Sandro wrote: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.
Ronk wrote:Kaivan wrote: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.
Ronk wrote:Kaivan wrote:
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.
