Reactive armor combined with regular armor, innacurate?

[son]

22:16 <@Sandro> keep in mind in era
22:16 <@Sandro> you couldnt use
22:16 <@Sandro> reactive armor over actual armor
22:16 <@felix> post that
22:16 <@Sandro> besides leather
22:16 <@felix> now
22:16 <@Sandro> thats why halberds are doing 2%
22:16 <@Sandro> plate + ra
22:16 <@Sandro> u post it
22:16 <@felix> i have no proof/recollection
22:16 <@Sandro> dont need it
22:16 <@Sandro> others will find it for u
22:17 <@Sandro> he already knows about it

[Sandro]

i suppose you technically got me to post it..

anyhow, no, you couldn't use reactive armor while wearing "metal" armor, it would yield something like "reactive forces cannot penetrate your metal armor".

[Panthor the Hated]

I remember that message

[Sexy Smithy]

Tru Dat.

[Batlin]

The behaviour you speak of didn't exist in 1998 according the the demo source code, but it did exist atleast in 2001/2002 according to these newsgroup postings:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.game ... 30e0997d00

OrionCA wrote:
>However, tonight I was fooling
> around and had her equip a shield and she got the message, "Your
> reactive armor spell has been negated." I'll check later to see if
> it's down-down or just disabled until she puts down the shield.


Equipping any metal armor will knock it off of you. It is handy for
killing RA so you can lay on a spell reflection in a couple of minutes.
Also, RA is only good for up to 75 hp's of damage. If you take a few
hits and get to a lull, you can equip a helmet or something and recast
it in a few minutes.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.game ... db3dd3d51f

Incorrect, any armor containing *metal* prevents RA from working. It does not work with studded, but works just fine with plain leather.

It would be interesting to find out when this was actually implemented.

[Kaivan]

Upon analysis of the cliloc files for the UO client, the message "Your reactive armor spell has been nullified." is present in the cliloc05 file which contains messages for the UOR update, including the client message that alerted the user that they could not use a target cursor with an all command and the many messages related to whether you could successfully cast reactive armor or protection. Thus, the changes to RA were made with the UOR patch.

Also on a somewhat related note, a while back someone brought up the fact that spells would trigger the reactive armor spell when you hit your opponent with the spell and were standing directly next to them. At the time, I did some research but was unable to find any conclusive results, but when attempting to date the changes to reactive armor and metal armor, I came across a patch note that dated the corrections to reactive armor and spells/ranged weaponry. The line item for this patch note is as follows:

• Reactive Armor will no longer react to magic damage and arrows

So, both arrows and magic spells should trigger the reactive armor spell when standing next to the opponent.

Edit: I'll move this to the Accuracy forum since this is an issue of accuracy.

[Mikel123]

That was me. Very cool, should be interesting to see how this impacts spells in particular.

[Mens Rea]

Sando and Felix are from the UO:R period too.

Forgive them for their trammy ways plz.

[nightshark]

Upon analysis of the cliloc files for the UO client, the message "Your reactive armor spell has been nullified." is present in the cliloc05 file which contains messages for the UOR update, including the client message that alerted the user that they could not use a target cursor with an all command and the many messages related to whether you could successfully cast reactive armor or protection. Thus, the changes to RA were made with the UOR patch.

By this reasoning shouldn't all kill function?

I know we have substantial evidence that all kill did not function, but this shows that although the message did not exist beforehand, it does not mean it wasn't so.

[Panthor the Hated]

Upon analysis of the cliloc files for the UO client, the message "Your reactive armor spell has been nullified." is present in the cliloc05 file which contains messages for the UOR update, including the client message that alerted the user that they could not use a target cursor with an all command and the many messages related to whether you could successfully cast reactive armor or protection. Thus, the changes to RA were made with the UOR patch.

By this reasoning shouldn't all kill function?

I know we have substantial evidence that all kill did not function, but this shows that although the message did not exist beforehand, it does not mean it wasn't so.

Strange logic... Clearly if patch notes are found that suggest RA did not work with metal armor in era it would trump this somewhat flimsy "the string wasn't in a cliloc until UO:R" evidence. With what we have it seems it was a UO:R feature though.

[Kaivan]

Upon analysis of the cliloc files for the UO client, the message "Your reactive armor spell has been nullified." is present in the cliloc05 file which contains messages for the UOR update, including the client message that alerted the user that they could not use a target cursor with an all command and the many messages related to whether you could successfully cast reactive armor or protection. Thus, the changes to RA were made with the UOR patch.

By this reasoning shouldn't all kill function?

I know we have substantial evidence that all kill did not function, but this shows that although the message did not exist beforehand, it does not mean it wasn't so.

There are some threads on this elsewhere in the Accuracy forum, including this sticky thread, but before UO:R, when you issued an all prefix with a targeted command, it would process for the first creature that it ran into within memory. That creature would obey the command, and the rest would not. However, the rest of the commands would get stuck in memory on the server, and the next time that you targeted something, it wouldn't target for whatever you had intended to target for, but would instead target for the next stuck command in memory. To offer an example, consider the following:

You have 3 pets and you issue an all kill command and target an animal. One of your 3 animals, whichever is processed first in the server memory, would attack the target. Afterward, suppose that you decided to cast night sight on yourself. When you target yourself with the spell, instead of actually casting night sight, the server would process the kill command for one of the other two animals that didn't respond when you first issued the command (also based on which one it runs into first in memory). This would continue until you cleared the "queue" of backlogged target commands for the issued command using the 'all' prefix, replacing the intended target effect with a queued command.

[Matty]

i suppose you technically got me to post it..

anyhow, no, you couldn't use reactive armor while wearing "metal" armor, it would yield something like "reactive forces cannot penetrate your metal armor".

You're not talking about the right era. This worked well in 1998. I had a dexer and used it often with chainmail.