UO Second Age

As a counterpoint I definitely recall prepatched heavy xbows that did way more damage than post patch on OSI. In regards to the information release, I wasnt playing at the time, I was just taking matron at her word which is usually the right thing to do.

Elk Eater wrote:As a counterpoint I definitely recall prepatched heavy xbows that did way more damage than post patch on OSI. In regards to the information release, I wasnt playing at the time, I was just taking matron at her word which is usually the right thing to do.

At one point in time, "pre-patched weapons" were a thing. Early on they had a problem with "one hitters" that were a blast to bring out at server wars. Every day in front of Covetous entrance on Lake Superior.

Boomland Jenkins wrote:

Elk Eater wrote:As a counterpoint I definitely recall prepatched heavy xbows that did way more damage than post patch on OSI. In regards to the information release, I wasnt playing at the time, I was just taking matron at her word which is usually the right thing to do.

At one point in time, "pre-patched weapons" were a thing. Early on they had a problem with "one hitters" that were a blast to bring out at server wars. Every day in front of Covetous entrance on Lake Superior.

You've never seen pure spite and rage like my brother when his rune for SW @ Covetous was blocked. It was a beautiful thing.

Elk Eater wrote:As a counterpoint I definitely recall prepatched heavy xbows that did way more damage than post patch on OSI. In regards to the information release, I wasnt playing at the time, I was just taking matron at her word which is usually the right thing to do.

There was definitely pre-patch weapons of many varieties. Katanas and HexBows come to mind. But later on, they were un-pre-patched. So OSI also has a history of un-pre-patching things without warning.

Kaivan wrote:I said that in my opinion it shouldn't be grandfathered. That doesn't mean it will happen.

My wife says I'm fully capable of achieving a reading comprehension of atleast a 5th grade level. With that validation in mind, I'm confident I understood this was your opinion and does not guarantee change.
Yet..your opinion on what mechanics need to be looked at and eventually patched probably weighs more than...well...anyone else active on the forums. That NASDAQ can be a fickle beast ya know. (The post was half joking; but I do very much hope all those old gf articles of clothing become prone to deterioration)

I apologize if my answer sounded flippant or accusatory, but I wanted to head off any possibility that my opinion could be taken as a statement of fact. In the past when I've said the same thing about this subject - which were just as much opinions then as they are now, many players have reacted poorly and treated the statement as the beginning of the blessed items apocalypse. I didn't want that happening again.

Kaivan wrote:I apologize if my answer sounded flippant or accusatory, but I wanted ... my opinion ... be taken as a statement of fact ... and treated ... as the beginning of the blessed items apocalypse.

BLESSED ITEM APOCALYPSE, YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST!

This entire subforum should be closed and iamreallyanerd should be banned. Stop breaking shit you morons. I don't even have a vested interest here anymore, but I'm intelligent enough to see the writing on the wall. You're not making anything better.

Look, my company just acquired one of our competitors, and as I'm looking through their invoices and the details of their operation it's so easy to tell why they had no money to continue. Don't be fucking blind assholes. Look around and stop ruining shit.

I seriously doubt that this thread, this subforum, or iamreallysquall are the reasons for players leaving the server. Needless to say, this won't happen, as this subforum serves our purposes as well as can be expected.

Kaivan wrote:this subforum serves our purposes as well as can be expected.

Therein lies my entire point. Kaivan, I like you. The shard needs you, and I appreciate the position you're in. However, a portion of the stance the shard has taken...its "purposes"...are arbitrarily obtuse and practically unachievable. Era accuracy is unimportant to all but a retentive minority (iamreallysquall). You're chasing a subjective ideal that's different per individual. A memory. You know it better than anyone. How many times have you written to how many unique individuals that their memory of the era is flawed? Few care that the shard strives for an objective accuracy that can never be reached. They want a fun and balanced experience that closely matches a game during an era that they enjoyed. OSI patched things in and out to keep the balance, but they got greedy. I understand the desire to avoid their mistake, but, at the same time, it's not right to draw a line (or date) in the sand and just take the good with the bad. Some things were changed for good reason. Make rules and take strides to keep the shard as pure as possible while maximizing playability, and abandon the unnecessary and impossibly hard stance on "accuracy or bust". Because you will go bust.

Keep the suggestion thread. Ditch the era accuracy thread.

Malaikat wrote:However, a portion of the stance the shard has taken...its "purposes"...are arbitrarily obtuse and practically unachievable. Era accuracy is unimportant to all but a retentive minority (iamreallysquall). You're chasing a subjective ideal that's different per individual. A memory.

I think that this is an important misunderstanding. Our goal is mechanical accuracy to the era, not overall era accuracy. The statements get shorthanded for the purposes of quick explanations, and in some cases, era and mechanical accuracy mean the same things.

In fact, the reason that we don't go for some nebulous complete era accuracy in terms of the whole experience is because of the relative subjectivity of that stance. It's unachievable, and therefore useless to pursue.

Malaikat wrote:You know it better than anyone. How many times have you written to how many unique individuals that their memory of the era is flawed?

The statement has value both from the perspective of the subjective experience, viewed with the rose tinted glasses of time, and the objective facts regarding how certain mechanics work. So while your statement is valid from the position of total era accuracy in the sense of the whole experience, that isn't the meaning that I was applying to it. My point is that when players discuss mechanical accuracy, which is an objective fact, player memory is not a reliable source.

Malaikat wrote:Few care that the shard strives for an objective accuracy that can never be reached. They want a fun and balanced experience that closely matches a game during an era that they enjoyed.

While I understand that this statement was made under the impression that we're attempting to achieve total era accuracy as you defined it earlier, I think that it is important that I point out that I do not believe that it is possible to achieve a fun and balanced game experience that closely matches the game experience had at the time. Each player had a different experience of what the game was in 1999, and much of what shaped that experience includes things that are outside of our control.

Malaikat wrote:OSI patched things in and out to keep the balance, but they got greedy. I understand the desire to avoid their mistake, but, at the same time, it's not right to draw a line (or date) in the sand and just take the good with the bad. Some things were changed for good reason. Make rules and take strides to keep the shard as pure as possible while maximizing playability, and abandon the unnecessary and impossibly hard stance on "accuracy or bust". Because you will go bust.

I'm really only addressing the part in bold, but I felt it necessary to take the whole quote in context.

I find it somewhat difficult to reconcile the notion of keeping things "pure" while making changes to keep the game more enjoyable (i.e. maximizing playability). These are generally subjective terms that are largely on opposite ends of the spectrum, and supposing that we decided to step into the developer's role, we would need to determine exactly what are considered the "pure" aspects, as opposed to those that can be sacrificed in the name of enjoyability. These are questions that we have no intention, and virtually no capability of answering.

Needless to say, if you would like to discuss the merits of whether we should or shouldn't act as developers, and what metrics should and shouldn't be used to determine success, I'm more than willing to have the discussion with you via forum or IRC PM, but this isn't the place to have that kind of discussion.

<
Your UOSA nerdism arousal has increased by 0.2%. It is now 100%.

Elk Eater wrote:

Kaivan wrote:I apologize if my answer sounded flippant or accusatory, but I wanted ... my opinion ... be taken as a statement of fact ... and treated ... as the beginning of the blessed items apocalypse.

BLESSED ITEM APOCALYPSE, YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST!

bump for blessed item apoc

Breakable blessed items are proven era-accurate! This is one discussion that needs to re-open.

So, what are we waiting for?