UO Second Age

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=42004&p=361119

I think it was around a year and a half ago that all movement restrictions were removed on swinging. Faust mentions in this thread he discussed with Derrick regarding swing timers and the movement restriction on swing state advance was accidentally removed. Specifically, the 0.25s no movement period required to advance the swing state.

Without discussing whether this is/was a good or a bad thing, is there any plan to patch this back to what it was? It's not exactly a small fry in terms of era accuracy, this is a combat changer.

This needs fixed despite the popularity surrounding its removal.

Still beleive the entire combat timer is NEA and needs another look.

Faust wrote:This needs fixed despite the popularity surrounding its removal.

Still beleive the entire combat timer is NEA and needs another look.

It won't be "fixed" until it's 100% right, otherwise the mechanic overall will still be inaccurate and the pvp population is going to suffer because having something like "stop to hit" is annoying. It makes hally cycling and chasing people, two things easily mastered, tedious.

Cycling without having to stop is beyond NEA.

If it "won't be changed until we're 100% accurate", then why was SOTR patched in, in first place? There haven't been any significant combat changes except swing on the run in about 2 years. Not a good argument to keep it in. A good argument would be "SOTR is era accurate" not "sotr is better for server population" - that flies in the face of the shard's goal.

There was a time where you had to stop moving to swing a weap?

How awful was the pvp?

MF Giant wrote:There was a time where you had to stop moving to swing a weap?

How awful was the pvp?

This isn't an opinion thread on whether PvP was/would be good or bad with SOTR. It's only about what's accurate, which is the shard's goal.

MF Giant wrote:There was a time where you had to stop moving to swing a weap?

How awful was the pvp?

Would suggest getting a bit familiar with this issue in order for you to fully understand the concept. The original Ultima Online combat swing timer functions in a specific manner using a function that advances your swing in a number of successions. The function is not suppose to trigger during movement, thus making you stop briefly for 1/4th of a second or one tick that is the equivalent of 0.25s for you to advance into a swing. This particular mechanic was removed shortly after the UOR patch.

UOR Mini Patch Update - http://www.uoguide.com/Publish_5 wrote:Players using melee weapons in combat will now hold their swing until their target is in range. Additionally, the timer that determines melee weapon swing times (combat timer) will now advance as the player is moving. Thus, melee weapon users will no longer be required to stop moving before swinging.

The combat timer still moves forward during movement but the code that determines swing advancement did not.

nightshark wrote:

MF Giant wrote:There was a time where you had to stop moving to swing a weap?

How awful was the pvp?

This isn't an opinion thread on whether PvP was/would be good or bad with SOTR. It's only about what's accurate, which is the shard's goal.

So you're saying it was pretty awful?

MF Giant wrote:

nightshark wrote:

MF Giant wrote:There was a time where you had to stop moving to swing a weap?

How awful was the pvp?

This isn't an opinion thread on whether PvP was/would be good or bad with SOTR. It's only about what's accurate, which is the shard's goal.

So you're saying it was pretty awful?

No.

Nightshark, I doubt you really want accuracy since real accuracy means no hally cycle, what on earth are you going to do then roll a dexer? lol.

I'm sure if "era accurate 1999 pvp" was in place, you'd destroy me Halbu. But until you find some evidence of the PvP system you idealize, we should use whatever is researched to be most accurate instead of trash talking in the Era Accuracy sub-forum.

That was a mini patch to adress a bug that made you have to stop before swinging. Otherwise it would have been in the big patch. Dint this get sorted out already??

I had a discussion with Derrick about this quite a while ago and there is some bug with the combat code relating to a piece of code that recognizes whether you have moved or not since the last tick. This is allowing players to swing while moving, and is also allowing players to hold swings.

Also, regarding evidence for no swinging on the run, this is something that I jotted down quite some time ago, and haven't had the opportunity to post this anywhere due to no relevant discussion topics. Here is an in-era source describing an encounter and explaining the exact property that we're discussing:

I was in Minoc the other day with my GM fisher when I suddenly realized that
3 SOSs had been stolen. I quickly found the grey and yelled GUARDS! but I
guess too much time had gone by -- nothing happened -- and my GM fisher
doesn't know how to fight, so there wasn't much I could do. So, I logged in
with my other character and baited the thief in Minoc. Of course he struck,
and instead of yelling GUARDS, I wanted to take him down myself with my
Katana of Vanq. (100 str, 100 dex, 25 int, 94 swords -- you know, a good Dex
Monkey). Of course the first flaw in UO is that you can't swing while the
guy is running, so here I am running this guy down (obviously who has 100
dex) with my horse and I'm not getting a single swing in even though I'm
right next to him. This lasted a good 60-120 seconds.

The post is dated February 26, 2000, which is at least a month if not more before any of the UOR changes hit the regular servers, which makes this documentation very relevant for the discussion.

Everyone knows you need to run past and not beside to hit people. You can run for 120 secs here aswell and never hit the guy since of the latency.

Also the latency was even worse back then since the phone modems, witch made you see him right next to you but he could be 5 tiles away from you.

Since he was on horse and the other guy was running he cant have galloped the whole time to stay at his side.