Poison

[Mephistopheles]

http://update.uo.com/design_196.html

Well I'll be damned...

If this is the case, then how the hell do they work now?

[Hicha]

http://update.uo.com/design_196.html

Well I'll be damned...

If this is the case, then how the hell do they work now?

Basically if u have 30 magery or any type of cure pot, you can cure DP. Lesser cure might take 1 or 2 chugs, but it'll definitely cure DP.

[poogoblin]

Here's an old stratics page that says otherwise (notice the description of the cure pots), this is also how I remember it (not to mention the fact it makes logical sense).

http://web.archive.org/web/199901250924 ... atics.com/

another similar table from stratics, so less likely for a typo

http://web.archive.org/web/199905082127 ... board.html



Now if only that dang Poisoning essay worked

[poogoblin]

This is a long shot but, anyone know these any of these stratics essay writers?

http://web.archive.org/web/199905082127 ... board.html



Please read the last paragraph
http://web.archive.org/web/199905082127 ... board.html

"Just keep doing what you did before only this time with the Deadly Poison. Deadly Poison opens a whole new horizon for an Assassin. It can kill the toughest melee monsters (including Ogre Lords, Wyverns, Cyclops, Drakes, and Ophidian Avengers) in a matter of a few seconds. Just run upo to them, inflict poison and run away. The poison will do the rest. "

One of the few essays that works, and I actually have memories reading this essay from back in the day.

Now given "in a matter of a few seconds" is vague but I know Wyvern poison alone takes ALOT longer than a few seconds to kill a Cyclops

[Mephistopheles]

"You are using an old URL to access this website
Please update your bookmarks to http://uo.stratics.com/

After clicking OK you will be taken to the new URL automagically

Xena Dragon, webmaster UO Stratics"

?

lol It's like all the other old links work but the one poogoblin's using for evidence doesn't.

[poogoblin]

"X" out of the popup so it doesn't take you to the new site, instead of hitting "ok"


In other news...

Here is the poison Essay, this is how I remember it. Damage and all!

http://members.fortunecity.com/arawn1/p ... _essay.htm


As I said lower cure pots COULD heal higher poisons but if one is doing this it can take MANY. I actually remember drinking ~8 normal Cures to heal DP.

Another thing worth noting "Finally, one must also know how to cure poison. Generally, the Cure spell is sufficient to cure Greater Poison and below, although I myself am almost a Grandmaster Mage, so that tends to help a bit. The most powerful potion is difficult to Cure even with this high of a Magery skill; in my personal experience, I've had to cast Cure three to four times before eliminating a Deadly Poison in someone's system. This spell seems to be somewhere between Deadly and Greater Poison in terms of effectiveness. "


The only time it takes more than a single GC pot is to cure Lethal

[poogoblin]

One more:

http://members.fortunecity.com/arawn1/

Even though this is a different format this IS the original poison damage essay, look at the author (the same that is at the inaccesible link on the stratics page).

And here's the same chart (so you know the guy on the above page didn't tweak it) even though it is in german

EDIT: guess I can only link directly to main page, go to "tips" then "asassin essay 4"

http://uob.zarum.de/hintbook/howto/gift.shtml


Notice that DP takes 13hp from start to finish, and if no healed kills a player from 100hp in 35seconds. If one is lucky enough to not have it recalculate the damage (which happens 50% chance every calculation). Otherwise if you have horrible luck and it is recalculated the much more likely 50% of the time one should have their enemy down to about 50hp (mind you just the poison alone) in around 20-25 seconds.

This seems much more in line with DP and makes sense as poisoning was one of the if not THE hardest skills to raise back in OSI days.

[Faust]

You are producing old evidence that has already been presented a long time ago. It has already been deemed incorrect based on the contrary evidence. Again, research the threads that allowed this change to take place so you don't clutter the boards with the same stuff that has been posted numerous times already.

The last couple posts that you have made is a new web site. However, it's still pretty much the same thing... You mention that DP deals 13 damage every tick and recaculates every 50%. Well this has actually been declared inaccurate based on the demo code to an extent. If you take 13% from 100 hp that's 13 damage... The ticks are actually recaculated 1/3 not 1/2 of the time. That makes DP actually stronger based on the way it works in the demo instead of the way it's stated to be on those articles.

[poogoblin]

You are producing old evidence that has already been presented a long time ago. It has already been deemed incorrect based on the contrary evidence. Again, research the threads that allowed this change to take place so you don't clutter the boards with the same stuff that has been posted numerous times already.

The last couple posts that you have made is a new web site. However, it's still pretty much the same thing... You mention that DP deals 13 damage every tick and recaculates every 50%. Well this has actually been declared inaccurate based on the demo code to an extent. If you take 13% from 100 hp that's 13 damage... The ticks are actually recaculated 1/3 not 1/2 of the time. That makes DP actually stronger based on the way it works in the demo instead of the way it's stated to be on those articles.

So we're taking the demo code over what nearly everyone back during this time period considered true? Does anyone actually think the demo code was setup to produce correct statistics.

The demo code was meant for JUST that. A demo, not the end all be all. The demo was never meant to be played for hours, people here put WAY too much stock into this code. r

These pages aren't inaccurate and I'm guessing whoever declared it inaccurate probably didn't deal with poison during T2A.

I'm sorry you feel I'm cluttering up these boards but this is fairly substantial and I figured if it had been brought up the discussion would be over.

Instead of the 4 line discussion between two people discussing the affects of cure pots and poison, and calling that PROOF?


I can honestly say I never raised an Alch/Poisoner to GM in the demo, even back during my last summer break between high school and college, I had better things to do.

[Faust]

If you want to verify how "accurate" the demo is, please feel free to talk to Batlin. I will say that the demo uses EXACT code that OSI used up until the last compilation in Summer of '98. However, if you feel the need to get more out of that statement please ask him "how accurate the demo code really is" and you will see.

I have stated this information below for the billionth time now...

The damage values from the "Stratics" article commonly used here mimics the EXACT code listed for poison damage from the demo...

The change to the cure/arch cure spells was listed in 2003 after the release of the AOS expansion. The precise values listed for BOTH spells on Stratics after the chance showed the "previous" and "current" values after the change took place. The arch cure spell retained the same "effective" value that the cure spell had prior to the change. It even STATES this in the article. Now the formula produced in the values ARE THE EXACT SAME VALUES from the formula produced in the demo that was last compiled in '98. In order for what you are suggesting to happen there would have had to been a "hidden" or "ninja" revision to cure and a revert that ended up getting revised again. This would be completely absurd to even think ever happened and there is absolutely NO evidence to back this far fetched idea in the first place. We have numerous UOHOC logs and articles that state curing poison was insignificant and very easy to do. The only thing that goes against this notion is the Stratics article under the poisoning essay that was written by a player that could EASILY have been mistaken. Trading NUMEROUS sources that uses Stratics, actual OSI code, UOHOC logs, and information from the actual UO.com website for ONE stratic;s article that was written by a player would be COMPLETELY insane.

I am clearly getting tired of repeating myself with these same statements over and over...

PLEASE READ THE DISCUSSION THAT LEAD TO THESE CHANGES.

[poogoblin]

Why do you feel you need to keep explaining it to everyone faust?

Why do numerous people keep coming back and saying the exact same thing? People that have never met and are possibly on different sides of the globe?

It is because the way stratics says it is, is the way it was. I played UO for about all of '99, during this period this is how it was. Bring all the town hall conversations and demo codes you want, again Stratics was basically "THE BIBLE" for UO during this time, the fact that Stratics is seen as inconsistent for this subject is nothing less than ridiculous, especially since it isn't on one stratics page but several.

And AGAIN, anyone that used dp or had been the victim of dp. KNOWS that it wasn't "incredibly easy" to cure.

[Faust]

haha, Stratics said that the spell delays were ( circle * 0.5 ) for over a decade and that was never true.. Nice argument...

Are you kidding me, the bible of UO?

This same "poison essay" was up on Stratics at the same time this "bible of UO web site" stated an entirely different picture on cure values when the change was made to the cure spells in 2003. We have a Stratics article that didn't reflect the correct effective rates in '99 and the same chart that didn't reflect the same effective rates prior to the change in '03...

Wow, isn't that amazing?

[poogoblin]

haha, Stratics said that the spell delays were ( circle * 0.5 ) for over a decade and that was never true.. Nice argument...

Are you kidding me, the bible of UO?

This same "poison essay" was up on Stratics at the same time this "bible of UO web site" stated an entirely different picture on cure values when the change was made to the cure spells in 2003.

I didn't play in 2003. I've noticed stratics is currently pretty trashy and ran the same way, this was not the case in 1999.

So I'm guessing everyone who questions the way poisoning works here versus how it works in T2A had some pyschological condition where we molded our thoughts to fit into what stratics told us? And even though this is how it was "seemed" to be working in game it was merely our minds playing tricks on us again?

Did you play much in T2A faust? And if so did you come across DP dexxers ever?

For the record I DO NOT have a DP dexer on this shard, I don't even have a dexer. (Just in case there was any thought of me "pushing" my own agenda)

[Homie]

all to mention imho:

a guy cant cast 2 ebolts in a row but instacures dp

all accuracy discussions and issues left beside this is looking like a joke to me if you consider how expensive a gm poisoner is...

but well, im fine with the poison as it is now in comparison to how it was after the "first" change.

At least it is still useful for pvm. poison ftw

[poogoblin]

all to mention imho:

a guy cant cast 2 ebolts in a row but instacures dp

all accuracy discussions and issues left beside this is looking like a joke to me if you consider how expensive a gm poisoner is...

but well, im fine with the poison as it is now in comparison to how it was after the "first" changes. At least it is now useable for pvm.

poison ftw

Agreed, who in their right mind would have trained alch/poison in T2A for ~100k (rough estimate and this was a decent chunk of change back then) for such a useless skill.