UO Second Age

Kenny Powers wrote:Do they do any damage here?

Nice troll! Try heal potion In Mani while you run.

archaicsubrosa77 wrote:

XaN wrote:How be we just simply abolish PP's for the sake of the shard..? Far as I can tell, this tactic doesn't get used in PVE?

Regardless of how it was back then, I think we can all agree that its not really helping the shard.

But Deadly Poison is okay?

They already nerfed Deadly poison to the point that it is a joke on this server with no other proof then some code they took from a DEMO, a demo not proof that it actually worked that way on osi even though articles exist stating the contrary. So bottom line they don't need proof to change something. But to change it back to how it was, they ask "where's the proof?". Hilarious.

Watatsumi wrote:

archaicsubrosa77 wrote:

XaN wrote:How be we just simply abolish PP's for the sake of the shard..? Far as I can tell, this tactic doesn't get used in PVE?

Regardless of how it was back then, I think we can all agree that its not really helping the shard.

But Deadly Poison is okay?

They already nerfed Deadly poison to the point that it is a joke on this server with no other proof then some code they took from a DEMO, a demo not proof that it actually worked that way on osi even though articles exist stating the contrary. So bottom line they don't need proof to change something. But to change it back to how it was, they ask "where's the proof?". Hilarious.

Stating "well this is how it's been on all the RunUO distro servers" is not proof and is not how things work here. The demo is a great way to base things off of, it something is in the demo and it wasn't in T2A, that's because it was in Pre-T2A and there are many documented changes on:

How
What
When

Watatsumi wrote: They already nerfed Deadly poison to the point that it is a joke on this server with no other proof then some code they took from a DEMO, a demo not proof that it actually worked that way on osi even though articles exist stating the contrary. So bottom line they don't need proof to change something. But to change it back to how it was, they ask "where's the proof?". Hilarious.

Try to get your facts straight before you decide to post incorrect statements in your responses.

The poison formula used in 2003 listed on Stratics uses the SAME formula that is present in the demo.

Nothing else needs to be said about this topic.

Faust wrote: Try to get your facts straight before you decide to post incorrect statements in your responses.

The poison formula used in 2003 listed on Stratics uses the SAME formula that is present in the demo.

Nothing else needs to be said about this topic.

Funny, thats what a lot of people said about the kryss vs katana debate. You even said:

Faust wrote:Katana was not the same speed as a quarterstaff and defintely not slower than a short spear.

Stratics and the demo being the same is no shock...considering stratics very well could have gotten their facts from a demo. As with kryss users, many poison users know that deadly poison does not feel right. It is just a matter of figuring out just what, if anything, is wrong and fixing it...as opposed to pointing to stratics and saying "see, that says its right, case closed".

Actually you are very well dead wrong. I said on MANY occassions that I always remembered the kryss being faster than a katana. However, I clearly stated MANY times that until the data on the table we use was proven wrong it would never be changed based on the structure of this shard. The fix that was put in place was based on a theory and was never concluded to be false or true... Sure, many people including myself agrees with the conclusion but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a hundred percent fact for obvious reasons.

Also, that argument you just mentioned about them pulling the data from the demo is completely absurd.

Why would Stratics pull data from the demo in 2003 when they didn't pull that data in '99-'02?

The evidence is based on an update that changed the cure spell.

This article states that change to "cure" in 2003 reduced the effect of the cure spell and allowed the arch cure spell to retain its previous value makes this VERY substantial piece of evidence The results that were listed for the spell was EXACTLY the same as the demo results. This wasn't the "cure or poison" article listed in Stratics at that time, which also doesn't go along with this update discussing poison changes. This clearly tells you that the current poison/cure guide on Stratics at that time was very WRONG giving an indication that the same thing could have easily happened with the guides in the past. The magery "cast delay" is a great example of that. This particular guide has the delays incorrect from their inception in early '98 all the way up to modern day. Talk about a lack of inconsistency... Most of these guides are written by players making them unrealiable at best from time to time. However, the piece of evidence for cure is based on a change/patch that just HAPPENED at that particular time.

Ronk wrote:

Faust wrote: Try to get your facts straight before you decide to post incorrect statements in your responses.

The poison formula used in 2003 listed on Stratics uses the SAME formula that is present in the demo.

Nothing else needs to be said about this topic.

Funny, thats what a lot of people said about the kryss vs katana debate. You even said:

Faust wrote:Katana was not the same speed as a quarterstaff and defintely not slower than a short spear.

Stratics and the demo being the same is no shock...considering stratics very well could have gotten their facts from a demo. As with kryss users, many poison users know that deadly poison does not feel right. It is just a matter of figuring out just what, if anything, is wrong and fixing it...as opposed to pointing to stratics and saying "see, that says its right, case closed".

Faust-responding-politely wrote: Nice catch, I was incorrect about that. As far as the poison situation goes, however...

This article states that change to "cure" in 2003 reduced the effect of the cure spell and allowed the arch cure spell to retain its previous value makes this VERY substantial piece of evidence The results that were listed for the spell was EXACTLY the same as the demo results. This wasn't the "cure or poison" article listed in Stratics at that time, which also doesn't go along with this update discussing poison changes. This clearly tells you that the current poison/cure guide on Stratics at that time was very WRONG giving an indication that the same thing could have easily happened with the guides in the past. The magery "cast delay" is a great example of that. This particular guide has the delays incorrect from their inception in early '98 all the way up to modern day. Talk about a lack of inconsistency... Most of these guides are written by players making them unrealiable at best from time to time. However, the piece of evidence for cure is based on a change/patch that just HAPPENED at that particular time.

Faust wrote:

Watatsumi wrote: They already nerfed Deadly poison to the point that it is a joke on this server with no other proof then some code they took from a DEMO, a demo not proof that it actually worked that way on osi even though articles exist stating the contrary. So bottom line they don't need proof to change something. But to change it back to how it was, they ask "where's the proof?". Hilarious.

Try to get your facts straight before you decide to post incorrect statements in your responses.

The poison formula used in 2003 listed on Stratics uses the SAME formula that is present in the demo.

Nothing else needs to be said about this topic.

First off I played OSI from 1997-99 and i remember having to cure more then once when i was deadly poisoned by a dexer. I thought it was bullshit, I never played a dexer on OSI and thought that was a very unfair advantage. I know i am not the only one that remembers this. Where is the documentation from 2003 that showed it was the same as the demo? It was in the patch notes? Are you looking at how archcure is coded today? If so that is totally WEAK proof. How did you get this information? Just because it said that cure would be less affective the archcure in the patch in no way proves that cure worked 100% of the time on deadly poison.

Try researching the discussion topics that lead to these changes.

Watatsumi wrote:

Faust wrote:

Watatsumi wrote: They already nerfed Deadly poison to the point that it is a joke on this server with no other proof then some code they took from a DEMO, a demo not proof that it actually worked that way on osi even though articles exist stating the contrary. So bottom line they don't need proof to change something. But to change it back to how it was, they ask "where's the proof?". Hilarious.

Try to get your facts straight before you decide to post incorrect statements in your responses.

The poison formula used in 2003 listed on Stratics uses the SAME formula that is present in the demo.

Nothing else needs to be said about this topic.

First off I played OSI from 1997-99 and i remember having to cure more then once when i was deadly poisoned by a dexer. I thought it was bullshit, I never played a dexer on OSI and thought that was a very unfair advantage. I know i am not the only one that remembers this. Where is the documentation from 2003 that showed it was the same as the demo? It was in the patch notes? Are you looking at how archcure is coded today? If so that is totally WEAK proof. How did you get this information? Just because it said that cure would be less affective the archcure in the patch in no way proves that cure worked 100% of the time on deadly poison.

Watatsumi,

Don't let Faust discourage you. I don't know what is exactly off with Poison/Cure either but try to look up some references and go from there.

I have found a few sources that agree that GM mages could cure poison fairly easily IF they go the spell off, so I've been concentrating on the effects of deadly poison.

It seems the difference and 'feel' problem we see here compared to OSI has to do with how deadly poison interrupted spells, as well as took hit points and reduced stamina.

I personally do not think it interrupts properly here on UOSA.

As far as damage, I have found a number of conflicting era resources and citations that cloud up how poison worked including the hit points taken and the frequency of 'ticks'. There is a poison damage essay, written in December 1999 by Malik Yagova that should unlock this whole problem.

The issue? This version of the essay has yet to be found. The UO:R version has been used to set some of the standards here on UOSA, and recently Derrick has corrected what he could could be cited. I.E. Lack of 6 HP min damage.

Here a link pointing to Malik's essay. Find that essay and we'll have an era accurate system.

http://web.archive.org/web/199910140203 ... m/alchemy/

How am I discouraging him Kraarug?

I'm not going to siphon through numerous threads to produce the research that lead to these changes after posting them countless times in the past. If he wants to see the research he can do a simple search and find them. That is what the feature is there for in the first place. We don't need to continue re-posting and re-posting this information over and over wasting more precious bandwidth.

The research is pretty concrete and I don't see it ending anytime soon.

Kraarug wrote: Here a link pointing to Malik's essay. Find that essay and we'll have an era accurate system.

http://web.archive.org/web/199910140203 ... m/alchemy/

I emailed stratics again on this topic to see if they could give me the old essay or any details. I'll let you know when/if they respond. I kinda mentioned UO-Secondage last time after they helped with the kryss/katana stuff without thinking they may be against helping out a free shard...so we'll see. lol

Another thing to remember, the amount of GM mages roaming around on OSI was a hundredth of what it is here, which would explain why it may have been less frequent to cure.

Well, everytime there is a poison debate I see many people talking about damage, ticks, etc...and faust talking about cure chance O.o. Half the time im not sure if people are talking about apples or oranges.

Either way, stratics responded...I dunno if this is the missing article or not...its copyrighted 97-00

From Petra at stratics:

Not sure if this is what you're looking for or not, but it's the right author:
http://uo.stratics.com/Archive/alchemy/ ... mage.shtml

I wonder if some of you idiots play the game nearly as much as you do arguing about it.