Taming Laughable?

[Hoots]

How about we end this thread?

Prove Kaivan's taming research wrong or stop posting with complaints and whining. This server is about t2a accuracy nothing else.

Simple, end topic.

Faust, his research IMHO didnt provide facts. It provided directions and assumptions. For you to agree to a change you want 100%, without a doubt, no debating, solid, documented proof of things...Am I wrong about that?

You are telling me you feel this way about Kaivan's research?

Believe me, i appreciate all the efforts you guys put into this stuff... Dont take my disagreements as insults.

[Faust]

We are suppose to use your word or the next person instead?

Again, provide proof to support a claim if you think something is incorrect.

[Hemperor]

I dont believe taming is accurate here... Ill just leave it at that. I voiced my concerns about the lack of information leading to the changes and the amount of speculative information included when the patch was being debated.

The problem was the PvP tamer was too powerful on this shard. Pop count is 100% of the reason why. The people who were the strongest supporters of the change and the loudest complainers on taming were the same people getting crushed by PvP tamers. There hally mages couldnt win those fights and dont think for a second that wasnt a big part of the changes.

Everything the PvP tamers were doing was possible on osi (from a technical standpoint) but not really possible due to pop count.

You couldnt have 10 mares on OSI bc the spawns were so camped that even getting 1 or 2 was a huge deal....It took me about 20 mins to tame a mare yesterday with my GM tamer... i didnt see 1 person when i was doing it. This would never be the case on OSI. To the same extend dragons and WW's were also camped and while easier to obtain, getting a force of 6-10 to PvP with was no easy task and took days if not weeks to replace.

Another pop count issue was that the 1 or 2 guys i remember trying to PvP with tamers would just end up getting ganked by 10+ players, killing the tamer then his pets... again, there just isnt the checks and balances in the player count to do that here.

I believe that from a code standpoint Taming was more accurate at the end of 08 than it is now. But from a shard standpoint... Tamer stregnth is probably more accurate now... If you understand what im saying....The taming 'gimp' was more of a workaround balance issue than accuracy change inho.

It really angers me to hear you tamers cry still to this day, I know the effort that Derrick, Kaivan and others really put into that patch. It was on test for probably the longest time compared to other patches.

Thing is, all information and research pointed in a single direction, there was nothing saying otherwise. I think rather than crying every week in a new topic, you guys should do something productive. Go do some research and other testing, you won't find anything of course, but at least with that you may realise and respect the effort that goes into making these patches.

I'll repeat myself for the last time, staff don't even bother replying to these topics anymore because the research is indisputable (which you all reinforce with each crying, but zero evidence, post).

This is lame. The research is far from indisuputable, that's why there was such a damn long thread on it. It's interpretation. Your attempts to trivialize the confusion and assumption around it by constantly talking about "crying", "whining", and "indisputable" are pathetic. You sound like a politician. Or a child.

And you clearly have some sort of angst against taming as a skill choice. I'm not sure why. How many tamers are on this shard "pvping" with their tamers? There's no such thing. If you see a tamer that attacks you, you have two options: run away, or fight them. PvP is consensual.

There's 81 times as many GM swords/fence/mace/archer characters on this shard as GM tamers. Is there really some kind of "imbalance" here? Sorry, I just don't see it. I can macro a Provoker in 3 days that makes gold at 95% of the rate of a tamer... probably faster, when you consider the time it takes to find and tame a couple dragons/mares to hunt with.

I'm sorry you see it that way. Unfortunately everything you just said is off topic, this shard's only goal is accuracy.

After many weeks of trying to get the 99 "Professions: Tamer" on archived stratics to show up (over 10+ dates), I finally got frustrated. It must be the one page that never shows up.

Anyways, I decided to go forward a bit, the earliest one that works is June 13, 2000. The link is here:
http://web.archive.org/web/200006131856 ... atics.com/

If you scroll down a bit and take a look at the list of commands, you will notice that "all kill" simply isn't listed. Rather, it is listed as:

"(Name) kill",
"(Name) attack"

Attacks targeted being (doesn't work with 'All').

Some things to note. The 'All' prefix does not work all that well nor all that consistently. Sometimes 'all' the pets will obey and sometimes not. 'All follow me' works well enough if your Lore is high enough; same for 'All guard me'. 'All Attack' will cause the nearest to you to respond even if you yell the command (which I recommend). It works better if you explicitly name the tame you want to attack. On the other hand, 'All Release' will release the last tamed (or nearest); repeating the 'All Release' command will release the next most recently tamed and so on; but the 'All Attack' command doesn't that way.

Now I understand this is UO:R, very early at that, and simply looking through the patchnotes from T2A all throughout UO:R and not receiving any notification of a change on "All Kill" should be enough to put the nail in this coffin, however I like Kefka so much I will continue.

The June site doesn't offer as much information as the next dates do, or isn't as clear. Here is another quote from
December 2000. There is probably an earlier date that says it exactly in these words (the others hint it, it just isn't in as much detail) however I am far too tired to search every stratics date:

The "All" prefix does not work for orders that require a target, because only the pet closest to you will respond. It works better if you explicitly name the tame you want to issue a command for

This explains further how the "all" prefix to commands work. We know for sure that all kill functioned in some sort of way in T2A, this explains it.

It also explains why "all kill" isn't listed in this 99 patch note, among other targetable commands ("all fetch", "all attack" etc.)

You can now give all your pets orders by prefacing your order with "all." For example, saying, "all follow me" will make all your pets follow you. The list of commands this works with is:

* all follow me
* all guard me
* all come
* all stay
* all guard me
* all stop

You will notice that NO targetable commands are listed with "all" because they just don't work the same way.

There's a little confusion on that source. The All Kill was not in the demo client, but it is within the patched client as keywords right in with all the others.

At this point I don't think the dispute that All Kill was a valid keyword, the only question is it's behavior.

I think there is substantial evidence here that targeted commands were not relayed to more than one creature.

As I've said before, I appreciate everyone's work on this. It's not about the source of the motivation, but the quality of result.
This is a surprisingly difficult issue to get a definitive answer on it seems and all the evidence that I can see certainly points towards only one pet following a targeted command, but in a haphazard fashion; which was then corrected (the haphazard part) on UO:R release

Along with everything else, I think we have the closing proof on this issue here (Thanks Kavian):
http://web.archive.org/web/200107170749 ... rticle=pvp

The article was clearly written in 1999.

The skill set I recommend is Taming/Lore/Eval/Magery/Resist/Meditation/Wrestling (once locks are in).

Skill locks were both proposed and introduced in 1999

(Note: I say All Follow here but using [pet name] Follow is the preferred way to do it. All Follow will only make one pet follow and it's difficult to determine which pet that will be. Again this is true with All Guard. It's better to use the pet's you want to guard name than it is to say All.)

Say All Follow and target the person you want to die, then use [pet name] Kill.

The likely implementable result of this is that any target commands will only operate on a single pet.

Quote:
The "all" command does not work for orders that require a target
This is the fix for the bug where it would store commands and call them later. When the "all" commands were introduced, they were never meant to be used with a [target] cursor. As a result, when telling 3 pets to "all attack", only 1 would attack, and the other 2 attack commands were stored away and retrieved when your next target cursor came up. This now only tells the last pet you commanded to follow your command without storing the other commands.


The archived page can be found here.

I would offer an explanation of exactly what occurs when you did use a command like that, but it's pretty self explanatory.

This is only a portion of it. Please, dispute.

[tekai]

hemp your source is from 2000, after all the uor nerfs, how many times to i have to keep saying that?

[Hemperor]

hemp your source is from 2000, after all the uor nerfs, how many times to i have to keep saying that?

Sorry tekai, thought you may have had an ounce of intelligence. Clearly the date of the source means nothing, maybe you should read the rest of my post.

And then read Derricks.
and then Kaivans.

[tekai]

I've been trying to email some people such as Morgana and other high brass tamers from the time period, to no avail. most emails don't work anymore.

There really isnt any source about it other then the lack of all kill from one of the patch notes, doesnt mean it wasnt working before or after that patch.

In an earlier thread, kievan didnt argue when I said all I needed was to find a source, becuase he doesnt really have one either. We KNOW there was stealth patches to the tamer class during pre-uor, there was to everything.

Going back to a previous thread, I did have one source that was really good. I posted to many links in that post so it may have been over looked, after re-reading my thread I really think this is worth some lime light.

http://uo.stratics.com/thb/info/newthunter.shtml

Here we see an IN ERA 99 topic about a treasure hunter, summoining pets and using all kill to "Stick them all on the same target at the same time"

[Hemperor]

I've been trying to email some people such as Morgana and other high brass tamers from the time period, to no avail. most emails don't work anymore.

There really isnt any source about it other then the lack of all kill from one of the patch notes, doesnt mean it wasnt working before or after that patch.

In an earlier thread, kievan didnt argue when I said all I needed was to find a source, becuase he doesnt really have one either. We KNOW there was stealth patches to the tamer class during pre-uor, there was to everything.

Going back to a previous thread, I did have one source that was really good. I posted to many links in that post so it may have been over looked, after re-reading my thread I really think this is worth some lime light.

http://uo.stratics.com/thb/info/newthunter.shtml

Here we see an IN ERA 99 topic about a treasure hunter, summoining pets and using all kill to "Stick them all on the same target at the same time"

Derrick and Kaivans posts have 99 sources.

It also isn't only "all kill" that is missing from the patch note, but EVERY single targetable pet command, which relates to the rest of my topic. Please re-read.

EDIT: I don't see 99 anywhere on that page, you may want to find that archived.

[Hoots]

We are suppose to use your word or the next person instead?

Again, provide proof to support a claim if you think something is incorrect.

then why was it changed to begin with? thats my only question. This seems to be one of the only "accuracy" changes made here without the required documentation.

[Hemperor]

We are suppose to use your word or the next person instead?

Again, provide proof to support a claim if you think something is incorrect.

then why was it changed to begin with? thats my only question. This seems to be one of the only "accuracy" changes made here without the required documentation.

I'm going to assume you misesd the post I made that collected all the information these changes were based on, saving you the time of using the simple search button.

[Faust]

then why was it changed to begin with? thats my only question. This seems to be one of the only "accuracy" changes made here without the required documentation.

Wow...

Sometimes people like you make me re-think my pro life stance.

[Hoots]

We are suppose to use your word or the next person instead?

Again, provide proof to support a claim if you think something is incorrect.

then why was it changed to begin with? thats my only question. This seems to be one of the only "accuracy" changes made here without the required documentation.

I'm going to assume you misesd the post I made that collected all the information these changes were based on, saving you the time of using the simple search button.

actually i searched for your orginal arguement on the subject from months ago...(you know, your "input" on the subject then, not copy pasting others efforts...) here we go... Great research hemp!

http://forum.uosecondage.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=4483

Faust, you have better chances gaining off pre-tames.
There are too many tamers as it is in ratio to players (compared to OSI). Everyday I see 5 more taming up at Ice Isle.
I don't remember tamers rolling with 15+ pets and controlling them perfectly, this should be WAY harder.
I don't remember taming mares etc. being so god d@mn easy.

I think some good research should be put into animal taming, pretty soon all dungeons and field will be camped by tamers (it already is half the time already)

________________________________________

Clearly you guys haven't seen Onslaught running around with 15+ mares.

Mares are quite a bit faster and deadlier than dragons also.

I'm not whining, just predicting the future. ACE is already solely based on tamers, I believe they have 4 or 5 at this point, so fighting them is basically something we try to avoid on the field at this point (they run until tamers come). Pretty soon LL room will be held down by tamers 24/7 etc... there really isn't much you can do vs a tamer.

EDIT: And I have also never seen these tamers fail one single command with this many pets. Being able to macro from 85-100 is just BS imo

EDIT2:*** 32 attempts at 99.6 were made to tame the nightmare, and then it seemed to kick you off alot, not attacking you but you would just dismount for some strange reason, this may have been a bug, but then again the nightmare may cause the same effect that a tamed drake would bring you, flagging you criminal in town and getting you killed.

________________________________________
I spent about an hour wiping out animal groups..it is actually ridiculous, I see about 5 new tamers a day as well.

This needs to be addressed immediately, it certainly wasn't this easy to make a tamer...

We have tamer island on this shard, TONS of animals for just what you need and a wandering healer every screen.
________________________________________
There are already quite a few, tamers can pretty much hold down any spot they want to with 0 skill.

Pet control needs to be much harder, ice isle needs to be nerfed slightly, among other things.

________________________________________

We are talking about recently Derrick...

Will no one address the issue that one can walk around with 15+ mares with 0 problem whatsoever:? Reflect + precasted gheal and you've beaten UO:T2A, those things are fast

________________________________________
Alll Kill = no skill.

I have died to Onslaught the tamer a total of 3 times, 2 were due to crashes believe it or not (when I was already far away).

I just think it's lame that we will have a great field fight going and OH NO ACE SUCKS SO CALL IN THE TAMER...anyways, this is a suggestions forum.

As I said, this is NOT accurate.

________________________________________

I think that is quite the exaggeration.

And Onslaught with that many mares is not an exaggeration whatsoever, I've seen him do it on many occasions. I'd say they are twice as powerful as dragons because of their speed and damage
________________________________________

I suggest possibly making it harder to tame mares and the like... the one time I saw a mare in the era, it took at least 5+ to control that beast and get it tamed, here as I understand it many have no problem getting multiple mares a day without death...

________________________________________

So this island is completely accurate?

As people already said, it's so easy here for tamers due to the lack of population. But I think if you are ready to increase stable sizes based solely off population (which there wasn't really a problem with to begin with) I think that Ice Isle could use a nice nuking, among other spawns, to fit shard population. Also, why so many wandering healers?

________________________________________

[Hoots]

Wow...

Sometimes people like you make me re-think my pro life stance.

Faust, your posts only make you sound smart and informed when you start them out with "son" or use "son" at some point in your post. Just a FYI for you.

[Hemperor]

What are you trying to prove Hoots? This is what I mean by hurting your cause. You quoted posts of me saying "Taming is messed up, let's do some research on it". Low and behold, what happened?

I guess I would be making personal attacks as well if I felt cornered, I guess the reality of facts written in stone is finally setting in.

[Mikel123]

Now I understand this is UO:R, very early at that, and simply looking through the patchnotes from T2A all throughout UO:R and not receiving any notification of a change on "All Kill" should be enough to put the nail in this coffin, however I like Kefka so much I will continue.

The June site doesn't offer as much information as the next dates do, or isn't as clear. Here is another quote from
December 2000. There is probably an earlier date that says it exactly in these words (the others hint it, it just isn't in as much detail) however I am far too tired to search every stratics date:
Quote:
The "All" prefix does not work for orders that require a target, because only the pet closest to you will respond. It works better if you explicitly name the tame you want to issue a command for

So your argument for our end-of-1999 shard is something that was written in December 2000, and "there is probably an earlier date"? That seems sort of suspect.

I went back and read the original thread. http://forum.uosecondage.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5189

Kefka owns you (I think you're "hait2a" from what I gather) from a logic standpoint the entire time. Sure, he gives up trying to fight against your interpretation, but he lasted a lot longer than I would have against your immaturity. From the start, you act like a little kid taking his ball and going home ("nail in the coffin of tamers", "balancing taming"), which... in your own words... is not the goal of this shard. It shouldn't be your goal to decide to nerf (er, I mean "balance") taming, then look up evidence to support what you want to do, then interpret the measly crap you do find in order to suit your original goal. And that's clearly what happened here.

I think Kefka felt much like I do right now... neither of us particularly care too much about whether "all kill" is useful or not... it only makes hunting slightly easier if it is implemented. But we just feel the need to argue with you because you're so clearly biased and/or not understanding how vague the documentation really is. But like him in that thread, I too am finding it not worth it to argue with you anymore. You clearly have no interest in reconsidering your hasty/biased perspective on this, and as far as I can tell, your opinion has no bearing on the direction of the shard, so I really don't need to actually convince you of anything.

[Hemperor]

Now I understand this is UO:R, very early at that, and simply looking through the patchnotes from T2A all throughout UO:R and not receiving any notification of a change on "All Kill" should be enough to put the nail in this coffin, however I like Kefka so much I will continue.

The June site doesn't offer as much information as the next dates do, or isn't as clear. Here is another quote from
December 2000. There is probably an earlier date that says it exactly in these words (the others hint it, it just isn't in as much detail) however I am far too tired to search every stratics date:
Quote:
The "All" prefix does not work for orders that require a target, because only the pet closest to you will respond. It works better if you explicitly name the tame you want to issue a command for

So your argument for our end-of-1999 shard is something that was written in December 2000, and "there is probably an earlier date"? That seems sort of suspect.

I went back and read the original thread. http://forum.uosecondage.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5189

Kefka owns you (I think you're "hait2a" from what I gather) from a logic standpoint the entire time. Sure, he gives up trying to fight against your interpretation, but he lasted a lot longer than I would have against your immaturity. From the start, you act like a little kid taking his ball and going home ("nail in the coffin of tamers", "balancing taming"), which... in your own words... is not the goal of this shard. It shouldn't be your goal to decide to nerf (er, I mean "balance") taming, then look up evidence to support what you want to do, then interpret the measly crap you do find in order to suit your original goal. And that's clearly what happened here.

I think Kefka felt much like I do right now... neither of us particularly care too much about whether "all kill" is useful or not... it only makes hunting slightly easier if it is implemented. But we just feel the need to argue with you because you're so clearly biased and/or not understanding how vague the documentation really is. But like him in that thread, I too am finding it not worth it to argue with you anymore. You clearly have no interest in reconsidering your hasty/biased perspective on this, and as far as I can tell, your opinion has no bearing on the direction of the shard, so I really don't need to actually convince you of anything.

Two staff members, one an admin, post 1999 sources with even clearer descriptions. You have all seemed to ignore that.

Defeat.

Call me immature all you want, you fail to connect the dots on what must be the most straight forward, obvious research ever displayed on this shard. Thanks for the laughs guys.