Deadly Poison

[Hoots]

If you read the other threads and discussion on Poison it is hard to argue with Faust on this.

I am also in the same boat that thinks DP isnt right here. I think it was 100% bc of the interupts. (now cure pots i believe are correct in that OSI were morons for adding dp and not making at least 1 GC if not more needed to cure them)

From my memory it was very hard to mage cure DP. I think interupts were a part but also failing to cure. When i get bit by a silver serp here on t2a i think it has more of the feel of how DP should be... not as deadly, but atleast something you have to pay attention to.

We can all argue round and round but unless someone can find something to contrast UOHC, Stratics, Newgroups, OSI patch notes and all the other usual source we ar SOL.

[Faust]

When you have people like Watersumi that negates to read the threads that lead to these changes there will be post after post without an end in sight. It would be nice if people would quit cluttering these forums wasting bandwidth and simply just read for a change. However, asking for someone to make an intelligent decision for once in their life is too much for some people apparently.

Try taking Hoots approach and produce some information to discard these changes.

I just guarentee that this won't happen since my research is pretty concrete though.

[poogoblin]

Poison Thread

Continuation after patch

I agree, it's nerfed to shit but it's been argued, discussed, referenced, cross-referenced, and tested... and the minority won. Just roll a hally mage like the rest of the server and be happy.

Use these links, the more proof we have for the way "it was" the better.

The thing is people put too much stock in the demo code around here, stratics was pretty spot on (with an occasional typo) back in the day but the "demo code" trumps stratics for some reason.

[Hicha]

I just guarentee that this won't happen since my research is pretty concrete though.

Your concrete proof is really only the demo, but what you say is in the demo slightly differs from what Batlin keeps bringing up from the actual demo code. The web reference you have says one damage calc, while the web reference kraarug has is the same archive page a few months earlier with a different damage calc. Who's is right?

Curing has been argued and debated, plenty of information regarding how easy it was to cure DP, so people need to just let that die.

The real dispute (now) is the inaccuracies in damage calculations. Really hard to believe that what we have here is accurate if a new topic keeps opening up bi-weekly by players stating its ineffectiveness.

[Hicha]

Poison Thread

Continuation after patch

I agree, it's nerfed to shit but it's been argued, discussed, referenced, cross-referenced, and tested... and the minority won. Just roll a hally mage like the rest of the server and be happy.

Use these links, the more proof we have for the way "it was" the better.

The thing is people put too much stock in the demo code around here, stratics was pretty spot on (with an occasional typo) back in the day but the "demo code" trumps stratics for some reason.

While the demo code is great to fall back on, it's still a weak baseline considering its just that, a demo. Pretty rare to find a game that went from demo to production without changing any code, features or design.

[Faust]

I just re-read Kraarug's last post in here quoting Batlin's response and that doesn't appear to be true at all...

Was something missed by me?

[Hicha]

The poison damage study essay from 2.00 that Ronk got is pretty solid. I think there needs to be some addressing of interruption to get the sence of deadly poison that we seem to be missing.

I don't think it's the interruption that's wrong. It could be the chance for recalculation.

If I'm not mistaken this is the site Ronk gave : http://uo.stratics.com/Archive/alchemy/ ... mage.shtml
Now, those damage values are the same as in the demo.
There is one outstanding difference:

Poison damage for all poisons is not "recalculated" for each "interval" of damage (only about a 50% chance).

In the OSI poisoned script there is only a 1 out of 3 chance for the damage to be recalcuated.

Code: Select all

on callback<0x53>() // 0x53 is called every X seconds to apply the damage
{
  // abort if user died
  if(!Q5JE(this))
  {
    Q660(this);
    return(0x00);
  }

  // handle poison duration
  Q5JF --;
  if(Q5JF < 0x01)
  {
    systemMessage(this, "The poison seems to have worn off.");
    Q660(this);
    return(0x00);
  }

  // go damage the victim
  // NOTE: even though a minimum of 2 is applied
  //       there is a divide by two inside the core
  //       giving us an actual minimum damage of 1
  doDamageType(NULL(), this, (Q42Y + 0x02), 0x08);

  // abort if user just died
  if(!Q5JE(this))
  {
    Q660(this);
    return(0x00);
  }
  else
  {
    // 0-2 = 0,1,2 = 3 choices, only execute if return value is 0 -> 1 out of 3
    if(!random(0x00, 0x02))
    {
      // go recalculate
      strength = getObjVar(this, "poison_strength");
      Q5JB(this, strength);
    }

    // go schedule a new callback
    callBack(this, Q4R0, 0x53);
    return(0x00);
  }

  // unused... taking up space
  Q660(this);
  return(0x00);
}

Maybe the stratics pages are wrong about the chance...?

Could be, someone guessing the recalulation chance is 50% is a pretty close to guess to a 33% chance to recalculate, especially considering the people writing the articles didn't exactly have direct access to the code at that time, only number crunching from testing.

These damage calculations are more inline with how poison calculations should be, especially having a minimum damage implemented. Someone living 60 secs from DP is much more realistic than the 145 secs we currently have.

[Derrick]

The poison damage study essay from 2.00 that Ronk got is pretty solid. I think there needs to be some addressing of interruption to get the sence of deadly poison that we seem to be missing.

I don't think it's the interruption that's wrong. It could be the chance for recalculation.

...

Maybe the stratics pages are wrong about the chance...?

We're using the OSI code verbatim, the chance is 1/3 to recalc on each tick.

[Faust]

I already stated that earlier Derrick, but apparently nobody seems to care or listen...

You are producing old evidence that has already been presented a long time ago. It has already been deemed incorrect based on the contrary evidence. Again, research the threads that allowed this change to take place so you don't clutter the boards with the same stuff that has been posted numerous times already.

The last couple posts that you have made is a new web site. However, it's still pretty much the same thing... You mention that DP deals 13 damage every tick and recaculates every 50%. Well this has actually been declared inaccurate based on the demo code to an extent. If you take 13% from 100 hp that's 13 damage... The ticks are actually recaculated 1/3 not 1/2 of the time. That makes DP actually stronger based on the way it works in the demo instead of the way it's stated to be on those articles.

[poogoblin]

Now if only we can fix the fact that someone with 30magery or with lesser cure pots can negate DP in a single try.

[Faust]

Curing has been argued and debated, plenty of information regarding how easy it was to cure DP, so people need to just let that die.

[Derrick]

While the demo code is great to fall back on, it's still a weak baseline considering its just that, a demo. Pretty rare to find a game that went from demo to production without changing any code, features or design.

The demo code base is well documented to be The code used on OSI servers in mid-98 (with a couple features intentionally disabled), which is of course pre-T2A so we need to be conscious of any changes to mechanics that were put into place '98 forward. There is no reason to belive that they would have changed the game mechanics for particular systems in the demo server, this is a huge and complete game server code base.

The Demo code is so much a complete OSI UO Sever, that the networking code and world save still existed in it, but was just disabled until Batlin reenabled it..

The assertion from posters who have not followed this project, that the demo is just a demo, is completely incorrect.

[poogoblin]

Curing has been argued and debated, plenty of information regarding how easy it was to cure DP, so people need to just let that die.

You will have to excuse those of us who argue that the sky is blue, even though others are saying it's fuscia.

[Faust]

The assertion from posters who have not followed this project, that the demo is just a demo, is completely incorrect.

People use this argument to cop out of a discussion based on their ignorance and bias in their ulterior motive, sadly.

[poogoblin]

The assertion from posters who have not followed this project, that the demo is just a demo, is completely incorrect.

People use this argument to cop out of a discussion based on their ignorance and bias in their ulterior motive, sadly.

Learn to slow down the personal attacks. I have no ulterior motives and I'm not ignorant, but thanks for pretending to know me.

I have a treasure hunting bard and a badly assembled mule...what ulterior motives do I have.

Please tell me about ulterior motives, ye ol Hally Mage.