Combat changes needed (Archery)

[Faust]

Removing runebooks seems like an idiotic thing to do just for the sake of ACCURACY. Technically they're still accurate to T2A (just outside of the timeframe as Derrick said) but removing them would accomplish what? They're still stealable/lootable so no biggie there, but how about the rune libraries everywhere?

So let's see, 16 runes per book, multiplied by how many books in a standard library, multiplied by the number of libraries, PLUS all the private libraries equals... jeeze we'll need a new hard drive on the server just to handle that! It's one of those things where having them in doesn't really affect game play (my stance on this would be completely different if they were newbied/blessed) but provides a massive performance tweak which would otherwise lengthen the already long save times. Let that one go people, it's going to hurt more than it'll ever help.

That's the luxury of having a shard like this, we can shoot for a target date but we can also tweak some things to behave like they did in other parts of the era but provide a basic performance upgrade, or playability in some cases, which would otherwise harm the overall function and enjoyment of the shard.

Yeah, that would be a 'good' thing in some areas and 'bad' in others. Mainly, the bad part is that this would go against the goal of this shard which is era accuracy. No it would definitely not be accurate if you reverted the patch date before November '99 to simply make our housing era accurate with the chosen timeframe. First, you would go from having one inaccuracy to a huge number ranging from runebooks, skill locks, potion kegs, gm staves, etc...

T2A System A(our current system)
Combined November '99/'98 Housing
Runebooks <--- Not accurate with '98 housing
Potion Kegs <--- Not accurate with '98 housing
Skill Locks <--- Not accurate with '98 housing
GM Staves, etc... <--- Not accurate with '98 housing

T2A System B
Pre-November '99 Housing System
Runebooks <--- Still not accurate with '98 housing
Potion Kegs <--- Still not accurate with '98 housing
Skill Locks <--- Still not accurate with '98 housing
GM Staves, etc... <--- Still not accurate with '98 housing

This would be era accurate t2a systems...

T2A System A
Pre-November '99 Housing System
No Runebooks
No Potion Kegs
No Skill Locks
No GM Staves, etc...

OR

T2A System B
November '99 Housing System
Runebooks
Potion Kegs
Skill Locks
GM Staves, etc...


You seem to prefer a custom t2a shard but that isn't what UO Second Age is aiming for here.

[fooka03]

It's always going to be a custom shard in one way or another. Tough luck if you want otherwise, somethings just aren't possible with runuo, and some things are just asinine (but most people want to implement anyway?) Not to mention you can never be truly "accurate" when you have a range of dates you're trying to go for as opposed to a specific time (say 19 July 1999 at 4:18pm EDT). Now what you can do is strive towards making it as close as possible to a specific date while taking some things, which are still era accurate mind you, that can help keep the shard playable, or at the very least running efficiently.

In regards to the runebook issue, and even to a certain extent the potion kegs, by removing these items you're going to place a MASSIVE strain on the limited server resources we have. What do you gain by this? Era accuracy? Ok a few days out of your target range is such a massive dealbreaker that 90% of the shard is going to quit if this is not implemented give me a break.

Let's see what else, closing down of, or at least severely hurting, the shard's rune libraries? Places of natural gathering for player interaction. Yea we should get rid of that and make this shard even more individualistic and introverted .

Quite simply, we don't have the same kind of resources OSI had to handle the server and they even had trouble (the march '99 patch with house and boat item visibility, the CUB patches). Even if we did, it's not the same player base or setup (multi-accounts, afk macroing), or technology (who here still uses a 28.8k modem to connect? or even 56k for that matter?) You have to take all of this into account when you're talking about what things to exclude and include, not just era accuracy (which should be the primary concern in any case.)

[Faust]

It's always going to be a custom shard in one way or another. Tough luck if you want otherwise, somethings just aren't possible with runuo, and some things are just asinine (but most people want to implement anyway?) Not to mention you can never be truly "accurate" when you have a range of dates you're trying to go for as opposed to a specific time (say 19 July 1999 at 4:18pm EDT). Now what you can do is strive towards making it as close as possible to a specific date while taking some things, which are still era accurate mind you, that can help keep the shard playable, or at the very least running efficiently.

In regards to the runebook issue, and even to a certain extent the potion kegs, by removing these items you're going to place a MASSIVE strain on the limited server resources we have. What do you gain by this? Era accuracy? Ok a few days out of your target range is such a massive dealbreaker that 90% of the shard is going to quit if this is not implemented give me a break.

Let's see what else, closing down of, or at least severely hurting, the shard's rune libraries? Places of natural gathering for player interaction. Yea we should get rid of that and make this shard even more individualistic and introverted .

Quite simply, we don't have the same kind of resources OSI had to handle the server and they even had trouble (the march '99 patch with house and boat item visibility, the CUB patches). Even if we did, it's not the same player base or setup (multi-accounts, afk macroing), or technology (who here still uses a 28.8k modem to connect? or even 56k for that matter?) You have to take all of this into account when you're talking about what things to exclude and include, not just era accuracy (which should be the primary concern in any case.)

No one is trying to replicate or social engineer era accuracy(the only form that cannot truly be replicated) here. UO Second Age replicates mechanical accuracy as if it's just another production shard being introduced during the '99 time period with the same code put in place with its own unique events just like the other shards had itself. The social experiences will be different and will be what the players make out of it.

I have been working with RunUO code for almost 10 years now. The extent or 'strain' is very apparent to me but it's nothing quite like what you are making it out to be in all honesty. Rune libraries would either have to lock down or block access to runes and there is only so many limitations on the amount of space and lockdowns that can be possible.

I don't really care about using the '98 or '99 housing system so long as we just choose one that makes the server consistent with the game mechanics with a portion of the era that actually existed.

We do not have the resources that OSI had? What resources are you talking about specifically? The server we are using is a million times better than any server that OSI had for their shards combined.

Also, please do a little research on this same similar top when it comes to era accuracy that has been discussed more than a thousand times here easily. By allowing an inaccuracy to take hold is the same fault every other t2a wannabe shard has made since day one. You are simply opening the doors to the flood gates when you purposely allow one inaccuracy to be implemented. This simply allows the next player say "OH WAIT THIS AND THIS AND THIS IS INACCURATE. WHY NOT THIS? IT WOULD MAKE IT SO MUCH BETTER!", blah blah blah. Derrick takes a hard line position on era accuracy and it's one of the key reasons this shard doesn't fall part like the rest before it. He does not take a developer's role and has stated many times that he does not intend to 'develop' this era into something that it was not since he does not think he could make the era better than what it was just like the rest before him that failed. History depicts the game mechanics of this shard. Not you, Joe, Dick, Harry, or me. This goal is the driving force behind this shard and what makes it unique compared to any other out there or before it.

[caveman]

Archery seems pretty accurate here. The damage seems a hair low but I couldn't say for sure. I had archery on my main during t2a. Against players I only found it useful for a first strike with a heavy before switching to a melee weapon. If I did happen to go back to a bow during the fight it would be a regular one because it didn't take so long to be able to shoot again.

[fooka03]

Also, please do a little research on this same similar top when it comes to era accuracy that has been discussed more than a thousand times here easily. By allowing an inaccuracy to take hold is the same fault every other t2a wannabe shard has made since day one. You are simply opening the doors to the flood gates when you purposely allow one inaccuracy to be implemented. This simply allows the next player say "OH WAIT THIS AND THIS AND THIS IS INACCURATE. WHY NOT THIS? IT WOULD MAKE IT SO MUCH BETTER!", blah blah blah. Derrick takes a hard line position on era accuracy and it's one of the key reasons this shard doesn't fall part like the rest before it. He does not take a developer's role and has stated many times that he does not intend to 'develop' this era into something that it was not since he does not think he could make the era better than what it was just like the rest before him that failed. History depicts the game mechanics of this shard. Not you, Joe, Dick, Harry, or me. This goal is the driving force behind this shard and what makes it unique compared to any other out there or before it.

Did I mention anything in my post about using something that would be inaccurate to the era we're striving for? No. It is at the very end, or a little bit past the optimal time frame that's being striven for. But that's ok, my objective is to destroy the shard and provide useless discussion points that cloud the actual issues that should be worked on. Give me a break. Tell me to do a little research? Sure, have been, check my stats this is my most active forum.

And here I was going to let this die with I made a point, you made a point, I made a counter, you made a counter. But no, you decided I needed to be lectured like a little boy who got caught stealing candy. I really appreciate when people are condescending to me (that was sarcasm btw)

Yes I know Derrick takes a hard line on accuracy, that's what I want too. If Derrick rules one way or the other on this am I going to argue with me man? Maybe a little, but it's his server and he's nice enough to let us play here so I won't take it too far. Is he doing a good job of getting the accuracy right? You betcha, I didn't donate because the man's hair looked good. And boy it would sure be nice to hear from him instead of wannabes speaking for him.

I'm done making off-topic posts here. I've made my points, and stated my opinions. I hope that they're taken under consideration. If not? Oh well, still makes me feel better voicing them, and many points of view help to paint a clearer picture.

So how about that archery? I'm hoping to see lots of other people embrace the skill other than the pk gank-gangs after the changes. Granted it might make them a little more effective too

[benny-]

Not to further sway this thread away from combat, but at the mention of runebooks, I thought I'd chime in...

Runebooks were added at the very end of the era, just shortly before the release of Renn. All save the last couple of months of T2A, runebooks did not exist. To me, runebooks were one of the many features that heralded the change to Renaissance.....nearly my entire T2A experience, players used individual runes, this is how the era was and thus it is how I think it should be here.

It could simply be for the sake of accuracy like you say, it could be a mere aesthetic choice (being required to use collections of individual runes simply feels T2A.) But personally, I find runebooks add an additional level of convenience that changed gameplay.

While it might only seem a matter of convenience and thus a "good" addition, runebooks add in a level of ease to the game, allowing users to have countless locations to be readily recalled to without any challenge or time spent.

A good example of this is t-map libraries. As it is, there are dozens of libraries all over the shard with every single last possible chest location all ready to go. Think of how challenging t-maps will be when players actually have to go out and find the treasure themselves rather than simply going to one of many towers, selecting a number, and be taken to the exact location of the awaiting chest.

In the era, the majority of players had to do some traveling to get to a desired location....even with recalling being heavily used, the majority of the time you didn't have runes ready to take you to the myriad towns and dungeons and the specific locations within. Think of how hard it would be to have a rune to each and every "hotspot" of the server without runebooks....near impossible.

Without an endless collection of runes, players will be forced to do some footwork to get to a desired farming location, vendor, etc. This creates more activity across the map. Whether it's players actually walking to go to a vendor, traversing through dungeon tunnels to try a different spawn, or even walking or taking a moongate to get to a different city. Having runebooks in each players house with dozens upon dozens of locations, or more grossly, having rune libraries with literally hundreds of locations, completely eradicates the need to do any sort of traveling. It changes the gameplay from having the chance to bump into other players (which creates interaction be it good or bad) to a much more instanced and efficient method of gameplay, where players simply blink in and out from location to location, instantaneously, completely eliminating the possibility of interaction.

In the end, I can see why players would want to keep runebooks, it is easier afterall. But to say that they don't have any effect on gameplay or that the change wouldn't have any purpose beyond the claim of accuracy is false. I think the removal of them would add in a level of difficulty to the game that was largely a part of the era.

[Psilo]

Great post!

[fooka03]

Quite a good read benny. Thanks for your post.

[Derrick]

My apologies up front for taking this further off topic than it already is.

The old rune libraries with piles on runes on a counter is a very highly regarded memory for me, and I'l not a big fan of runebooks myself. Rune management was an art in the day. I think likely half of my bankbox contents was runes placed strategically in backpacks so that I'd remember where they went.

The primary (not only, but primary) reason that we didn't remove runebooks when we started narrowing down our accuracy focus is really the lack of any reasonable path to accomplishing that goal.

There are other threads on this where is has been discussed in much more detail. If anyone would like to continue discussing runebooks and potion kegs, please first review those topics and bump them if desired.

[lotus39]

+20 Vanq bows should do more than 12-16 damage
+20 Vanq Heavys should do more than 18 or so.


All things considered damage doesnt seem era accurate at all.

[Derrick]

The base damage on a Heavy Crossbow is 11-56, that's of course halved after the bonuses go on, but 18 average seems kind of low even without the Vanq. What kind of armor did your oponent have?

All the weapon damages are here: http://www.uosecondage.com/stratics/arms.html
And the damage sequence is here: http://www.uosecondage.com/stratics/combat.html

Some damages using the 5d10+6 from a regular store bought heavy crossbow (new, with gm anat and no armor) would be:
Min: (11 * (150% + 20% + 20%))/2 = 10
Average: (25 * (150% + 20% + 20%))/2 = 23
Max: (56 * (150% + 20% + 20%))/2 = 53

Clothing does provide some ar of course, but we've disregarded any magic or exceptional bonuses above, so hitting for 18 seems a little on the low side still.

[lotus39]

The base damage on a Heavy Crossbow is 11-56, that's of course halved after the bonuses go on, but 18 average seems kind of low even without the Vanq. What kind of armor did your oponent have?

All the weapon damages are here: http://www.uosecondage.com/stratics/arms.html
And the damage sequence is here: http://www.uosecondage.com/stratics/combat.html

Some damages using the 5d10+6 from a regular store bought heavy crossbow (new, with gm anat and no armor) would be:
Min: (11 * (150% + 20% + 20%))/2 = 10
Average: (25 * (150% + 20% + 20%))/2 = 23
Max: (56 * (150% + 20% + 20%))/2 = 53

Clothing does provide some ar of course, but we've disregarded any magic or exceptional bonuses above, so hitting for 18 seems a little on the low side still.

This was tested on two different mages with clothing, very low AR.

That said this is on a mage without Anatomy, however even missing the 20% damage bonus.

I should be hitting for more than 24 max, after 40 or so shots.

Average was 18.

With a +20 Vanq Bow I was hitting for 12-14 average over 50 shots.

[Derrick]

Actually I messed up earlier, average damage roll should be 31 (might be off by one)

So for Vanq Heavy in mint condition with no anat:
Average: (31 * (150% + 20%) + 9)/2 = 31 - AR of body location.

given an AR of 7 say for a jesters suit (best clothing AR), that's 24 damage.

Looking into this.

[lotus39]

Actually I messed up earlier, average damage roll should be 31 (might be off by one)

So for Vanq Heavy in mint condition with no anat:
Average: (31 * (150% + 20%) + 9)/2 = 31 - AR of body location.

given an AR of 7 say for a jesters suit (best clothing AR), that's 24 damage.

Looking into this.

So I went on test to give it a try and discovered on test anyway Archery Damage is tied to tactics and shouldnt be.

Archery with tactics on test hits like I remember it.

Archery without tactics on test hits like production shard, weak.

GM bow No tactics on test 11 pt average
With tactics on test 20 pt average

[lotus39]

Actually I messed up earlier, average damage roll should be 31 (might be off by one)

So for Vanq Heavy in mint condition with no anat:
Average: (31 * (150% + 20%) + 9)/2 = 31 - AR of body location.

given an AR of 7 say for a jesters suit (best clothing AR), that's 24 damage.

Looking into this.

So I went on test to give it a try and discovered on test anyway Archery Damage is tied to tactics and shouldnt be.

Archery with tactics on test hits like I remember it.

Archery without tactics on test hits like production shard, weak.

GM bow No tactics on test 11 pt average
With tactics on test 20 pt average

Just to clarify I ran it with about 50 more arrows each

Tactics gives huge damage increase to archery

My understanding is you get %100 damage with 50 tactics, %150 with Gm tactics

If archery isnt tied to tactics at all then you should get %100 with 0 tactics with a +20 modifier you should get %120.

Does this explaion why archery damage on the production shard sucks so bad?

****I have been updated thats its always used tactics, Now im scouring to find the bad info I read ****************