"Should Spell-Damage-Delays be reverted ? (Pre-Patch)

[Creager]

shouldn't we consider the changes mentioned above and increase or make Dexxers somewhat even par with the whole PVP class? That in effect would attract more players that love to PVP and intereact with other players in the server.

That was bascially EA's mission statement when they introduced UO:R

The majority of people who did play T2A, and actually had a sense of the ruleset, gave up on this game up years ago and want nothing to do with it.

I think guys today correlate t2a-pvp to a misconception manifested from pervious T2A freeshards. Durning the early years of UO, you couldnt just land a sloppy interrupt on your opponet and prevent them from healing or dumping an ebolt on you.

The game was always based on luck, it was about capitalizing on what luck the game gave you. And a good connection always helped =)

IMO to mimic T2A for it actually was, create huge lag spikes every 30 seconds to a minute. Back then, you were more likely to quit because of lag, than anything else.

[Hemperor]

Dexxers were always the under dogs in this era, my major beef is that an energy bolt can do 5 one time and 42 the next...this is a REAL situation, although unlikely...it just goes to show you what kind of dice rolls you are really playing with, when you think you are so "skillful"

[Milford Cubicle]

I agree with Jaster in his suggestions. I think the only way to really make this the true t2a era would be to eliminate multi-clienting and razor overall, but for obvious reasons that's somewhat out of the question, even though if there were limits put on clients i would do it right away.

[Hemperor]

I agree with Jaster in his suggestions. I think the only way to really make this the true t2a era would be to eliminate multi-clienting and razor overall, but for obvious reasons that's somewhat out of the question, even though if there were limits put on clients i would do it right away.

I would be all for this as well...

Crafting is hardly the chore it used to be, I can afk craft shit while farming if I wanted to... I know a number of people that manage to farm on two characters while crafting on another. How accurate.

[Faust]

The only way you could eliminate multi-clienting is if you put a restriction based on the IP address that is currently logged in. This means anyone on a router that has multiple people playing will not be able to log in outside of the first person logged in with that IP address. This shouldn't be recommended in my opinion.

The work involved with coding a unique uosa razor based on this shard alone is simply staggering. This isn't the easiest task by any means...

[Hemperor]

The only way you could eliminate multi-clienting is if you put a restriction based on the IP address that is currently logged in. This means anyone on a router that has multiple people playing will not be able to log in outside of the first person logged in with that IP address. This shouldn't be recommended in my opinion.

The work involved with coding a unique uosa razor based on this shard alone is simply staggering. This isn't the easiest task by any means...

I understand your first point there Faust, it's just a shame in a way, IMO it really takes away from any sort of T2A feeling but it's just one of those things that much can't be done about.

I was thinking yesterday, would Zippy sell a customised Razor (not the source)? It enough people were interested and if it was something the staff actually wanted, there could be a set goal for donations etc... although at the same time you wouldn't want to pull away from server donations, it would really depend on the cost and if Zippy would do it.

I'm simply dying to see someone use In Lor again

[Guerrilla]

isn't zippy from divinity?

[Faust]

isn't zippy from divinity?

Yes, this is why it's a long shot for anything related to this would ever happen.

[crabjuice]

OSI t2a pvp was so great because it fit the era. It fit the 1999 slower computers, dial up connections, and limited abilities that UOA had. This is 2009, pvp needs to be more fast paced. Everyone has fast connections, computers that can easily handle UO, and razor.

I know this is a good point, but I also know this won't change the staff's mind.

[Ezp]

Just tested this delay tweak and I can say im not a big fan of it. This tweak just improves fast casting ebolt and looks/feels like a hybrid of uor/t2a. If you was looking to cast explo/ebolt more well that tactic will be eliminated with this. Don't know why we go away from accurate stuff to obvious inaccuracy. Theres zero proof the spell delay was at the current tc but tons for the live server. It would just be mind bogling if we put this on the live.
Fix the problem, not cause accuracy issues by changing other stuff. Fire Field was the problem not the other spells.

[SPANKY]

I agree with Guerrilla's post.
Me and Grim were talking, and it's as if the spell delay is a recarnation of 56k dial up.

I barley find my self field pvping because of the spell delay. It's just way too easy to survive.
Everything doesn't have to be "era arrurate", that was 10 years ago, we can just change one little thing, and make the shard just a little different.

If animals and other species evolutionized, well, why not UO:T2A?

[DrFaustus]

I agree with Guerrilla's post.
Me and Grim were talking, and it's as if the spell delay is a recarnation of 56k dial up.

I barley find my self field pvping because of the spell delay. It's just way too easy to survive.
Everything doesn't have to be "era arrurate", that was 10 years ago, we can just change one little thing, and make the shard just a little different.

If animals and other species evolutionized, well, why not UO:T2A?

Simply put, you can't.

[Faust]

Ezp is referring to the damage delay on spells not the spell disruption. Those were altered slightly too. This is something that I totally agree with him on. I know some people are trying to come up with ways to make exp/ebolt a little closer together, but this definitely isn't the route to go. Making something that is 100% accurate to be inaccurate to try to make another feature that is claimed to be inaccurate accurate isn't the right thing to do.

I was able to confirm that the delay is exactly 1.0 seconds on the UO Demo. The theory before this was that archery and fire breat damage delays were 1.0, so it would more than likely be the same for the damage delay on spells. We estimated the delay to be around 1 second on the demo too.

I officially confirmed it on the demo through a very simple measurement process last night though. The fireball spell takes 1 second to cast. If you cast it on the demo while holding the key down for the second fireball you can obviously tell that the damage doesn't pop in until the target comes up for the next spell. This means that the damage delay is at least 1 second or more for 100% certainty. The damage hits at around 1 second so it is most certainly sitting at 1 second like all the rest of the damage delay features in the game. This didn't really surprise me though. The damage delay on spells definitely need to go back to what they previously was when they were accurate.

[Guerrilla]

faustus your a joke... do u even pvp?

[alatar]

faustus your a joke... do u even pvp?

good point