UO Second Age

Ronk wrote: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

Close! This is the UO:R version and I think it was dated in either March or April 2000. There was a previous version Dec 1999 that we are missing that wouldn't have had min damage of 6 hps for deadly listed.

EDIT: I have a version dated July 17th, 2000 from a December 5th, 2000 save.

And, to answer the other posters question: We argue about the game in an effort to help make it closer to what the shards goal is. It's called vetting.

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

I really think your forum privileges should be limited considering you bring the trash talk board everywhere you post, including many productive discussions such as this one.

Back to being on topic, has anyone looked at poison ticks etc. in the demo so far?

Hemperor wrote: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.

Statement from someone who didn't play T2A on OSI. Everyone and i mean everyone i pvped with was gm magery, maybe we were not all gm resist, but it was just as easy to macro magery on OSI as it was here, just took 2 weeks instead of 3 days.

Watatsumi wrote:

Hemperor wrote: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.

Statement from someone who didn't play T2A on OSI. Everyone and i mean everyone i pvped with was gm magery, maybe we were not all gm resist, but it was just as easy to macro magery on OSI as it was here, just took 2 weeks instead of 3 days.

Making assumptions based on nothing gets you nowhere on this shard.

Neither do memories.

Rather than being upset and making pointless posts, why don't you do some research and try to dig up some facts to combat the already posted facts that you are so against. Memory vs facts is always a losing battle, welcome to UO: Second Age.

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/[/quote]
I am not discouraged by anything Faust says in the slightest. Looking at all his responses on the trash talk board shows his true character anyway. I think the research you have done is great keep it up. The fact is I know i had to carry around greater cures for the simple fact that the cure spell was not dependable against deadly poison in T2A. I know this is not proof, and since I have a job that requires me to work instead of sit on this forum all day like the faustinator, I can't get the info to prove that. Obviously you have put a lot of time into this subject and have not found any proof either, so I realize there is no chance this will be changed back.

Hemperor wrote:

Watatsumi wrote:

Hemperor wrote: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.

Statement from someone who didn't play T2A on OSI. Everyone and i mean everyone i pvped with was gm magery, maybe we were not all gm resist, but it was just as easy to macro magery on OSI as it was here, just took 2 weeks instead of 3 days.

Making assumptions based on nothing gets you nowhere on this shard.

Neither do memories.

Rather than being upset and making pointless posts, why don't you do some research and try to dig up some facts to combat the already posted facts that you are so against. Memory vs facts is always a losing battle, welcome to UO: Second Age.

Neither does the research of someone who never played. BTW it is really hard to remember that my guildmates and I were gm magery. Like that was really something out of the ordinary after the game was almost 2 years old. Give me a break lol. Secondly a lot of the things that are in UOSecond Age are based on assumptions, that's what happens when you try to recreate an era with little to know printed information. You my friend should play that great new pre-t2a shard you have been raving about on these forums.

Clearly I am not your friend, so refrain from referring to me as that. Anytime I push forward for a change I provide sufficient documented evidence, I did play in the era however I never refer to my memory. Sounds like you have a beef with the shard rather than myself.

Your writing skills are limited so I'm going to take a leap of faith and assume your reading skills are no better, otherwise you would have noticed the many page long topics that battle out over each implementation on this shard. Nothing is ever implemented here unless it's beyond a doubt, and any mistakes that are made are quickly corrected.

Hemperor wrote:Back to being on topic, has anyone looked at poison ticks etc. in the demo so far?

Our poison ticks and damages and cure rates are exactly as mid-'98 OSI from their code, and confirmed in multiple other sources.

It should be noted that the one essay that's often cited on curing poison is from a guy that is "almost" a GM mage. I don't know what almost means but it's not exactly a specific guideline to base our system on. Until we find some hard evidence that our system is wrong, we'll use the hard evidence that we have found.

I don't like it any more than anyone else that DP is easy to cure, but we will not just make up formula parameters, with such little basis.

Wow, a guy that "conducts" himself negatively on the trash forums couldn't call that one any better, huh.

Please show me one piece of my research that has been wrong Watersuei

Thanks,

Xena, from stratics, has sent me a zip containing some archived poison info from 02/27/2000.

Rather then trying to post it, Ill just note it looks similar to our others. It says GC's cure 100%...but may take several attempts to cure Lethal Poison (level 5). It says deadly does 13% every 5 seconds.

Ronk wrote:Xena, from stratics, has sent me a zip containing some archived poison info from 02/27/2000.

Rather then trying to post it, Ill just note it looks similar to our others. It says GC's cure 100%...but may take several attempts to cure Lethal Poison (level 5). It says deadly does 13% every 5 seconds.

Okay, that's pretty definitive. Can you email that to me? (Look for PM)

I'd like to look into how poison damage interrupts.

Kraarug wrote:

Ronk wrote:Xena, from stratics, has sent me a zip containing some archived poison info from 02/27/2000.

Rather then trying to post it, Ill just note it looks similar to our others. It says GC's cure 100%...but may take several attempts to cure Lethal Poison (level 5). It says deadly does 13% every 5 seconds.

Okay, that's pretty definitive. Can you email that to me? (Look for PM)

I'd like to look into how poison damage interrupts.

Sent. The only problem I see with a feb 2000 update is that it would probably include any new UO:R changes. Maybe not...I dunno.

When I email stratics it goes out to a whole group of them and several tend to respond...so its still possible they may send/find more info.

Hemperor wrote:Clearly I am not your friend, so refrain from referring to me as that. Anytime I push forward for a change I provide sufficient documented evidence, I did play in the era however I never refer to my memory. Sounds like you have a beef with the shard rather than myself.

Your writing skills are limited so I'm going to take a leap of faith and assume your reading skills are no better, otherwise you would have noticed the many page long topics that battle out over each implementation on this shard. Nothing is ever implemented here unless it's beyond a doubt, and any mistakes that are made are quickly corrected.

Sarcasm detector is broken my friend? You are ASSUMING the code is the same for the cure spell in 98' because of the demo and some patch notes in 2003. So in fact assuming is a big part of UOsecond age, contrary to what you stated in above post. As i stated before I love this shard, I actively play it, unlike you or the faustinator. I don't like this change because I feel it is not era accurate. The only reason I keep talking about it because you guys like to attack me. Maybe if you learn to shut your face you wouldn't see my posts anymore. And people that played T2A at least have a basis and understanding of the mechanics beforehand, before they blindly think everything they read is true. If it was true that you were playing T2A at seven years old, all I have to say is WTF is the matter with your parents.

My guess is that the archived link Xena sent to you is identical to this 4/14/2000 archive which cites nearly identical information to the demo. The last modification date of the information is from 3/1/2000, and without any patch notes showing any significant changes to poison, we can only assume that the actual essay was updated with more accurate information as it was found.

Kaivan wrote:My guess is that the archived link Xena sent to you is identical to this 4/14/2000 archive which cites nearly identical information to the demo. The last modification date of the information is from 3/1/2000, and without any patch notes showing any significant changes to poison, we can only assume that the actual essay was updated with more accurate information as it was found.

The poisoning essay by Som Kman and Den Dragon is not what I was interested in, however, you are correct, the two versions appear the same.

It's the poison damage essay by Malik Yagova from December 1999 that I was hoping we could recover and Ronk did.

Thank you Ronk.

This version differs from the UO:R version is that there is no minimum damage Also, the UO:R version provides the damage in terms of a formula [For DP it’s 1+(current health/8] rather than a percentage [For DP it’s 13%].

The UO:R version also publishes a minimum damage by strength, the T2A version does not.

Both version of the essay suggest that remaining health may have been calculated intervals of two cycles rather than every cycle.

In short, the UO:R poisons seem more effective with a minimum damage implemented.


What I’d like to look at is how poison damage is used in the calculation of interruption of spell casting.