7.5g each!!!!!! Good grief, I've been sitting on a small mint this whole time. Hmm, prolly coulda phrased that better. Anyways, thanks for that info!
Could you elaborate on your comment about Archery and Tactics? It definitely has a bonus as far as I can tell.
I think he means in terms of bonus on weapons. Like you get an "accurate" katana it gives +5 tactics. If you get an "accurate" bow it gives +5 archery instead of tactics.
Yeah, that's probably what he meant. Thanks I always wondered why it was designed that way. Anybody know?
Anat does increase damage, the archery bonus is spent on archery instead of tactics because it is to increase accuracy, tactics only increases damage and has zero bearing on how accurate a weapon is
That's exactly what I meant when I said 'bonus.' Thanks! Are you sure? I will never claim to be a know-it-all when it comes to UO but I thought anat/weapon skill increases damage and tactics increases accuracy.
I don't have an archer yet, but will start one soon. Quite hard so far, as UOR is quite different from UO, at least as I remember it.
Scribe Archer bro if you don't want to Archer Mage it. Having an explode ebolt reflect while timing a bow "hit" and purple is actually really nice.
IIRC: 100 Tactics = +50% damage 100 Anatomy = +30% damage Your weapon skill versus target's weapon skill = chance to hit
Hello fellow archers. I made some calculations about how archery works here and it obviously has its pros and cons. Here is the table: What makes me wonder is that in most games i've played archers are penalized for shooting targets at close range (aka Point blank shots). It seems here we have the opposite. By look of the numbers it's obvious that's detrimental to remain in place for those 0.75 sec before the shot (stealth shot in the back or paralize).
I am more interested in archers as a sort of europa militia guard unit, as in Waywatchers, stealth, perhaps an elven archer. I don't aim to attack anyone, but more for roleplaying, and as a challenge.
Is this vs Monsters? Because I can promise at 120+ archery at 6 tiles I do not hit for 50%+. Unless something has been changed.
This is ridiculous. It should be GM vs GM, regardless of movement before or after a shot, 50% chance to hit. Additionally, it should be base 75% to hit vs monsters with 100 skill in melee, as per melee balance fix.... More of a chance to hit per magical property, accurate, etc. In pvp you can move like 7 tiles in .75 of a second reducing accuracy by a huge amount. In pve with a monster on your tail it is dependant on your speed, however a lot of the higher end mobs are quite fast and can make haste at least 4 tiles per .75 of a sec. Little wonder archery seems pointless in this system.
I don't think it matters for the formula if it's PvP or PvM. In fact it's useless to shoot with arrows in PvP unless you paralyze the target, get close to him and combo the shot with explosion + energy bolt dump. You still get better than 50/50 hit chance if you stand exactly by the enemy (2 tiles away) even with no accuracy bow/x-bow. Other use in 1v1 is mirage. In mass mountless fights though with +14 archery weapon things get better. Sad part is exceptional bow/x-bows don't have such property so you have to keep some magicals. Although probably those come down to CTFs. The mount speed makes it 100% luck chance what is going to be your position when you shoot. To be honest the system looks good - i mean it has some interesting scale for positioning and planing but in PvP all these statistics don't matter since everything is so dynamic. It will always result in lower hit chance for archers. Ranged weapons are already penalized for being ranged - their DPS is lower and they lack special ability (let's say being ranged is their special ability). Why is effective hit chance penalty also applied? Useless statement: 1) History is perfected according to who? To you? Perfection is more of a process and less of a state; 2) It needs changes and many people had put some real arguments. If you don't need it to be changed - ok. Many others say you are wrong.