UO Second Age

I believe there is something up with disrupt delays, not disrupts.

There should be less delay when casting spells but more delay when u actually get disrupted "you must wait to cast another spell".

That would have been a better mechanic...make casting like bandage slippage.

virtue wrote:I believe there is something up with disrupt delays, not disrupts.

There should be less delay when casting spells but more delay when u actually get disrupted "you must wait to cast another spell".

Again: Evidence or it isn't accurate plz.

virtue wrote:I believe there is something up with disrupt delays, not disrupts.

There should be less delay when casting spells but more delay when u actually get disrupted "you must wait to cast another spell".

The recast delay is a fixed variable sitting at 0.75s.

The disrupt delay equates to the remainder of the spell's casting delay upon disruption. For example, casting an energy bolt that takes 1.75s and getting hit 0.1s with in the casting process gives you a 1.65s delay until you can recast again. If this happened 1.65s into the casting process it would only be 0.1s delay until you can cast again. So in other words the disrupt delay simply depends on when you interrupt your opponent's casting process.

A fixed variable is known as a constant

virtue wrote:I believe there is something up with disrupt delays, not disrupts.

There should be less delay when casting spells but more delay when u actually get disrupted "you must wait to cast another spell".

It's not that there isn't interest in this subject, but lacking specific evidence we have made a lot of guesses that result in much worse spell casting mechanics and feel than we have currently.

I'd love to seal this one in stone, but we just haven't been able to. The best theory based mostly on a wire variety of evidence, reasonable calculation, and much testing is what we currently have on the shard. If anyone has a better theory we're happy to entertain it, and if sound, test it. But as with anything on Second Age, we're hesitant to just make up something.

spell disruption based on luck is incredibly annoying to the point where it makes pvp no fun.

marmalade wrote:spell disruption based on luck is incredibly annoying to the point where it makes pvp no fun.

This is the most pathetic thing I've ever read, every good game has some element of chance get used to it. There ARE other ways to kill people besides a mage you know.

OMG I didn't do what I wanted to do every time, I'm sad

marmalade wrote:spell disruption based on luck is incredibly annoying to the point where it makes pvp no fun.

You must REALLY hate how two GM-weapon-skill players have a 50/50 chance of hitting their swings and dodging swings

marmalade wrote:spell disruption based on luck is incredibly annoying to the point where it makes pvp no fun.

game
noun
1. a form of play or sport, esp. of a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength or luck.

Imagine how crappy board or video games would be if it wasn't luck/dice roll based.

Player 1 hits Player 2 for 20 damage.
Player 2 hits Player 1 for 20 damage.
Player 1 hits Player 2 for 20 damage.
Player 1 wins!

Player 3 hits Player 1 for 20 damage.
Player 3 wins!

Player 4 hits Player 3 for 20 damage.
Player 3 hits Player 4 for 20 damage.
Player 4 hits player 3 for 20 damage.
Player 4 wins!

Gambling wouldn't do too well either.

Faust wrote:

virtue wrote:I believe there is something up with disrupt delays, not disrupts.

There should be less delay when casting spells but more delay when u actually get disrupted "you must wait to cast another spell".

The recast delay is a fixed variable sitting at 0.75s.

The disrupt delay equates to the remainder of the spell's casting delay upon disruption. For example, casting an energy bolt that takes 1.75s and getting hit 0.1s with in the casting process gives you a 1.65s delay until you can recast again. If this happened 1.65s into the casting process it would only be 0.1s delay until you can cast again. So in other words the disrupt delay simply depends on when you interrupt your opponent's casting process.

So if I'm disrupted .25 sec into a Blade Spirit cast, I can't cast anything else for another 5 seconds or so? That doesn't reconcile at all with my memory.

Mikel123 wrote:So if I'm disrupted .25 sec into a Blade Spirit cast, I can't cast anything else for another 5 seconds or so? That doesn't reconcile at all with my memory.

Have you ever actually casted that spell and gotten interrupted? I'm not too sure as to how the interruption delay works but I don't think it goes beyond the constant Faust mentioned. The second part doesn't seem to be correct...

Mikel123 wrote:So if I'm disrupted .25 sec into a Blade Spirit cast, I can't cast anything else for another 5 seconds or so? That doesn't reconcile at all with my memory.

It does to me. It would always happen that the Ogre Lords in Wrong would interrupt me as soon as I started casting Blade Spirit and I had to wait out what would have been the entire casting duration.

Orsius wrote:

Mikel123 wrote:So if I'm disrupted .25 sec into a Blade Spirit cast, I can't cast anything else for another 5 seconds or so? That doesn't reconcile at all with my memory.

It does to me. It would always happen that the Ogre Lords in Wrong would interrupt me as soon as I started casting Blade Spirit and I had to wait out what would have been the entire casting duration.

I've never had to wait to re-cast longer than a blink after being interrupted...Not sure where this is coming from.

Mikel123 wrote: So if I'm disrupted .25 sec into a Blade Spirit cast, I can't cast anything else for another 5 seconds or so? That doesn't reconcile at all with my memory.

Summon delays are finalized after the standard 5th(1.5s) and 8th(2.25s) delays and have nothing to do with the disrupt delay. All the summon delay does is add an extra static variable onto the delay that exists during the casting process.

Mikel123 wrote:

marmalade wrote:spell disruption based on luck is incredibly annoying to the point where it makes pvp no fun.

You must REALLY hate how two GM-weapon-skill players have a 50/50 chance of hitting their swings and dodging swings

Yeah, these statements from people that complain about the interruption formula don't realize PVP would only come down to spamming first circle spells and that's it. Spell interruption is perfect and has no flaws in my opinion. Most of these people are only basing their ideology off other shards like Divinity that utilize the incorrect default RunUO code.

I could understand the complaining if this was several months ago before the callback process was found in the demo that made spell disruption twice as much for spell attacks... but this isn't the case anymore since the correction was made and spell disruption couldn't be anymore perfect. Spells at low circle are reliable enough to not be completely overpowered with mass spamming, while higher circle spells are completely reliable for a spell interruption.