UO Second Age

It pleases me to see these items off the lame silver system, and put into the game in a moderately t2a accurate fashion. However, does this mean that this stuff will be breakable now? God I hope so.

why are you so negative man

I am very positive, about t2a accuracy.


(also, you owe me 10 silver guerrilla)

whats era accurate about razor get over it

matron dewinter -1
lettuce +1

topic debunked, now go back to having a merry christmas

MatronDeWinter wrote:It pleases me to see these items off the lame silver system, and put into the game in a moderately t2a accurate fashion. However, does this mean that this stuff will be breakable now? God I hope so.

I had blessed black sandals and newbie clothing that I dueled in 24-7 in t2a and NEVER did it ever break or did I ever have to replace it. I didn't even take my sandals off to fight a macer with qstaff hitting me tons.

Doesn't sound accurate to me Matron!

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=20056

Proven to be true in this thread. Nothing was done about it. Matron is just bringing it up again being that the main rallying cry against it was the silver system. Now that it's off that it seems like a reasonable question.

Matron just wants to go smashy smahsy with your neon, I don't blame her.

Psilo wrote:

MatronDeWinter wrote:It pleases me to see these items off the lame silver system, and put into the game in a moderately t2a accurate fashion. However, does this mean that this stuff will be breakable now? God I hope so.

I had blessed black sandals and newbie clothing that I dueled in 24-7 in t2a and NEVER did it ever break or did I ever have to replace it. I didn't even take my sandals off to fight a macer with qstaff hitting me tons.

Doesn't sound accurate to me Matron!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't items get hit in certain orders? Or at least have hit chance percentages assigned to them? Pretty sure sandals are low on the getting your ass beat scale.

They shouldn't be indestructible if the goal of the shard is to be accurate to the mechanics available on Nov. 23, 1999 (I think that's the right date). It is quite baffling though how the staff made a decision that completely ignores era accuracy simply because Blackfoot and company do not wish to damage their trammel while PvPing or whatever. Yet, a double hally hit was implemented based off a loosely translated asian website and a random google group post that had little or no specifics was implemented rather swiftly(later corrected).

So, is the deciding factor then not era accuracy and instead who it effects? If Blackfoot disagrees, it won't get changed no matter how much factual data you provide? Apparently, it seems the case with this specific topic.

In all likelihood though, if it is changed, the pre-acquired trammel will be converted to "gm gifts for rp'ing", so that they can have their indestructible nature to protect Blackfoot. If you're going to exhibit bias as developers and administration, at least be honest about it.

Actually Derrick brings every issue to me and asks for a green light before he codes anything.

You're welcome, jerks.

lettuce wrote:whats era accurate about razor get over it

bringing up the inaccuracy of some of razors features to justify the inaccuracy of an item like CBDs is a logical falicy.

this subject has, however, been discussed thoroughly and i think we got a pretty definitive answer from staff. they may have changed their stance on the subject though, since the shard just got flooded with bless deeds.

noxmonk wrote:They shouldn't be indestructible if the goal of the shard is to be accurate to the mechanics available on Nov. 23, 1999 (I think that's the right date). It is quite baffling though how the staff made a decision that completely ignores era accuracy simply because Blackfoot and company do not wish to damage their trammel while PvPing or whatever. Yet, a double hally hit was implemented based off a loosely translated asian website and a random google group post that had little or no specifics was implemented rather swiftly(later corrected).

So, is the deciding factor then not era accuracy and instead who it effects? If Blackfoot disagrees, it won't get changed no matter how much factual data you provide? Apparently, it seems the case with this specific topic.

In all likelihood though, if it is changed, the pre-acquired trammel will be converted to "gm gifts for rp'ing", so that they can have their indestructible nature to protect Blackfoot. If you're going to exhibit bias as developers and administration, at least be honest about it.

arguments like this are why no one takes you seriously, nor should they ever.

BlackFoot wrote: arguments like this are why no one takes you seriously, nor should they ever.

You don't have to take me seriously, nor should you. Discussion on accuracy should be left solely to the facts which you, staff, and others clearly choose to ignore when it has a negative impact on your perceived play experience.

Facts:
1.) UOSA has a stated goal to emulate the mechanics and feel of the game circa Nov. 23, 1999.
2.) Mechanics available for players to "bless" clothing circa Nov. 23, 1999 created an item which was destructible but would remain with you when you die.
3.) Mechanics used by players to "bless" clothing on UOSA do not use the same mechanic that was available to players circa Nov. 23, 1999.

Therefore:
If 1 is true and 2 is true, 3 should match 2. It does not. These are indisputable facts, choose to ignore them or try and place your single minded caveats in there however you like but in the end you will always be incorrect.

your arguments are weak and transparent