UO Second Age

Posted: **Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:20 pm**

.......

Posted: **Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:20 pm**

Umm, explosion has a delay of 3 seconds before it hits...

Explosion wait for the recast timer, release, cast Earthquake that takes 2.25s to cast, and done...

Pretty simple process since Earthquake takes you down to 20hp from a 100 and explosion does an average of 24 damage.

Feel free to get the decompiled scripts from Batlin's project here.

Posted: **Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:38 pm**

Posted: **Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:46 pm**

I'm pretty sure I've never said STFU

If you don't feel something is right I'm happy to listen, you asked where this info came from and I told you, I can tell you the base damage of a 6th circle spell is taken from OSI code, and corresponds to everything else we've seen from actual OSI trials on that spell, and if your memory doesn't line up with that, I'm not sure where to take it from there.

There's other issues that I can work on that are undisputed until more evidence is shown to back memories on spell damage, but i can't just invent new figures out of thin air for spell damages and apply them on Second Age. Everything here is based on something, and only on memory when it's pretty undisputed.

Posted: **Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:56 pm**

Loathed wrote:i understand how most feel here, why bother arguing, don't comment on us about show us the proof, when you're linking shit that's nothing OSI OFFICIAL, cuz it's all player testing- that's what we're doing on things, we give input and we're told stfu- you have no proof. I want to see the proof too, the truth is- there is no proof available. We can't pull all the code from the game client itself the way it was on patch # XX on the date of xx/xx/xxxx

so where do we go from here? the calc is wrong on a few spells, why should i believe it's right at all on the others? the spell disruption is way off- i can't show proof, i didn't video record shit when i started playing. Analyzing the word disrupt would lead most to believe that if something disturbed your casting i.e dmg you fail at casting. In later expansions/era they implemented protection so that you could take dmg and still cast. well why the hell would they do that if you could only get disrupted in the first portion of the cast?

it's frustrating for both parties here, we want the proof- you want the proof. Don't take us speaking our minds about mechanics as an attack on you. We're all trying to reach the same goal here. If a ass ton of veteran uo players feel something is wrong, maybe something is wrong. I don't think the correct response is - No, you have no evidence. I have still not seen any evidence. I seen player testing info, but I've seen no OSI Official Codes.

Evidence: a : an outward sign : indication b : something that furnishes proof : testimony; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter

Proof: 1 a : the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact b : the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning

Evidence and proof provided: Era patch notes and dev logs, matching demo code to said patchnotes, fansite era posts etc.

What more could you ask for? I have NEVER seen a freeshard go so in-depth into achieving era accuracy. All of these resources at our disposal such as the demo, patch notes, and all the work put in by the staff and players like Batlin's project, are alot more credible sources to follow than just someones memory. No other freeshard has gone to these lengths to ensure era replication.

Posted: **Sun Oct 04, 2009 9:33 pm**

Arkosh Kovasz wrote: What more could you ask for? I have NEVER seen a freeshard go so in-depth into achieving era accuracy. All of these resources at our disposal such as the demo, patch notes, and all the work put in by the staff and players like Batlin's project, are alot more credible sources to follow than just someones memory. No other freeshard has gone to these lengths to ensure era replication.

i 120% agree with you.

however, there is no denying that alot of the pvpers here have stopped playing due to certain changes that make pvping less about skill and more about luck. i am not disputing that the system that is in place here is not 100% era accurate, but i think staff need to think more about whether era accurate changes are actually promoting shard growth or making people turn to other freeshards.

remember, back in 1999 there were no freeshards that people could play if they weren't happy with the changes that osi made. today there are and i think admins have to keep that in mind when resorting to era accuracy all the time, especially when something as important as a healthy pvping playerbase is neglected in favour of something as small as a few points in mini heal damage.

edit: this is just the way i feel, and i completely understand that this shard is based on the principles of era accuracy. just wanted to make it clear that in no way do i expect things to be changed if they are not era accurate.

Posted: **Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:14 pm**

I understand the point that a unhappy playerbase=dead shard but people are using the same reason for why they joined the shard as the reason for why they might leave. That being era accuracy.

Player starts here....joins forums....first post......"Oh man, Just started here love the shard and how the staff strives for era accuracy"...

Player is here for awhile....something they're used to is found to be inaccurate and changed..."Oh man you guys are ruining the shard and hurting gameplay by being TOO acurate"....

It's like a no win situation....and as in all things not everyones gonna be happy.

Posted: **Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:25 pm**

Would also like to point out that at least once a month there is a new pandemic which everyone claims will lead to a reduction in population unless changed/reverted...ever since I joined here over a year ago, proud to say I pioneered some of the initial ones as well.

CUTTING BANDAGES ONE AT A TIME!?!?!11

Posted: **Mon Oct 05, 2009 1:39 am**

The problem isn't that there are sometimes 10+ dmg mini heals, it's that there are never 3-8 pt mini heals. There's a reason that mini heal was not the pvp mainstay it is on UOSA, and that reason is that it was not a consistent way to gain health -- it was hit or miss. Here, every mini heal does 10-12 damage.

Posted: **Mon Oct 05, 2009 3:19 am**

Actually mini heal spam was really big in CTF over 6 months ago. I used to marvel at how Tron would survive all hell by doing it. With magic as the mages only healing and possibly combat in the case of non tanks and/or hybrids the accurate way mini heal works makes other ideas for character templates playable.

If this complaint comes from primarily dexxers...all I have to say is

What we need is less complaining and more player ingenuity.

I have already noticed a big trend away from the 7X GM templates. Not saying they are superior, just noticing alot of diversity lately.

Posted: **Mon Oct 05, 2009 5:13 am**

I think the important thing to consider is that, while we all want era accuracy, we also want a steady and enjoyable gaming experience. I enjoy UOSA a lot, and these implementations haven’t bothered me as much as some. However, it is a nuisance to have a “never ending” series of patches which constantly, and drastically, change the game play. If nothing else – please stop implementing so many changes/patches and condense your work into larger, better thought-out, packages that the players have weighed in on. Now, that having been said, I do greatly appreciate the fact that most patches are discussed on these boards and tested before implementation. However, a lot of us don’t have the stomach nor the time to argue with Faust over right and wrong code.

a) I don’t understand all that stuff, nor do I care to learn it (coding)
b) I don’t have dozens of hours during the week to look up old sources for information.

All that I ask is that you slow down. It seems like every few days new patches are tossed in and slap you in the face. Also, I know a lot of players who don’t ever read the forums – so maybe some sort of in game mechanic which would allow players to read/weigh in with their opinions regarding changes would go a long way. Donno just my two cents.

Posted: **Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:56 am**

I agree Mike.

The last patch although big of text was really intended to be a pretty minor adjustment (stamina); but I thought it was a pretty well thought out package myself, and I tried to get as many things in to it as possible so that we weren't seeing a patch-a-day as i coded these things. The downside of big patches though is that there is a greater probablility of a buggier patch day.

I don't for-see any big changes coming soon that are going to effect combat drastically, but there are a few things that are intended to be addressed soon, hopefully this week:

Not being able to see items in houses until you enter the steps, and on boats until you board.
Fishing still fails at GM
Resist gains should be based on damage taken, not spell circle.

Posted: **Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:23 am**

Not being able to see items in houses until you enter the steps, and on boats until you board.

Please address this one very carefully!

Posted: **Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:39 am**

Fwerp wrote:
Not being able to see items in houses until you enter the steps, and on boats until you board.
Please address this one very carefully!

Indeed. We didn't nail it the first time we put it on, and it was immediately pulled off. It's going to be tricky, but I have a good handle on what i missed the first time around, specificly that items on steps need to be visible always.

UO Second Age

PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?

Re: PVPERS? ON STRIKE?