UO Second Age

An Corp!

Impressive table, Mikel

I do have a few questions regarding this table though (in the spirit of getting as accurate of information as possible ):

1. I wonder if the tactics modifiers have been "low-balled" a little bit, and this is why:
   My understanding is that tactics skill gives you between -50% and +50% of the base damage--e.g. 50 tactics gives you +0%. If this is the case, then wouldn't a +25 tactics modifier give you +25% of base damage? The numbers I see in the table, however, appear to be adding only ~12.5% of the average base damage (e.g. in the table Halberd avg damage=27, +25 tactics modifier=3.4, and 3.4/27=12.6%). If it were +25% rather than 12.5%, then +25 tactics for the halberd would mean average of +6.8 damage which is > power (6.7 damage)
2. I don't know if this is possible to answer without actually looking at the code, but I would think the tactics modifier is probably applied to the actual base hit damage, not the average damage... this means that a +25 halberd hitting for a max base damage of 49 would (assuming 25% bonus as above) would get 49*0.25=+12.3 damage from the tactics modifier. Obviously, if the roll was low, however, the tactics modifier might only add +1 extra damage. But in any case, if I am not mistaken in this speculation, it would mean that the tactics modifiers result in the heaviest hit possible (when you get a good roll).

Thoughts?

The damage modifier adds a flat amount, whereas the tactics modifier adds a percentage. It stands to reason then that the lower the base damage of the weapon, the less the percentage increase helps and vice versa. If you're doing 10% more damage with a weapon that normally hits for 10 damage, that's only +1... on a weapon that can hit for 50, that's 5. Big difference.

Conversely, faster weapons have lower base damage, but they swing more often, so you get more chances to hit. This means that flat damage bonuses (ruin, might... vanq) is much better to have on a fast weapon.

So to sum it up, the faster the weapon, the more value it gets out of a damage modifier. The bigger the weapon, the more value it gets from the tactics modifier. Obviously it's best to have both either way.

An old post of mine, still should be accurate.

Armor
----DURABILITY---
Exceptional +20% to item HP
Durable +5 to item HP
Substantial +10 to item HP
Massive +15 to item HP
Fortified +20 to item HP
Indestructible +25 to item HP
---AR BONUS---
Key: /+(Neck, Hands), +(Arms, Head, Legs/Feet), +(Body).
Exceptional +20% AR
Defense +5 / +0.4, +0.7, +2.2 to AR
Guarding +10 / +0.7, +1.4, +4.4 to AR
Hardening +15 / +1.1, +2.1, +6.6 to AR
Fortification +20 / +1.4, +2.8, +8.8 to AR
Invulnerability +25 / +1.8, +3.5, +11.0 to AR

Armor actually has 2 AR ratings, what you see and what actually is protecting specific body parts.
The wiki states:
"The AR # before the / indicates the armor's actual Armor Rating for the area that it protects, the # after the slash indicates its contribution to one's total (or combined average) AR (as displayed in the Character Status window), with the exception of Shields. The number before the slash is what actually counts towards AR, the latter number is merely an approximate in-game display. Decimals are rounded to the nearest whole number in-game. "
Look here to see specific AR valueshttp://www.uosecondage.com/stratics/armor.html. I have applied these values to pieces of armor. And what I have found was that Hardening is indeed better then Exceptional quality armors. However without an Indestrutable durability mod on your armor, it will not last as long as exceptional!

Conclusion: Keep Hardening Modifiers or higher!

Weapons
--DURABILTIY--
Durable +10 to item HP
Substantial +20 to item HP
Massive +30 to item HP
Fortified +40 to item HP
Indestructible +50 to item HP

--ACCURACY/TACTICS--
Accurate +5.0 to Tactics or +4.6 to Archery*
Accurate, Surpassingly +10.0 to Tactics or +9.3 to Archery*
Accurate, Eminently +15.0 to Tactics or +14.0 to Archery*
Accurate, Exceedingly +20.0 to Tactics or +18.7 to Archery*
Accurate, Supremely +25.0 to Tactics or +23.3 to Archery*

--DAMAGE--
Exceptional +4 Damage
Ruin +1 damage
Might +3 damage
Force +5 damage
Power +7 damage
Vanquishing +9 damage
Silver Double damage to Undead

The first thing you want to look at when you get a magic weapon is to see if it is Force or better. Exceptional weapons only apply a +4 dmg mod, whereas Force applies +5 dmg. Keep in mind that without a high durability modifier the weapon will break quicker then exceptional quality weapons.

Now for the tricky part, accuracy/tactics modifiers. Tactics extra damage is based off of a percentage. FORMULA: % of Base Damage that is Dealt= Tactics + 50. Using the forumla and applying it to weapons you will find that hard hitting weapons (halberd) will benefit more then soft weapons (daggers) due to percentages.

a halberd with an Eminently accurate (+15) mod is better then exceptional
a dagger with a Supremely accurate (+25) mod is NOT better then exceptional, however, throw in a might damage mod and you may have yourself something better then exceptional... (who uses daggers anyways?, poisoner perhaps)
Reference: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=3081&view=previous

Conclusion: If its hard hitting & eminently accurate or better keep it if you like better then exceptional. If its force or better keep it. Any additional modifiers on top of these means that you have something to play around with.

Question for Kaivan. GM weps on UOSA are made staic +4.

I distinctly remember using item id or arms lore, some kind of combination, during T2A to pick better weapons, because I thought the damage bonus was a random +1-3 or w/e. Meaning, GM weapons were not all made equal.

I cant recall if it was horseshit or not. I remember doing weird shit all the time because of hearsay.

son wrote:Question for Kaivan. GM weps on UOSA are made staic +4.

I distinctly remember using item id or arms lore, some kind of combination, during T2A to pick better weapons, because I thought the damage bonus was a random +1-3 or w/e. Meaning, GM weapons were not all made equal.

I cant recall if it was horseshit or not. I remember doing weird shit all the time because of hearsay.

It was true, they just don't have the numbers and haven't come up with a way to approximate it yet.

Add another one into the mix. I used to do this all the time.

If you hid repaired an item, it would restore its durability 100%. You did not need an ounce of blacksmithy.

Do you have a source which shows that two new exceptional weapons of the same type would report different arms lore values for their damage? According to stratics, exceptional weapons were given a static +4 damage bonus, which lines up with the changes outlined in the 11/10/98 patch notes where some items lost some of their damage when the retroactive weapons fixer was applied (the old calculation was a 20% damage bonus, which favored heavier weapons).

I'm certainly not saying that it isn't possible that its different, however, we haven't seen any evidence to that effect.

Edit: apparently in-line linking isn't working properly, so here's the raw url: http://wayback.archive.org/web/19990815 ... m/arms.htm

Also, source on repairing?

Kaivan wrote:Do you have a source which shows that two new exceptional weapons of the same type would report different arms lore values for their damage? According to stratics, exceptional weapons were given a static +4 damage bonus, which lines up with the changes outlined in the 11/10/98 patch notes where some items lost some of their damage when the retroactive weapons fixer was applied (the old calculation was a 20% damage bonus, which favored heavier weapons).

I'm certainly not saying that it isn't possible that its different, however, we haven't seen any evidence to that effect.

Edit: apparently in-line linking isn't working properly, so here's the raw url: http://wayback.archive.org/web/19990815 ... m/arms.htm

Also, source on repairing?

Sorry uncle, both are just from boggy memory. I know I did it repeatedly for both. I kinda sorta remember a bug report/patch note saying "hide repairning will no longer give maximum durability"

I dont remember what I used to do to identiify which GM weps were better. There was a trick, I just cant recall. It may have been what the value of the weapon was (with item id?)

But again, all memory from 13 years ago.

Well, it's something that you might consider looking into, but I can tell you that item identification, or the default vendor price, would give you the value of items and that these values differed between crafted weapons. However, the only known variant on these items was the total item durability, which factored into the total value of the item, which is probably what gave the impression of better weapons from a damage perspective.

This is a good topic. I never knew how to bring it up and I think son is right on track.

Back in the day....1999/2000 ish, I would make a bunch of GM weps and somehow ID them where I was able to only keep the "best" ones. I do remember there being a small range of "levels" on them and I thought it was based on the message I got when ID'd.

Pretty much no help in this discussion.

HardCore wrote:I do remember there being a small range of "levels" on them and I thought it was based on the message I got when ID'd.

Since ID shows you the sell price, presumably you could differentiate between them based on the sell price it told you. But, this doesn't prove or disprove Kaivan's point about damage being a static +4 and durability actually being the price-determiner. I looked around a lot for this info and couldn't find it on groups archives, so I'm guessing it'd take one of those "it's the same on Demo as it is today" type of things to really nail down how it works.

the bazookas wrote:An Corp!

Impressive table, Mikel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_eZmEiyTo0&t=2m17s

Wait 'til I get going! I have an excel file that is now 12 worksheets large, with everything from this to pricing to escorting samples to a pixellated Castle footprint. Safe to say that if Derrick's servers ever get destroyed by an IRL orc invasion, we may be able to recreate most of the formulas in the game based on my trials and data recordings. It's remarkably OCD, and remarkably sad.

the bazookas wrote:I do have a few questions regarding this table though (in the spirit of getting as accurate of information as possible ):

1. I wonder if the tactics modifiers have been "low-balled" a little bit, and this is why:
   My understanding is that tactics skill gives you between -50% and +50% of the base damage--e.g. 50 tactics gives you +0%. If this is the case, then wouldn't a +25 tactics modifier give you +25% of base damage? The numbers I see in the table, however, appear to be adding only ~12.5% of the average base damage (e.g. in the table Halberd avg damage=27, +25 tactics modifier=3.4, and 3.4/27=12.6%). If it were +25% rather than 12.5%, then +25 tactics for the halberd would mean average of +6.8 damage which is > power (6.7 damage)
2. I don't know if this is possible to answer without actually looking at the code, but I would think the tactics modifier is probably applied to the actual base hit damage, not the average damage... this means that a +25 halberd hitting for a max base damage of 49 would (assuming 25% bonus as above) would get 49*0.25=+12.3 damage from the tactics modifier. Obviously, if the roll was low, however, the tactics modifier might only add +1 extra damage. But in any case, if I am not mistaken in this speculation, it would mean that the tactics modifiers result in the heaviest hit possible (when you get a good roll).

For (1), remember damage is halved as a final step before being applied to players. So, 27 is the average *roll*, but really it's 13.5 before tactics, anatomy, strength, and weapon modifiers kick in. So indeed +25 is adding 25%, but it's 25% of 13.5.

For (2), I too think it is applied to the base damage. I don't mean that +25 tactics makes a halberd *always* hit by +3.4, I just mean on average. So yes, +tactics weapons would be a little more high-variance in their damages (which is IMO a good thing). Certainly there's a range there. It's just a pain to calculate ranges. Which, of course, I did in a recent version of my file, using the actual dice rolls used, to calculate 25th percentile and 75th percentile damages for all of these weapons, in addition to the 50th percentile which is listed in the table above.

Mikel, make your spreadsheet copyleft for UOSA's benefit.

The item id differentiation in pricing makes sense for GM weps when contrasted to durability. But why would they make durability variable and not damage range?

Not saying this is proof of anything, just makes it curious.

The decision to make durability have a range was probably a design aspect they were looking for. All weapons, player crafted or not, had this inherent property.

Edit: Also, it should be noted that this same property can be seen on the demo where we know that a given weapon always received the same 20% damage bonus to its average damage as an exceptional bonus. Thus, we know that item durability had something to do with its value as presented by the item ID skill.

Kaivan wrote:The decision to make durability have a range was probably a design aspect they were looking for. All weapons, player crafted or not, had this inherent property.

Edit: Also, it should be noted that this same property can be seen on the demo where we know that a given weapon always received the same 20% damage bonus to its average damage as an exceptional bonus. Thus, we know that item durability had something to do with its value as presented by the item ID skill.

a little look into patch notes throw this up.....

Ultima Online: The Second Age Patch Notes for 11/10/1998

Individual skills.

It will be possible to craft exceptional and below average quality bows, crossbows, and heavy crossbows. These will have differing damages just like exceptional quality smithed weapons do. In addition, they will have maker's marks if they are exceptional and are crafted by grandmaster bowyers.




the key part is ''These will have differing damages just like exceptional quality smithed weapons do'' I remember clearly ITEM ID ing Katanas, and anything that was worth over 99gp was a winner and the max was around 115gp being the best weapon avail. It was said that a max price kat was the same damage as a force weapon. but that was just hear say. they DID give better DPS at higher prices but i couldn't confirm any extra damage.

Pointing out that exceptional quality and low quality weapons had differing damages doesn't invalidate the static +4 for an exceptional quality weapon. It merely points out that those types of weapons will have differing damages for both exceptional and low quality weapons, which were +4 and -4 respectively. Although, on that point, I do not know if we have low quality items producing lower damage and durability values than normal quality items here on UOSA.