UO Second Age

Did you read my entire post tekai? I'm not sure what you are arguing here... the patch notes didn't list ANY targetable commands under the "all" prefix for a reason. There's another older topic with the whole arguement on this, no sense restarting it every 2nd month.

Yes i read it hemp, but those rules were for June of 2000!

after -all- the UOR Nerfing

there was a ton of changes, both put in patch notes and stealth patched into the game that hurt tamers after trammel came out. i had to deal with loggin in to see what they did next.

tekai wrote:Yes i read it hemp, but those rules were for June of 2000!

after -all- the UOR Nerfing

there was a ton of changes, both put in patch notes and stealth patched into the game that hurt tamers after trammel came out. i had to deal with loggin in to see what they did next.

Alright well I suppose when the all prefix came out they just decided to only not list the targetable ones in the patch notes for whatever reason.

Faust wrote:The "all kill" command works just fine... It just doesn't work for every pet on the screen. People that PVP'd with WW's and Dragons in t2a still used "all kill" to make them attack. Using that command was just more convenient than changing the macro to add a specific pet name. The stories involving "all kill" was generated based on people using that command to kill people in PVP with pets. Trying to base that around sending dozens of pets as a fact is stupid and pointless... The "all" command was removed completely in early UOR. However, all target commands were on an individual basis during the t2a era.

Does this include all follow me as well?

Mirage wrote:

Faust wrote:The "all kill" command works just fine... It just doesn't work for every pet on the screen. People that PVP'd with WW's and Dragons in t2a still used "all kill" to make them attack. Using that command was just more convenient than changing the macro to add a specific pet name. The stories involving "all kill" was generated based on people using that command to kill people in PVP with pets. Trying to base that around sending dozens of pets as a fact is stupid and pointless... The "all" command was removed completely in early UOR. However, all target commands were on an individual basis during the t2a era.

Does this include all follow me as well?

Is "all follow me" a targetable command?

....

Faust wrote:The "all kill" command works just fine... It just doesn't work for every pet on the screen. People that PVP'd with WW's and Dragons in t2a still used "all kill" to make them attack. Using that command was just more convenient than changing the macro to add a specific pet name. The stories involving "all kill" was generated based on people using that command to kill people in PVP with pets. Trying to base that around sending dozens of pets as a fact is stupid and pointless... The "all" command was removed completely in early UOR. However, all target commands were on an individual basis during the t2a era.

This is speculation that borders on complete nonsense. Just say "I don't remember, but here's what my research shows" if that's the case. Bending your recollection to mimic your research is hindsight bias. I don't see a single person here, besides yourself perhaps, who recalls "all kill" only impacting the closest pet.

I'll join Tekai in looking for info on this, because the system as it stands on UOSA just doesn't ring a bell with my memory of the production shards at all.

Why don't you try reading before responding?

I didn't research this topic for the billionth time, Kaivan did.

I listed my opinion based on what I remember involving this game mechanic which "mysteriously" corresponds with Kaivan's research for some unknown reason...

Faust wrote:Why don't you try reading before responding?

I didn't research this topic for the billionth time, Kaivan did.

I listed my opinion based on what I remember involving this game mechanic which "mysteriously" corresponds with Kaivan's research for some unknown reason...

I layed out the facts on "All Kill"

Anyways, the research is pretty much indisputable. Prior to doing this, I went on a few UO boards and asked the vets (who play current OSI) and majority of them remembered it being the way we have it here.

I'm emailing richard garrott!!!

is he still in space?

I'm still not over this no all kill thing, I really was a tamer and I know i didnt spam. Doesnt matter though, I don't need dragons to kill people anymore =)

tekai wrote:I'm still not over this no all kill thing, I really was a tamer and I know i didnt spam. Doesnt matter though, I don't need dragons to kill people anymore =)

People just called it "all kill" because non-tamers were clueless about controlling pets.

Personally I whispered my commands so nobody who wasn't right next to me could even tell what I was saying during periods when that was allowed and yelled them when range made a difference.

Here's an actual excerpt from my macros.txt before it turned unicode (uo3d?):

########
K 1 0 0
Yell star kill
########
X 1 1 0
Yell Louthan kill
WaitForTarg
LastTarget
Yell Tira kill
WaitForTarg
LastTarget
Yell Kali kill
WaitForTarg
LastTarget
########
Z 0 1 0
Yell claim louthan
Yell claim tira
Yell claim kali
########
X 1 0 0
Yell star kill
WaitForTarg
LastTarget
########

At this point, I didn't have an "all kill" command at all. I had a macro to control my nightmare (named "star") and other macros to sick and claim my 3 wyrms (named after old friends on Atlantic "louthan", "tira", "kali")

I think this was from the period when "all kill" always locked on to a specific pet and was pretty much useless. I remember being pretty pissed about having to create these explicit macros because it locked me in to always using the same set of pets. Before this patch, you'd just mash "all kill <last target>" 3x and your pets would trudge off.

Unfortunately my earliest macros.txt is dated 10/16/2000 and the ones with these commands were from test shards, so I can't nail the exact era when what did what.

tekai wrote:Yes, in 2000 faust.. after they took anyway everything from tamers. Trammel took away our pet limits ect... I quit over the taming changes in UOR.

Pet limits was easily the greatest balancing act of UO:R and one of OSI's few crowning achievements.

Caranthir wrote:

tekai wrote:Yes, in 2000 faust.. after they took anyway everything from tamers. Trammel took away our pet limits ect... I quit over the taming changes in UOR.

Pet limits was easily the greatest balancing act of UO:R and one of OSI's few crowning achievements.

Too bad it was combined with bonding. Tamers stopped being tamers after that patch and a rather important game dynamic was destroyed. Tamers who lost their pets had to tame new ones, but that drew competition and PvP to the taming spots. Tamers who couldn't manage to tame their own would buy from others. So there were game balance (risk .vs. reward), PvP and economic systems all torn down by the addition of bonding.

Corwin wrote:

Caranthir wrote:

tekai wrote:Yes, in 2000 faust.. after they took anyway everything from tamers. Trammel took away our pet limits ect... I quit over the taming changes in UOR.

Pet limits was easily the greatest balancing act of UO:R and one of OSI's few crowning achievements.

Too bad it was combined with bonding. Tamers stopped being tamers after that patch and a rather important game dynamic was destroyed. Tamers who lost their pets had to tame new ones, but that drew competition and PvP to the taming spots. Tamers who couldn't manage to tame their own would buy from others. So there were game balance (risk .vs. reward), PvP and economic systems all torn down by the addition of bonding.

When in doubt, say "the economy is ruined" and mumble something about risk vs reward. If only we could know how many times the economy was "ruined" from 1997 to present on the actual production shards... I'd guess it was in the dozens.

Pet bonding was one of the cooler things I saw in UOR, and was really the only reason I continued to play with the pet/follower limits. When combined with Animal Lore showing you the stats of your pets, I thought it was pretty cool to be able to not only train yourself to improve, but train your pets as well.

It's really not that hard to tame a dragon or two at GM Taming. I guess you could argue that being able to res pets versus spending 5-10 minutes to tame a few new ones is a boost to tamers that helped them become more efficient at making gold... but in the scheme of things, does it really matter? You're talking about an era in which farmers already had Trammel. How the f--- are their dragons EVER going to die anyways? Putting in the follower limit along with the bonding was easily an overall slowdown for tamer gold-making efficiency.

Actually, with the advent of the Animal Lore showing stats, I'd guess tamers were further slowed down by Lore-ing 50 dragons in a row to find the one with the best stats to tame. And anyways, bonding was also pretty cool from the standpoint of being able to actually hunt monsters with something other than dragons. With pack instinct, 5 Frenzied Ostards were actually faster at killing just about everything than a couple dragons were, and far more fun as there actually was some risk of them dying and losing skills. Even Hell Hounds and Hellcats were a ton of fun, as you could find the ones with the highest HPs and thus the highest firebreath. If I remember, there was a huge variability in the HPs of Hell Hounds, almost to the point of some having double the HPs (and thus, firebreath) of others.

You always could train your pets, you always could hunt monsters with pets other then dragons. All bonding did was open up the taming template to the lazy who otherwise couldn't be bothered investing time in something if they risked losing it, and shutdown PvM to most other templates.

And the crime here wasn't bonding per se, it was the fact tamers never had to tame another pet once they hit GM.

I made a counter-proposal when this came out that you shouldn't be able to resurrect your dead pet until you'd provided a new pet to put it's soul in to.

I'm also confounded how you can ignore things like risk-reward, game dynamics, and the economy. If you gave players a summon money button, not only would they willingly press it over and over, they'd sell the gold for cash on eBay. That'd keep some folks happy ... but it's not much of a game.

Yes, theoretically I *COULD* train a pet, but I'd have no way to gauge progress and in a moment of lag, it could all go away when you freeze and the 5 hell hounds you just spent 15 minutes taming are all gone.

I'd have definitely been down for taming a new pet to put the bonded pet into. But again... it's quibbling. The extra 5-10 minutes it takes to tame a new dragon isn't much when you lose 10-15 seconds per monster killed because you can only use 2 dragons instead of 7.

Taming has never been the most efficient way to earn gold, during any era in which I played at least. It was up there, for sure, but GM smiths and treasure hunters earned a lot more. What kind of "risk" is present with a smith? That maybe one week, not many people will need GM katanas? Even provokers were 95% as effective at earning gold as tamers, and the investment to get to GM was 1/100th that of taming.

I'd love to see numbers on tamers before and after the follower limit and bonding introduction. Do you really think they went up? I'd guess the opposite. The follower limit was a BIG deal to a lot of people.