Swing on the run (dexing)

[Sandro]

Swing on the run is also the reason dex monkeys(yes I remember this term but it doesn't fit dexers on UOSA lol) can be lame to play in pvp. With pvm it's not a huge problem, but either way most players would love to see this mechanic taken out. There's pvpers who don't post on forums, and they can't stand it.

I have 3 good friends who made chars here, played then quit as soon as the mechanic "pause 1 second to continue swing timer" was put in. My friend has a bad computer, conn and that mechanic made it much harder for him to pvp effectively.

It doesn't do any good.

Events are here because it seems it won't do any good to remove them, since many play for them. Fine.

But this mechanic doesn't do ANY good to keep in, it's not going to make the game inaccurate by taking out. Honestly. We need to put this bad in it will bring population back.

Without population UOSA's mechanics won't do us any good IMO. This mechanic is not even game-breaking, UOSA will still feel like 1999 as far as mechanics.

lol

[Kaivan]

Again, if anyone is interested in seeing a change to movement restrictions, looking for some documented information from the era is the way to do it.

Although, even if information is found to justify the removal of movement restrictions, it is likely that the scenario will be much much worse than it currently is. The information that I linked in the first post should explain why this is the case (this is why I asked people to read it), but if anyone is still unclear, I can provide an explanation.

[Sandro]

I'd like the explanation, even though I already fully understand it.

I just wanna watch people try to pick it apart and then justify it.

Explanation as to why my hally-tank will be near invincible if we make this change plz!

[Ronk]

Again, if anyone is interested in seeing a change to movement restrictions, looking for some documented information from the era is the way to do it.

Personally, I think a lack of complaints from the area about dexxers is a form of proof. Though I am sure you'll disagree. As has been said before, what you are asking for does not exist. A direct patch note obviously doesn't exist and any fix to that was stealth patched. And finding an era discussion of attacking on the run probably won't exist since it was clearly (by the lack of complaints) a non-issue during the era.

Cases for attack on the run:
1. Everyone (not counting forum trolls) have said they remember dexxers being competitive. I have yet to see one (non forum troll) who has seriously remembered dexxers being a complete and utter joke in T2A. First hand testimony from such a large sample is evidence.

2. There are no forum complaints, rants, or details of anyone complaining during the T2A era about dexxers being under powered and impossible to use in PVP. Had dexing been useless, people would have complained and these posts would exist. If you can find any complaints, feel free to post links.

3. Dexer guilds and the term 'dex monkey' were rampant in the era. These would not have existed (as they don't exist here, except for the bloodrock as far as I know and we are just a stubborn lot who don't mind dying a lot . Proof can be found of T2A era dexxer guilds, if you want these links ill look them up.

Although, even if information is found to justify the removal of movement restrictions, it is likely that the scenario will be much much worse than it currently is. The information that I linked in the first post should explain why this is the case (this is why I asked people to read it), but if anyone is still unclear, I can provide an explanation.

Better or worse, era accuracy is the goal.

[Kaivan]

I'd like the explanation, even though I already fully understand it.

I just wanna watch people try to pick it apart and then justify it.

Explanation as to why my hally-tank will be near invincible if we make this change plz!

Sure, I'll give the explanation, but it by no means implies that tank mages would be more powerful. It would likely wreck all forms of combat across the board.

---------

From a high level, there are two different pieces of relevant information that we can derive from each of our current sources.

From the demo, we know the following:

• Your swing was not held.
• Your swing did advance while moving.

From the UOR mini-patch we know the following:

• Your swing was not held.
• Your swing did not advance while moving.

These sources provide us with both consistent and inconsistent information. For the consistent information - the fact that your swing is not held - there is no debate to be had. Your swing is simply not held. However, for the inconsistent information, swing advancement while you move, we have to ask an important question: When did this change?

In the context of the above question, UOSA really only has to entertain two possibilities. Either:

• The movement restriction was implemented after November 23, 1999.
• The movement restriction was implemented before November 23, 1999.

Since we don't actually know when the change was implemented, the small amount of flexibility offered allows us to choose which of the two implementations we would like to have (unless further information restricts that choice). After extensive testing, we found that the option to prevent your swing from advancing produced a more workable system than our alternative. Of course, why is this the case?

Recalling the factual information from our available sources, we know that in the demo your swing could advance on the move, and that your swing was not held. In practice this meant that unless you and your combatant stood toe to toe, it was possible to run away from an opponent and never allow them to have a swing. The reason for this is because once your swing reaches the end and you are ready to attempt to hit your opponent, you attempt to do so regardless of whether they are in range or not. So, if you are not in range, the swing is simply wasted, and you must wait out the time once again in order to attempt to swing again. This functionality of the demo - and of the T2A era - represents the function of not holding your swing until your opponent is in range.

Extending the above information, if the combat code were to be modified so that your swing would not advance when you move (Note: This is interpreted to mean your swing state not your swing counter [read the links to understand this fully!]), two results emerge. First, the combat code would be simpler in execution, reducing server load (a very important issue at the time). Second, by preventing your swing from advancing on the move, the issue with your swing going off despite being out of range is solved without explicitly putting any code in place to prevent it. As a trade off for this kind of fix, players must stand still in order to advance their swing as you see done on UOSA.

--------------

Beyond what I've said above, its extremely difficult to add any more detail unless there is some familiarity with the demo code from the first link. I hope that this provides some better understanding of our implementation.

Again, if anyone is interested in seeing a change to movement restrictions, looking for some documented information from the era is the way to do it.

Personally, I think a lack of complaints from the area about dexxers is a form of proof. Though I am sure you'll disagree. As has been said before, what you are asking for does not exist. A direct patch note obviously doesn't exist and any fix to that was stealth patched. And finding an era discussion of attacking on the run probably won't exist since it was clearly (by the lack of complaints) a non-issue during the era.

Cases for attack on the run:
1. Everyone (not counting forum trolls) have said they remember dexxers being competitive. I have yet to see one (non forum troll) who has seriously remembered dexxers being a complete and utter joke in T2A. First hand testimony from such a large sample is evidence.

2. There are no forum complaints, rants, or details of anyone complaining during the T2A era about dexxers being under powered and impossible to use in PVP. Had dexing been useless, people would have complained and these posts would exist. If you can find any complaints, feel free to post links.

3. Dexer guilds and the term 'dex monkey' were rampant in the era. These would not have existed (as they don't exist here, except for the bloodrock as far as I know and we are just a stubborn lot who don't mind dying a lot . Proof can be found of T2A era dexxer guilds, if you want these links ill look them up.

None of these points are direct information on the mechanics of the era. These are only observations of what people did during the era which accounted for a modicum of variables external to the mechanics.

Although, even if information is found to justify the removal of movement restrictions, it is likely that the scenario will be much much worse than it currently is. The information that I linked in the first post should explain why this is the case (this is why I asked people to read it), but if anyone is still unclear, I can provide an explanation.

Better or worse, era accuracy is the goal.

If you read the explanation above you'll see why there is any flexibility in the first place, and until some concrete evidence can be found, that flexibility will remain.

[Psilo]

*edited* because of semi flamage

[Sandro]

Your ping and countless hours spent on this game are the only way you can get "overpowered". It's not the mechanics, people will do just as fine as now vs you even if this is changed. 30 ping is the reason you're tough to beat, otherwise you would be on a more even level with people.

I played when they had this feature enabled briefly and combined with insta-hit it was pretty impressive..

much easier to play a mage then it is now, and with this feature you could easily have a 1:1 swing ratio vs. a dexxer, you could just never stop moving and cycle your halberd..

[Roser]

If we reverted back and added in SOTR and took out holding hits....

I think it would work if there was a big enough window to hit with (say 4 ticks). I DO remember in T2A that hally cycling took some serious skill and if you didn't time it right, you would miss your hit... although that could be a mashed up memory of double hitting.

Is it possible to re-open this case to test center and play around with it?

I do realize people were going nuts without being able to hold a hit, but perhaps its something that just took a little getting used to? I mean it wasn't on test for all that long before the alternative changes went in.

Kaivan, to be honest, if that mini patch note it to be taken as a whole then we really shouldn't be able to hold hits (unless there is evidence that I am missing). I did ask you if that patch note could be interpreted separately, and you said no.

Sooo.... I do see some inconsistency's here.

p.s - I feel that Kaivan is rolling with some serious punches here. I don't want you to forget that you are well respected and your opinion is held in high regard. Plus you rock. *bro hug*

[Kaivan]

It's just not worth it. And Kaivan's post really doesn't help this shard at all, that's what's wrong. Being uptight about a stupid mechanic.

IPY is doing much better than UOSA at the moment because our staff has obsessive compulsive disorder and can't stand letting one stupid mechanic slide. It would probably cause them an anxiety attack.

And the hilarity is our staff allows events.

It's posts like these that are entirely intolerable in this forum. I will not allow this thread, or any thread in this forum or any other publicly accessible forum to degrade into an arguing contest between shards. The staff of IPY, UO Gamers, Defiance, UOSA, Angel Island, or any other server are free to guide their ship as they see fit - to whatever goal they have in mind - and it is entirely inappropriate to attempt to devolve any public thread into a "this free server is better than that free server" debate over the decisions made on any server. It's childish and has no place here; keep it to the private forums.

If we reverted back and added in SOTR and took out holding hits....

I think it would work if there was a big enough window to hit with (say 4 ticks). I DO remember in T2A that hally cycling took some serious skill and if you didn't time it right, you would miss your hit... although that could be a mashed up memory of double hitting.

Is it possible to re-open this case to test center and play around with it?

I do realize people were going nuts without being able to hold a hit, but perhaps its something that just took a little getting used to? I mean it wasn't on test for all that long before the alternative changes went in.

Kaivan, to be honest, if that mini patch note it to be taken as a whole then we really shouldn't be able to hold hits (unless there is evidence that I am missing). I did ask you if that patch note could be interpreted separately, and you said no.

Sooo.... I do see some inconsistency's here.

p.s - I feel that Kaivan is rolling with some serious punches here. I don't want you to forget that you are well respected and your opinion is held in high regard. Plus you rock. *bro hug*

There are a few points that I would like to make here:

First, if Derrick is open to the idea of disabling the movement restrictions on test, then I see no problem with testing it.

Second, there wouldn't be a large window in order to hit people. As with the demo, if you aren't in range on the exact tick that your swing reaches the end, your swing is wasted.

Third, with respect to the mini-patch, we aren't interpreting the pieces separately. What we've done is included the mechanics that existed just prior to that patch and, in theory, before our cutoff date. The result of that implementation is that the act of moving prevents your swing from ever advancing, even if you are in range. This has the result of allowing you to hold your swing if you're moving, but as soon as you stop your swing advances and checks to see if you're in range (if you're ready to swing). If you are, then the swing occurs, otherwise you miss your swing. So, it's still possible to miss your swing, but it's dependent on your distance from your opponent at the time that your swing actually happens when you stop.

Finally, I'd like to say thank you very much for the kind words. I hope that out efforts have been acceptable as staff members and that people are always aware that we don't want others to feel like we're the 'faceless staff' and that everyone else are just the 'players', but that we are all people that deserve to be treated properly and equally.

[Psilo]

Kaivan wrote:

It's posts like these that are entirely intolerable in this forum. I will not allow this thread, or any thread in this forum or any other publicly accessible forum to degrade into an arguing contest between shards. The staff of IPY, UO Gamers, Defiance, UOSA, Angel Island, or any other server are free to guide their ship as they see fit - to whatever goal they have in mind - and it is entirely inappropriate to attempt to devolve any public thread into a "this free server is better than that free server" debate over the decisions made on any server. It's childish and has no place here; keep it to the private forums.

I sincerely apologize for the attack, I started drinking a little early and was being irrational/rude so in retrospect yea my bad. I absolutely love the staff and UOSA and certainly don't support other shards.

I do think I have a good perspective on what needs to be done ultimately to save UOSA though.

The shard needs only 300 more online for it to feel full again, we can get back there if we get rid of gamebreaking mechanics like "stop to swing". It's so bad for people with slow connections, comps. Why not take it out? Especially since everyone has cable now and without lagg we notice this mechanic, and that's why it's killing pvp.

Events are game breaking, yet we allow them! What disturbs crafting, pvm, role playing and pvp(the annoying server messages, the sudden loss of population who goto the event ect.) more than instances? Nothing really, yet it exists = (


I think we need to ask Derrick what he thinks after he gets time to read this thread. Derrick can be what he wants, look at events. So maybe he can make an exception here too. He needs to look at the benefits and the "negatives"(if there is any lol).

[Ronk]

Kaiven, are you saying that the shot on the run worked much like healing? WHere in you must be in range to begin the attack, and in range when the attack finishes? Or are you saying you have to be in range the entire time or the attack fails?

With fast weapons, have to be next to a person as an attack land is not a problem, at least not as I remember it. It is when you grab the slower heavier hitting weapons that the problems crop up.

[Roser]

Not exactly like healing Ronk... When you swing, damage is calculated at the start of the swing not the end.

On the demo, you have to be in range and able to hit your target on the EXACT tick (a tick is a quater second) that your weapon is ready to swing. If you are a tick to late on the far side of that tiny window, you will miss your swing and will have to wait for it to recharge again.

So, it sounds like a hard thing to pull off for someone with low dexterity using a melee weapon, on the other hand, a dexer wouldn't have much of a problem, especially with being able to swing on the run.

If that one tick window was extended to even 2 ticks..... That all of a sudden feels a lot like T2A combat mechanics. But of course it would take some serious getting used to, and the pvp community here might have a ruffled feather or two over it.

When the demo changes first went in on test, I felt like my mind was torn out of this time and placed back in 1999 parents basement. It felt right, even with the double hits. Although I didn't get much time to play around with it before the alternative changes went in.

BTW Question: I wonder if it was the implementing of "holding hits" coupled with the demo mechanics that made double hits way to insane?. (remember people complaining about dexers doing random double hits)

[Faust]

Tank mages cycling a hally every couple seconds without having to stand still...

[Mens Rea]

son, Tank mages, son, cycling a hally, son, every couple seconds, son, without having to stand still, son... , son

Is what you meant

[Ronk]

Tank mages cycling a hally every couple seconds without having to stand still...

Uh huh, and if your target has to stand next to you during the entire hally swing you'll never hit anyone. Not to mention when you are casting spells you are standing still. And lastly, what does this have to do with era accuracy? Attack on run and having to be near the target for a swing to hit is far more era accurate than what we have now.