Still thinking about giving this server a try if a few others that I know continue asking and are willing. I have never been much of a UOR player but may possibly give it a try if a few others play. Would like to clarify a few things up here when it comes to spells though. - Will the era accurate spell damages exist or be tweaked? - Will harm damage be radius based? - What are the damage delays on spells(MA, HM, FB, LT, MB, EX, EB, FS, etc...)? - Will you have the era accurate spell disruption upon being hit when casting that has only existed on one other shard(UOSA) or sticking with the RunUO mechanic of just being hit regardless of the damage for the disruption? - What will the recast delay be after successfully casting a spell? - Will you have the era accurate 'fast casting' mechanic? - Will the RunUO invented recast delay mechanic upon spell disruption that never existed in UO ever exist on this server? These are the only thing items that come to mind at the moment. I'm still trying to gauge how 'era accurate' this shard is going to be and if it will just end up caving when the flavor of the month change by the masses start grumbling.
I'll leave it to Ezekiel to comment on the spell specifics, but our primary goal is to re-create the UO:R era should trammel have not ever been added. While this is a broad directive, we have actually adjusted a variety of the things you mentioned and have several open tasks related to spell functionality. You can get a rough idea of our plans by looking at the changes that were made to houses. With no trammel, there would not have been house item decay, without house decay there would not have been changes to house mechanics. So the housing mechanics on Renaissance have been reverted to a form familiar to players from the Second Age era. You can see how we have incorporated the UO:R house designs, while retaining the classic housing rules in the housing section of the compendium.
I'm a little confused by the correlation between item decay in houses when it comes to Trammel's existence. Phase III was activated before Trammel during February 2000 and was mentioned during the beginning stages of the process as far back as '98 when Phase I was first implemented. Would have to say the correlation between the two is a bit broad in my opinion. What phase is actually being used here? Based on the housing compendium it appears to be Phase I house mechanics but other posts on the forum sounds like a mixture between Phase I & II. For example, the lockdowns and secures appear to be very close to Phase I but the other mechanics such as commands/co-owners were not added until after the first phase. This shard seems to be taking a very broad line that most other shards take when it comes to development. UO Second Age walks a very thin line and it's one of the key reasons that the shard is so successful and continues to be this very day. When the era accurate gurus of UOR start having disputes with those that want to 'better develop' the mechanics of the shard it's going to end up causing a lot of the usual issues that destroy shards. Players come and go and the next flavor of the month majority will override previous mechanics with their opinionated mechanics when the mumbling and grumbling starts. Hard to call a shard PreT2a/T2a/UOR, etc... when it begins to start looking less and less like the name implies. Good luck on attempting a modified shard where many have failed and few have succeeed to only lead to failure in the end. Will be interested in Ezekiel's response for the spell related topics.
What you said is accurate regarding the house rules. Since its nearly impossible to be constrained to a certain patch when it comes to the UO:R era some allowances have to be made. Some of the house details had to be adjusted, and some had to be created from scratch (Villa's, Stone Tower, etc) In reality it comes down to staying true to the spirit of UO:R, since without trammel, who can say what would have been changed and what would have been left alone. That said however we have no plans to "reinvent" the UO:R era like most shards have. Nor do we intend to establish a marxist regime that sticks so hard to era accuracy that it is used against the playerbase. No decisions are made on Renaissance without extensive research and planning. Just because a patch note, or demo server shows an exploit or broken mechanic to have existed in our era does not mean we will add it. Nor do we intend to run a for profit shard like several others do.
Well there are known exploits that defined specific mechanics. Spell disruption is a very good example. The original OSI code had a bug/error where it called the spell disruption module twice when getting hit by a damage spell that significantly increased the chances of being disrupted where if it did not exist it would have been much different in reality during nearly all aspects of the game. There are many of these 'tiny' bugs or exploits that when stacked or combined make a significant difference to the definiton of the era. The so called 'marxist' regime has worked very well for UO Second Age by accepting the bad that comes with the good. The bad sometimes is a crucial aspect that helped define the era from one person to the next. However, there is without a doubt some bad mechanics that overall sucked and would have been nice to be able to modify. The smallest change or modification can send one player packing and replacing that player is easier said than done. One too many of these changes will define the life cycle of this shard and most succumb to the same fate that the rest have shared. All shards that start up believe their shard will be 'different' and the statement is never true. The shard will be the same book just another story. Stick to the original code that defined the game with very little changes and you may just slip by the wheel of fate. Shards like Hybrid and DFI claimed to reproduce the UOR era but with 'exemptions' that would make the game/era 'better' and the same could be said for T2A shards like IPY. Saying that you will end up not reinventing the era is easier said than done because even the smallest change or modification that never existed is essentially reinventing it. Would suggest already accepting the fact that this shard is reinventing the era into trying to produce something that would have been better. However, sticking to the basics with few modifications is a tricky ordeal and wish you the best of luck.
Actually it was pretty clear to me on my first visit to the Renaissance website that I was not going to get an exact reproduction of UO:R. The motto is 'History Perfected'. The mission statement speaks of making slight changes. Anyone who reads even just the main page should know exactly what they're signing up for, which is not at all the case anymore with that other server you keep bragging about. Your point is that others have failed at what is being attempted here but frankly I think that's irrelevant. People succeed where others have failed all the time, at all manner of goals. At the very least it's better to have a solid go at it than give up before even trying. I don't know why you're here preaching a counsel of doom but I'm not buying into it.
What i get from UO:R is that they will implement a t2a feel to the era. They keep it inline with what so many people think is the way UO should have went from the beginning. Keep the good, remove the crap. Setting everything to a certain patch date results in an incomplete game. I believe this shard to operate and aim for a complete product, not a dead end.
Currently the spell damage values are not correct, they are too high by default and will be lowered. I think it is only acceptable to use the proper spell damage formulas from the true Renaissance Era. If you have the proper documentation available, that would be of help to save the staff time digging it up ourselves. This change will see publish, I just cannot specify on when. Yes, harm damage will be scaled by the normal means, however in addition to that the distance from caster to target will influence spell damage as well, this is already in effect. The delays for all spell damages are 1 second, meaning 1 full second after the spell is targeted the damage will apply, not immediately as the animation does. The only exceptions to this rule, are harm & lightning, which are instant damage. Explosion is also an exception to this rule. If you are referring to the formula for spell disruption, which potentially allows you to avoid interruption from taking damage, based on the amount of damage taken while casting, the answer to that question is no, we will not. The ability to potentially avoid interruption, when taking damage while casting a spell, is already available in the form of the protection spell. In addition, the percentage at which the protection spell will actually "protect" you can be further scaled based on your skill in Eval, Meditation, & Inscription. This is not directly the reason which we have chosen not to implement the system you describe above, however it is one of the factors we used in determining whether or not we would benefit from such a system. This mechanic is still operating under the default settings of the RunUO server. I did actually have these patch notes, but upon double checking to answer your question it seems I actually forgot to bookmark this page. I'll dig this info out of my browser history when I have some time, if nobody else has presented the information by then. It's hard to answer this question, because you've written it in such a context that implies that I have every single piece of documentation available for the Renaissance era sitting in front of me, which I do not. Fast casting is currently on the live server, however in order to make use of this function its required that you hold your spell cursor & wait out the spell delay for your next spell. If you were to queue your last target in the middle of the spell casting (explosion, for example) process, you would not be eligible to fast cast your next spell, as you would still be suffering from the spell recovery delay of the previous spell. I don't think I can give you a reliable answer on this question as well, because I am not entirely sure of the system you speak of, but i'll try to answer this based on the assumption that we are both referring to the same mechanics. The out-of-the-box RunUO server has some extremely questionable spell mechanics. The spell interruption recovery timer (time until eligible to cast next spell, after being interrupted while casting) was extremely high by default. I personally adjusted this value, and I ran all types of combat scenarios testing the new interruption timer. This modification is something that I changed myself, after witnessing & experimenting with the excessively long recovery delay. However I am not claiming that the change I made reflects an accurate mechanic of Renaissance, at the time I made the modification I had literally no documentation in front of me, and this value is potentially subject to change upon the discovery of proper documentation for Renaissance. I am not guaranteeing a change in light of proper notes, I just simply do not know the correct value off the top of my head. There's no real need to gauge us to see what our level of "Era Accuracy" will be, as that is not the goal of the server at all. The purpose of researching & documenting the patch notes, is to understand exactly the way each mechanic functioned during the live OSI Renaissance period. We are not using/requesting this information as a foundation in which to base mechanical changes on, it's merely a starting point for us to understand how it worked on production servers. Understanding the systems that were in place during the original OSI Renaissance period allows us to more effectively determine whether or not those systems are something that we would like to use here on Renaissance. I personally do not agree that the Renaissance Staff, nor any other development team could ever truly re-create the "real" Renaissance Era, considering that trammel did indeed come to see publish, and as such it is completely impossible to know how the game would have evolved if the original developers hadn't caved under pressure and implemented trammel.
Well said and very well explained Ez. I do not understand some people and wanting to stick to specific date when running a server. The way UO:R is doing it is perfect. Implementing the great things UO:R was without the Trammel aspects and influences Trammel had on Felucca. I also agree that using the entire UO:R era allows you to implement other things that were either added or taken away during the entire era while also have the T2A housing rules which were great. In my opinion having 1 specific Day/month/year has caused other servers more problems in the past then helped it as players would go look up patch notes and complain about why something isn't in game or why something is in game. Some people look for anything to complain about and often want things implemented that would benefit them and their play style more. Most servers held to era accuracy do indeed fall. With T2A being the exception because it was one of those " Best server available at the time" types. Alot of people are currently unhappy because of the strictness of being held to a specific era. Not gonna bring them all up here but for anyone who has actually played there you know what I mean and other issues that have been brought up. Lastly, we are just players here. The staff has already shown us more respect then any other server I have played of this calibur. To me personally, the era is great and UO:R without Trammel was the most balanced and best era of UO. There is way more to do overall, PvP is balanced with more viable PvM and PvP templates. Then add in the UO:R housing with the T2A housing rules which is fantastic. Not to mention the additions of the Large Keep and the Fortress. This server is already gaining widespread popularity because people are buying into the "History Perfected Model". Anyone who comes here expecting this to be 100% UO:R is way off. The biggest problem in my opinion is that people aren't taking the time to actually go through and read up and learn about the server fromt he website. Which lists everything anyone could possibly want to know about the server and answer any questions they could possibly have about the server in general.
The era accurate mechanic isn't really an ability it's a part of the game and has been since mid '98 to this very day. I really don't see any reason not to use the code and protection only improved the chance of not being disrupted. There are many valid reasons for the mechanic ranging from PVM to PVP. Small damage amounts had a lesser chance of disrupting spell casting and this ranges from poison ticks to melee hits from a critter zerg in PVM. Choosing the non-accurate RunUO invented mechanic of 0+ damage always interrupting will be a mistake and only invents the so called 'spam pvp'. Also, debuffs is a critical aspect of this conversation since it did not always disrupt spells due to it landing a 0 damage ratio. Are you just going to reinvent this and make it a guarentee spell disruption? I just don't see any valid reason for keeping the made up RunUO mechanic at all. This effects both PVP and PVM. Batlin's decompiled scripts are readily available for anyone to use, and this would not just help in the case of spell damages but many other basic mechanics that held over for the decade+ years the game has been around. Recast Delay and Fast casting is improperly coded by RunUO. The 'recast delay' in the RunUO code is based on a strict delay applied upon 'finishing the casting sequence' instead of actually 'casting the spell' like it was on production shards. The code was the same during UOR as it was during T2A when it was first implemented. There was a delay equivalent to an 8th circle non-summoning spell(2.25s) when the spell finishes casting(mantra/casting animation ends). If a spell is casted during that window a recast delay of two ticks(0.5s) would be applied after initiating it preventing another spell from casting until it elapses. The way this code is implemented is pretty critical because the standard RunUO code simply makes you a wait out a static delay of a couple ticks no matter the case. This allows a mage to fast cast 1.75s faster than what would have been possible during the UOR era. RunUO by default applies a recast delay during spell disruption. IE: cast a spell, gets interrupted, recast delay is applied. This never existed in UO and still does not to this very day. The evidence on this subject matter is pretty solid over at UOSA. Also, given the fact the way the recast delay functions to begin with invalidates this mechanic altogther actually since it would not be possible due to the coding structure of the original recast delay. __________________________________________________ Please tell me you will actually be using the proper original spell casting delay formula for this server? IE: 0.5 + (Spell Circle * 0.25) and this would be on the notion that the spell circle index would be 0-7 and obvioulsy the formula would be 0.25 + (Spell Circle * 0.25) on an index of 1-8. No other server has attempted to re-create a server based on era accuracy making this comment pretty flawed. All servers have been a 'modified version' of the era from day one and this even included Zippy's rebirth server. No other server has attempted this task besides UOSA and that is the longest and most successful server still to this day. I think that would have to tell you something since all servers that tried the modified model has collapsed miserably where the only server that has attempted era accuracy is still live and very successful to this very day. I think the only way this server will succeed with being a modified model is by using the original mechanics from start(this doesn't mean from the start on day one the shard opens). If a mechanic that has not been changed or modified from the original is discovered it should at least be implemented and ONLY after it has been implemented should it be modified for balance. This way the playerbase could at least experience the original mechanic to gauge if it's good or not which isn't possible if they don't ever get the chance to play with it.
Someone with as much knowledge as you knows very well that UOSA is modified in many ways as well. And they pick/choose where their "era accuracy" applies. A perfect example is item bless deeds, or gold duping. Both were in the T2A era. Now you have UOSA allowing a jacked up system of targeting to kill players in their homes because it was "era accurate". I recall people getting banned on UOSA for using a gold duping exploit, whats the difference between that and using flawed mechanics to kill players in their homes? Both of these situations were not meant to happen but are era accurate, yet UOSA has chosen one that they will look the other way on? I can appreciate where you are coming from with your arguments here, but comparing UO:R to UOSA and arguing true era accuracy is a flawed statement as well. There are countless examples on UOSA that can be easily proven inaccurate, and have been, but yet they remain. UOSA is a great shard, but they have reached a point where everyone just bickers and throws around patch notes and the mission statement for the shard can no longer benefit it much. At some point people need to use some common sense when it comes to what they impliment/do not impliment. UOR will be fine as they are shooting for a certain "era accuracy" while not limiting themselves in unrealistic ways. But at the same time the staff understands that you cannot vary to far from the time frame designated (uor) and you cannot go adding 1000 custom features. EDIT: Hybrid is by far the longest and most successful server to this day. Yes, they are horrible now don't get me wrong. However they have achieved levels of activity that UOSA has never seen, and are still reaching the same amount of players online that UOSA does. You've obviously played UOSA as long as many of us have, so you should be able to see that the activity level there has dropped dramatically. Sure there are a lot of hybrid/ipy players going there to try and start over and keeping the player online count high, but really the shard has been dying and this is well known. You used to be able to find a fight anytime of day around there, now your forced to either PK, or sit at brit gy for hours on end and wait for someone to come by who might be orange to you.
The activity level for UOSA has not dropped really. I played the server when there were an average of 80-100 clients in the early days up to the 850 peak a couple years ago. The server has always fluctuated in between the 400-700 range in between the first and second stage of its current life cycle. The average is still 500 clients to this day. The housing clamor you speak of will not kill the shard and it will definitely continue down the same successful path it has enjoyed for the past few years. UOSA has a very few handful modifications in reality. Would hardly use the term 'in many ways' when inferring to the modifications. Again, it may be possible to run a successful modification server such as this but the odds are stacked that never looks good. I would think someone such as yourself would have to agree to my skeptisism on the subject matter. Have been through dozens upon dozens of shards since 2001 and probably have more experience with the player run scene than dozens upon dozens of people combined here as well. This shard could possibly work if it sticks to the basics and modify those basics based on balance and not for the clamor of the month to drastically change a basic. The same would have to hold true for too many custom additions.
You came here to restate old opinions to a new crowd, not to debate anything. I know this because all these subjects were argued on the other server's boards already to no effect. No one changed anyone's mind. So I will not attempt to change yours now. I'll just say this - I came here to get away from all this nonsense. A similar discussion started by a Renaissance fan on the other boards would not be tolerated, so in at least this one particular respect I hope staff will see fit to emulate UOSA.
Actually I can name several servers that tried and failed sticking too 100% era accuracy. Including one I was staff on. If you want the list send me a pm and I'll get it to you. The point of this server isn't 100% era accuracy. The point is "History Perfected". How UO:R would have been in the staffs eyes if Trammel were never added to the game. With a few additions that add more to the game. Read the website.. Best additions in my opinion are the 2 now housing types. Fortress is by far the GOAL. People will get all the UO:R experience they want here. People who have never seen what true balanced PvP is, is going to love it. Factions and everything else that's been mentioned and everything that hasn't been mentioned.
Adding custom houses or any other custom content is not going to make a shard successful. If that was the case Revelation and Rel Por would be at the top of the list. I keep reading these 'true balance pvp' statements but can't help laugh at each one. What do you consider balanced? Your opinion from the next varies differently and just because you think something may be balanced it will never hold true from one person to the next. There is no such thing as 'true balance' in any game. There is only appeasement and tolerance on a massive scale with the masses that is constantly being weighed. I'm not really trying to argue Ultima Online philosophy here and pretty much just wanting to seek the information that was asked of the staff in my previous posts. I don't care if the shard is a booming success or the usual utter flop. That will simply be determined by the game mechanics chosen by the staff and the way they conduct their behavior. Will there be any rebuttal or answer to my Re: Spell Topics: by Faust » Wed Aug 29, 2012 11:40am response in this thread? Still wondering if this server will follow the logic of using the original mechanics with the open possibility of improving on them instead of simply choosing to bypass and step over the original like every other modification shard.
I think this thread should be closed. It's full of useless back and forth banter. The guys who are here LOVE the shard and everything the staff is doing. Nothing is changing, one person whining won't cut it here. There's a reason we all abandoned our old shards for UO:R, and honestly I'll keep playing here if we averaged at 50 people because the people here rock and the community is amazing.
As I stated before, some of the mechanics you listed we already have, or plan to correct, and some of them we will not. The documentation you've listed above is not currently in effect on Renaissance, however I fully intend to convert the spell casting delay formula back to the proper mechanic that was active on OSI Renaissance. I have not yet cross referenced the formula you listed above, however I do believe that what you have is correct, and will implement this change based on verification that it is indeed correct. I (personally) don't feel the need to lock this thread, Faust and every other player who comes to Renaissance will always be free to state their personal opinion. The documentation he has provided, whether or not it is correct & what we are looking for, is not useless banter, it is quite the opposite. Players taking their time to post such information saves the Staff a great deal of time pouring over patch notes, etc. We will never implement a change in mechanics based on things such as: Massive/Majority player discrepancy Massive/Majority player demand A forum poll with overwhelming votes towards a change Dooms-day theories about how the server will die if <this> is not changed. Donations offering as a means to change any mechanics In short, we absolutely will not implement any changes to the server that we as Staff feel doesn't suit our goal.
The spell casting delay formula above is definitely precise. Was proven to be exactly right on the demo and through out multiple sources over the years since that time span even up until this very day. Simply take a glance at the current spell mechanics over on current production shards. Click on each spell individually and you will be able to see the base casting speed. First circle has always been two ticks/pulses and each cirlce following added an additional tick/pulse. I was one of the people that rigorously verified accurate spell casting functions over on UO Second Age and all my research can be found over on their forums. The 'fast casting' or recast delay mentioned above was extensively researched by me as well. UO Power Gamers had a very precise description of the way the delay and fast cast feature in general worked. The irony in the whole article is that it was posted during the early UOR days roughly around '00 or '01 if I am not mistaken. The research has already been conducted for nearly all basic mechanics that have not changed over the several years the game has existed and a huge number of the behind the scenes spell and combat mechanics have not changed much. Also, it's good to see that the staff(at least one so far) can handle a litlte constructive critisism for a change. I thought this was something that only existed over at UO Second Age with Derrick. There will always be the traditional players that hop every staff member's tool ranting that you should worship them without ever debating a single issue. Being open minded about opinions and not shutting someone down simply because you don't like what he/she has to say is just one piece in the puzzle that destroys a shard. Azeroth over at IPY should take a note.
I highly recommend reading a few thousand of Faust's posts on the other boards before you back him up. See why so many have long been tired of the rhetoric instead of having to learn yourself through hard experience. For him to tout open mindedness is a hypocrisy of the greatest magnitude. He also changes stories more than Mitt Romney. While arguing era accuracy here and citing UOSA as the gold standard he is simultaneously defending non-era accurate material against their players on their boards.
