UO Second Age

I will just say what I said months ago. Harm damage, simply put, is far greater than I remember it. A 12 damage harm is absurd in my opinion. Here, you can really PVP with only using harm, where as in t2a, this would have been a laughable prospect. Harm should do virtually no damage -- this is a big part of the problem.

Fwerp wrote:I will just say what I said months ago. Harm damage, simply put, is far greater than I remember it. A 12 damage harm is absurd in my opinion. Here, you can really PVP with only using harm, where as in t2a, this would have been a laughable prospect. Harm should do virtually no damage -- this is a big part of the problem.

If mini-heal numbers are bumped up, this pvp would be fine imo.

It's similar to div.

Ye if u go on test where i think the mini heal is bit higher its much more enjoyable

It's getting deep in here with all these tears.

After extensive testing, the revised spell damages fall pretty precisely (min, max, and average) in line with the experimental damages listed at the bottom of this stratics page:
http://web.archive.org/web/200003060348 ... stance.htm
Since the values now used for spells are from the Pre-T2A OSI code, and completely unbased on these tables, this is likely no coincidence and I belive them to be correct.

These are very likely the damages we will use in a publish tommorrow morning.

I want to thank everyone that's presently on the test shard doing testing, except for the guy that killed me as soon as I logged in

Derrick wrote:I want to thank everyone that's presently on the test shard doing testing, except for the guy that killed me as soon as I logged in

Lol..? You should put a permanent balron spawn in his house on the live server..

Derrick wrote:After extensive testing, the revised spell damages fall pretty precisely (min, max, and average) in line with the experimental damages listed at the bottom of this stratics page:
http://web.archive.org/web/200003060348 ... stance.htm
Since the values now used for spells are from the Pre-T2A OSI code, and completely unbased on these tables, this is likely no coincidence and I belive them to be correct.

These are very likely the damages we will use in a publish tommorrow morning.

I want to thank everyone that's presently on the test shard doing testing, except for the guy that killed me as soon as I logged in

Sorry that was me thought you were a fake :DD

Derrick wrote:After extensive testing, the revised spell damages fall pretty precisely (min, max, and average) in line with the experimental damages listed at the bottom of this stratics page:
http://web.archive.org/web/200003060348 ... stance.htm
Since the values now used for spells are from the Pre-T2A OSI code, and completely unbased on these tables, this is likely no coincidence and I belive them to be correct.

These are very likely the damages we will use in a publish tommorrow morning.

I want to thank everyone that's presently on the test shard doing testing, except for the guy that killed me as soon as I logged in

Derrick,

According to that page the max damage on an ebolt was 42 with 100res vs 100 eval -- with these spell damages it is only at ( 6d8 + 8 ) / 2 which is only 33 pts.

Is this comparison correct or am I missing something?

The newly confirmed damage tables from the demo are very nice and decreased some of the luck associated with the previous values moving the equilibrium much closer in most cases for each spell.

Harm Example:
Old: 1-12 Average: 6.5
New: 4-9 Average: 6.5

Ebolt Example:
Old: 5-42 Average: 23.5
New: 10-42 Average: 26

I am glad that something small lead to something larger that lead to something even more larger in the long run with all of this making the shard more accurate and better in the end.

PS
Tron quit with the sad and pathetic attempts at slandering me. You and your guild's "suggestion" to make all spells disrupt constantly would create an even more extreme spam hally case by case situation. Again, this HAD nothing to do with me until the issue was brought to my attention from the poison interruption thread from Kraarug. This lead to a theory based on my part invovling the pre-halved damage that ended up being right on with pin point precision. If you think this was "all me" you are completely mistaken as usual. There were many players in this role ranging Batlin's extensive debugging of the demo code. There were a range of 5-6 people involved with this entire process ranging from Kraarug, Bat, Derrick, Kaivan, and me. I really didn't do much besides make a theory on the situation and made a post about it starting up the discussion of the topic that EVEN YOU was on board with. So please spare me your typical remarks of slander when unexpected problems pop up... The situation has been fixed pin pointing various problems from spell values including the defensive spells like the heal "in mani" spell.

Hiram wrote: Derrick,

According to that page the max damage on an ebolt was 42 with 100res vs 100 eval -- with these spell damages it is only at ( 6d8 + 8 ) / 2 which is only 33 pts.

Is this comparison correct or am I missing something?

There is a bonus for magery skill also, it'll add 50% at gm.

Derrick wrote:

Hiram wrote: Derrick,

According to that page the max damage on an ebolt was 42 with 100res vs 100 eval -- with these spell damages it is only at ( 6d8 + 8 ) / 2 which is only 33 pts.

Is this comparison correct or am I missing something?

There is a bonus for magery skill also, it'll add 50% at gm.

Aha! So I was missing something Thanks!

Edit:

Derrick: any chance on getting the chance to disrupt formula here? I asked for it before and got directed to demo source code that needs to be decompiled and then waded through because it is obfuscated based on the wiki, and those who have the actual formula in front of them have not been very forthcoming

Hiram wrote:Derrick: any chance on getting the chance to disrupt formula here? I asked for it before and got directed to demo source code that needs to be decompiled and then waded through because it is obfuscated based on the wiki, and those who have the actual formula in front of them have not been very forthcoming

It's still obfuscated to those that have it, and I really don't want to post it on the forums, becuase I fear it's going to be a point of contention due to misinterpretation. Having it available to people who are interested in it enough to take the initiative to extract it themselves is likely a good sign that they would actually study it instead of snapping off a "WTF" post to it.

Are the posts in faust's last post already in place on the live server?

The spell damages described in my last post and the heal changes indicated in my earlier post in this thread went live this morning.

The heal rates as mentioned may need some further looking into, but they are what's on right now. All these dice rolls were taken from OSI code and not tweaked. It's possible that the heal rolls were modified sometime after Summer '98, and I appreciate every one's looking into this.