There appears to be two changes: 1) changes to how much damage you take when you successfully resist, and 2) resist being checked against eval to determine damage from the eval int modifier (this is separate from actually resisting a spell). The patch doesn't mention anything about changing resist chances, so it's hard for me to believe that when the stratics author wrote the recorded data was before "changes were finalized" that he was in any way talking about a player's chance to resist, rather than how the new EI vs. resist modifier worked. And I'm pretty sure the latter is what they were testing in the first place if you look at the chart. When he says there "may be small discrepancies" in the data he has to be talking about the damage results, not the successful resists, because the discrepancies between the resist formula and the actual resists aren't small. They're well under what the calculator says they should be for an entire 225 spellcasts. How then did Stratics get the wrong formula? I dunno. Maybe it was the original formula for resist; there were a number of changes to resist in '97 and '98. In that case, the stratics author was just using outdated info (a recurring theme). Or maybe the author just messed up the formula, missed something that was supposed to be tacked on, wrote it down wrong, etc. I don't know. What I do know is their own sample badly conflicts with the calculator. I also played a mage extensively, and can tell you the dueling scene at the Jhelom farms would not have existed on Test Center if GM resist made more than 2 out of 3 poisons fail. Either way, if you keep on with this "69% resist for nox!" talk the PvP community is going to have you committed.
Paraphrasing Men In Black here: a PvPer is smart. The PvP Community is dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen months ago, everyone knew dice rolls were implemented here. Fifteen days ago, everyone knew Poison was resisted more than half the time. Imagine what the PvP community will know tomorrow. In any case, I am actually encouraged that testing here shows 34% resist rate, and the testing back on Stratics showed 40%. Maybe the RunUO guys got this one right; those numbers are within a reasonable margin of error of each other.
I agree -- it's why I didn't take a position in this thread (except against stratics) because I knew it could possibly be bad beat bias. Nox is a clutch spell and its impossible not to notice when it gets resisted. I wouldn't dismiss everything the PvP community complains about though; some other complaints are justified, like those about 0 damage melee hits.
I'd like to see the chance to resist poison at more like 10%, and chances to resist spells reduced across the board for low level spells.
Aww I totally remember raising on Reapers way back. Then when I got higher, I went with a friend to hit GM (or high 90s) off a daemon spawn in the hedge maze tower. We would run up and spawn a daemon and lure it down and box ourselves into a corner, when it ran out of mana, kill it and repeat.
Well one of the main differences between raising skills here and in era is that there was an anti macro code in UO:R that prevented gaining resist from the same caster reliably. You couldn't just FS yourself in your house and conceivably ever reach GM. That's why people used the summoned daemon method - which was practiced very late in the era. I'm pretty confident that power hour did not come into the game until some time after UO:R (as a response to people being unsatisfied with the anti macro code.) And also - resist was not a movement based skill. You couldn't 8x8 it anymore than you could 8x8 poisoning to my knowledge. You needed more different targets casting on you in order to raise it (hence the daemons) just as you needed a variety of items to poison to raise poisoning. This was my understanding in the era, and while it's not scripture I'm pretty confident about it. So my point is - resist may actually function the same here as it did in era at GM - but here we all have GM resist because of the resist parties (ms/cl in house functionality) and without the anti macro code you can GM at a reasonable rate off casting on yourself in your house. And again in era I don't believe the majority of players had GM resist. I never saw the daemon parties until well after factions was out and that was also not at the start of the era. And even then it was in my opinion not common. I 5x'ed and pvped daily, even participated in the semifinals of the tournament of champions and I think I had 75-85 resist. I think it would help if MS/CL was fixed, but most dedicated people would still have GM resist. I had GM resist within a couple weeks of starting here and there were no resist events at that time that I knew of. Obviously Telamon can't just put anti macro code in and like Lib said, trying to specially code in changes to just poison resists is probably not reasonable either. I think our best bet would just be fix MS/CL and live with the rest.
Power hour was not a response to the anti-macro code -- they were the same patch -- and it was implemented before the UO:R publish by a month. (http://www.uoguide.com/Publish_4) The reason people used demons was for the pure volume of spells, not because resist required multiple casters. It just wasn't common to do it yourself until power scrolls in Pub 16 and AoS. Askchopper had it listed as movement-based and shows both methods of raising it. (https://web.archive.org/web/20041016033135/http://www.askchopper.com/?p=skills_8) You needed multiple targets for some target-based skills, like poisoning or animal taming. Resist is a passive skill and there is no targeting. There's a resist essay from UOPG that was archived in April 2001. There's nothing archived further back than that so I don't know when it was actually written, but that's a year at the most after UO:R. I don't really think of April 2001 as late UO:R. This is still the same period where mages had to carry their spellbooks when casting. (https://web.archive.org/web/20010407112747/http://uopowergamers.com/e-resist.shtml) Like I said, this might be due to shard differences. My partner in that tournament on Pacific was 5x120 with GM anatomy. He didn't get to 120 resist with demons. And 75-85 resist is pretty wild man. If you look at that essay, the author said he got from 60 to 90 in 5 power hours, and that was with just two mages summoning.
i've got nothing to refute you with, i'm just going off my best memory. I don't even remember there being power scrolls during the ToC. Although I remember eval+anat being in and that was probably around the same time. still have never heard of 8x8 resist here ask chopper says 8x8 for most stuff but just a lot of casters and healing method for resist http://www.askchopper.com/?p=skills_8 i tried googling 8x8 resist and just see a lot of people saying you couldn't do it which is what i recall
Well, it's been awhile. Anat/Eval and champ spawns/power scrolls were both apart of Publish 16, which was a few months before ToC. It says the skill is movement-based. And the "lot of casters" part is listed as alternative method.
In the Renaissance OSI era, there was a bug where you could get mad gains in resist by casting energy field under a ladder in your small tower, then run up and down that ladder. You wouldn't take much damage at all but it was considered damage by energy and I remember getting my resist pretty high until OSI pulled the plug on that.
i play a gm nox mage daily, in the field and in 7x duels where im for sure our chars on right on top of each other quite a bit , its VERY frustrating to see my $500k poison skill resisted so much. do i love the nox mage char - YES , does it only work halfass- YES , is it a waste of time and money to make a nox mage currently - imo YES
can everyone agree that resist is way too easy to gain? pax, your askchopper.com link states "I personally think this is one of the hardest skills to GM in Ultima." do you think it being the 6th most commonly gmed skills here reflects that as a reality on UOR? do you think it was 6th most commonly gmed in era?
There is no such thing, nor will there ever be, era-accurate skill gains. No one is getting banned for 24x7 macro training their characters or botting multiple accounts here. There's no 8x8 or other such limitations and everything is easy. Everything. We just have to accept that we're playing the game where everyone effectively has "cheat codes" to have perfect characters in the realm that was designed for a wide spectrum of skillsets and levels. After we accept that everyone has perfect characters, what then is the issue or potential desirable outcome for any possible change to the effectiveness of the Poison spell?
Just set liberations dumbass comment straight from page one, "crew" had nothing to do with the heat of battle change. Idk where you get dumbshit stuff like that, but I for one hate the change and was never once inquired about it. None of us were. It was a change staff made, and I've no idea where the basis for it came from.
LOL @ that. cr3w wasn't even remotely active around the time of that patch. I'm fairly certain Telamon drummed that one up on his own and when I was asked about it, I wholeheartedly agreed that people attacking criminals should not have recall restrictions, because fuck criminals. The restriction is a minor punishment for being a criminal, just like known felons can't vote in RL. Heat of battle flagging in factions should be restored ONLY after moongate travel with sigils has been completely removed.
If I recall, it was around the time that Battlerattle was around and raging and he and a handful of crew satellites were talking about how they were going to PK extensively and ruin the server. Battlerattle was very vocal at the time both in his hatred of Telamon and the server as well as his hatred for the heat of battle mechanic. It may have been coincidence, but it definitely looked to any onlooker that Battle pushed this change through with the force of his whining. I guess it's true that it wasn't crew in the sense that the guild is an entity where Sandro calls the shots, but to the average onlooker it did look like a crew member pushed a bad change through by being vocal about it. I think that the lack of heat of battle with regards to factions was probably an oversight on Telamon's part, however. He didn't remove it for reds, and I think what he was going for with removing it for blues was so that blues wouldn't accidentally attack reds with blade spirits or something and be unable to get away. I think that it carrying over to orange on orange combat was probably unintended, and that if it had worked as intended it wouldn't have helped Battlerattle in the way he was trying to push it through as he was whining because his reds were being statted and his factioners killed. Though I'm really not entirely sure about the history for how it's worked/is working for oranges at the moment, I think it's functional again but am not really sure. I generally don't flee from battle so haven't run into it myself, but I have had oranges attack me and then recall pretty soon after that.
It was intentional for factions because of sigil thieves running through gates, if I recall correctly. It was intentional for blues because anyone heroic enough to attempt to thwart criminals, should not be unfairly punished for doing so. With the mechanic left as it was, it was far too simple for a single red to bait a single player into combat, just to roll in the posse when the aggression restricted escape. Feel free to call it Trammel, or what have you, but so is 3x accounts and easy to circumvent statloss, in that regard. For what it's worth, Battle and Telamon are actually friends RL, as far as I know, so I wouldn't take any of his fallout in game or IRC too seriously.
Yeah, Idk about all that but it's plausible. I don't think battle's whining had the pull to influence a mechanic change like that, but he was hardly active then or now so I wouldn't have taken him seriously if I were Chris. It just irritates me that it's pawned off as "crew's influence" when "we" had nothing to do with it. In fact, I absolutely hate it.
They say that the appearance of impropriety is as bad as impropriety itself. Like I said, I don't really believe that Battlerattle pushed those changes through since they didn't do much to save him from the hardship he was facing, but when people see him whining publicly about it and bugging telamon and then it gets pushed through shortly after that they tend to assume he had something to do with it. I do understand your frustration though, I think that the more respectable parts of crew often get flak for the wrongdoing and general idiocy of the less reputable people associated with the group.
