UO Second Age

This google discussion is interesting

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.game ... ad63bb99f4

MatronDeWinter wrote:I thought there was evidence to this case?

The debate was never resolved other than staff ruling one way. From the evidence it seems whether or not our cut-off date had SOTR is up to individual interpretation, and staff chose no.

Edit: that is my understanding of the situation, anyway.

MatronDeWinter wrote:I thought there was evidence to this case?

Rose wrote: Pre-T2A Google Groups post's say that you swing on the run.

The T2A Demo shows that you can swing on the run.

A Patch note in April of 2000 (5 months after the cutoff) says that you can now swing on the run. This patch note has been interpreted in such a way that staff believes swing on the run did not exist at some point during the t2a era.

This is all.

Arsen wrote:there are some things that may not 100% proven era accurate but a huge misstake by staff back on osi

this. why would you copy something that is obviously only making the game worse

''A Patch note in April of 2000 (5 months after the cutoff) says that you can now swing on the run.''

that indicates OSI developers realized how it should be. it's still from before renaissance, for the sake of the shard leave it how it is now

bushman wrote:

Arsen wrote:there are some things that may not 100% proven era accurate but a huge misstake by staff back on osi

this. why would you copy something that is obviously only making the game worse

''A Patch note in April of 2000 (5 months after the cutoff) says that you can now swing on the run.''

that indicates OSI developers realized how it should be. it's still from before renaissance, for the sake of the shard leave it how it is now

By that logic we should have gargoyles, necromancy, and insurance too. That's how the developers realized it should be.

except for those are not from the second age

MatronDeWinter wrote:
By that logic we should have gargoyles, necromancy, and insurance too. That's how the developers realized it should be.

yea sure its the same like flying around as a gargoyle. exaggeration at its best.
why do you even care so much matron you dont play here anyway.
all you do is visiting the forums and troll/ come up with propaganda shit.

+ you ignore



Rose wrote:

Pre-T2A Google Groups post's say that you swing on the run.

The T2A Demo shows that you can swing on the run.

A Patch note in April of 2000 (5 months after the cutoff) says that you can now swing on the run. This patch note has been interpreted in such a way that staff believes swing on the run did not exist at some point during the t2a era.

From this google group http://groups.google.com/group/rec.game ... 9e0a4a2e04






GM, SBR/LS, WE/ATL Visa profil Översätt till SvenskaÖversatt (visa ursprungstexten)
Fler alternativ 1 Juni 1999, 09:00

Nyhetsgrupper: rec.games.computer.ultima.online
Från: [email protected] (Corwin of Amber (GM, SBR/LS, WE/ATL))
Datum: 1999/06/01
Ämne: Re: Warriors and Mages
Skriv ut | Enskilt meddelande | Visa original | Rapportera det här meddelandet | Sök meddelanden av denna författare

>I feel some changes need to be made to how stamina works. Here is a
>comparison of what a fully developed warrior needs to have to compete with a
>fully developed mage:

>Mage:


>50 of each reg and a Qstaff


>Warrior:


>25 of each reg, 50 bandages, 25 total refresh, 25 greater heals, 10
>explosion potions, 5 greater cures, fast weapon, strong slow weapon, armor
>and a shield



I currently play a pure warrior, and an arch-mage.

Under real pvp competitions ... not duels ... I've slaughtered mages
with my warrior with as little as a piece of bone chest, 10 bandages,
and a GM katana. If you have comparable connections, and you stick on
them, they just get chopped up and interrupted without getting off
hardly any spells. They usually die miserably trying to get off a
recall or a heal. The Katana just chews up a pure mage.


If you want to defeat any mage just carry an item of magic reflect,
and watch how fast they run -or- die.


In general when my warrior is "tanked-up" I carry Armor, 4 GH, 2 TR, 2
GC, 20 Bandaids, DP-Katana, Halberd, Order Shield, Magic Trapped
Pouches .... occasionally some other things depending on supply and
demand. If I carry any regs it is just a few garlic and gingseng to
cure myself from monsters. The Halberd is *mostly* for whacking
monsters or on occasion if the opponent has a faster connection and I
can't stay close. Remember outside of a "dueling" area ... your
warrior can run off and heal, just like the mages like to do.


I've never seen a mage stand still, heal, and get off spells while
getting beat on by a pure Warrior.


I don't win 'em all ... I don't lose 'em all. Overall, I think it's
balanced probably about as good as its gonna get.


A warrior can also exploit all forms of magic items. Wands can be used
to interupt a mage, break para, or heal. Reflect, inviso, and teleport
items can be very handy. Magic Armor is dang nice, and someday I hope
to see what a DP Katana of Vanquishing can do.


Corwin

Under real pvp competitions ... not duels ... I've slaughtered mages
with my warrior with as little as a piece of bone chest, 10 bandages,
and a GM katana. If you have comparable connections, and you stick on
them, they just get chopped up and interrupted without getting off
hardly any spells. They usually die miserably trying to get off a
recall or a heal. The Katana just chews up a pure mage.

Lol, this certainly helps our argument more. Katanas don't eat up mages at all on UOSA when the "stop to hit" mechanic is in. They should.

i played my macer dexer more than my tank during this era because i could hit mages for dmg and disrupt better. here, something isn't right. dexers are near-worthless

Kaivan wrote:

iamreallysquall wrote:? why is everyone so mad i asked a simple question if a change that had gone in place was intended or not, are you sggeesting that i should say nothing and let said change happen with 0 patch notes ? sounds like bunch of people that dont report mistakes / exploits and bugs if i didn't post this someone else would

Thank you very much for pointing out the error. No player should be berated for pointing out an error with the mechanics, whether it varies from what we know to be true, or what we have implemented.

thank you

Kaivan wrote:This has been said before, but one inaccuracy should not be an excuse for another inaccuracy. If that particular stance were accepted, we might as well have an entirely custom server because of a single inaccuracy.

truth

Give it a go right now matty, currently you can swing on the run.

I would like to encourage everyone to get in game and test this out, and if you have time, report back.

what sucks is i'm at a hotel in NM so my ping is hovering between 100-300. i still hold that something is wrong with the swinging mechanics. regardless i'mn gonna play now and relive the old days where you could kill a good mage on a dexmonkey.

Rose wrote:Give it a go right now matty, currently you can swing on the run.

I would like to encourage everyone to get in game and test this out, and if you have time, report back.

It should be noted that while you can run and swing right now, the error is also causing player swings to be held as well, which is not supposed to happen (this is not a disputed mechanic between sources).

Matty wrote:what sucks is i'm at a hotel in NM so my ping is hovering between 100-300. i still hold that something is wrong with the swinging mechanics. regardless i'mn gonna play now and relive the old days where you could kill a good mage on a dexmonkey.

;]]

i was aswell a pure fenc dexer on drachenfels 98-99. i rocked hard vs mages.
here it is complety dif and NOT era accurate as it was before without SOTR.

hope they dont take it away because iam about to have way more fun playing UO actually and have something new to do. iam tired of playing a hally mage all day!!!

thanks god for the change!