Larisa!

[Guest]

...

I'm eagerly awaiting the next KR patch (as are a lot of other people) and can't wait to see what's in that list.

 

[_Uriah Heep_]

*snickers to self*


Ahhh, nevermind

 

[Nixon[I-C]]

What an idiotic, clueless change this would be. It's pretty clear to me, the dev team just doesn't know where to really take PvP. We've been force fed the same crap for so long, and I've been waiting and waiting for these game changing awesome developments, and no surprise they've never come, and I'm still waiting. Then they go and do something silly like this?

And yes, it maybe just a 'test', but it gives great insight to the thinking process behind the changes, or rather lack of.

Hasta

 

[Guest]

...


*snickers to self*


Ahhh, nevermind



Some *ahem* people are simply too predictable when a legitimate question about certain things come up.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

well ... now that you've expressed the appropriate "oh darn it" about a newly discovered problem ...

Might want to go on test, and figure out how to "fix it" ...and relay in some coherent form ...
just what it is you propose ...

Rather than arm chairing the entire thing ...

want to "fight" the change?
bring a little more than opinion ...

Plenty of "scaling" that could be done to "improve" the current system ...
Building resistance to poison, after so many failed/cured attempts ... lasts for x amount of time ... oooo

make the poisoner change their tactics
Arch cure as an area effect ... if only one is poisoned MAX distributed effect (more cures over more players ... yeah ... less)
"absorb" some of the poison and "spit it back" ... arch cure REMOVES some applied poisons on weapons ...
and/or "lessens" the rating on any carried in "a pack" in range ...
differentiate between direct and magical application ...

just saying ... as long as the "hood is up"
why just reverse the changes ?

poisoning and curing are "perfect"? no touching?

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Might want to go on test, and figure out how to "fix it" ...and relay in some coherent form ...


[/ QUOTE ]
Have you ever done a parox on a mage?

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Might want to go on test, and figure out how to "fix it" ...and relay in some coherent form ...


[/ QUOTE ]
Have you ever done a parox on a mage?

[/ QUOTE ]

not quite coherent as to what thats gonna "fix" ...

 

[Guest]

The fix that is inherint in that question is the fix to leave it alone. You neutrally alligned questions/suggestions don't solve the parox riddle. To know the parox riddle you must have done them. If you havn't done them then the riddle will forever elude you.

This change is not coherent in it's scope. The negative effects of this change will greatly outweigh the positive ones. Which, of course, we are all waiting to hear about. Have any coherent thoughts on those?

 

[Basara]

How about a best of both worlds solution or two -

Option One:

1. Get rid of Arch Protection (no one uses it much, and it confuses the hell out of people in the AoE that get caught by it, then can't figure out why their resists and casting speed are messed up).

2. Replace Arch Protection with a SINGLE TARGET "Greater Cure" spell that does what Arch Cure does normally.

3. Now, reduce Arch Cure to an AoE version of Cure.


Option Two:

Swap spell circle/level positions of Polymorph and Arch Cure. As it better reflects the power of a 7th level spell, make it one. Polymorph is too high a level for its uses.

Hell, go through and do a spell level adjustment pass of ALL the spells, after that quick fix. A lot of them could be adjusted (compare blade spirits, to spellweaving Nature's fury, for example). Add some spells, drop some spells, and maybe have Grimm redesign the spellbooks in general to hold 10 per page (and add more spells to the other skills too).

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

Fine ... poisoning and curing are perfect as they are ...
For you.

cool ... Lock poisoning and curing as "fixed" no further attention required ... put the hood down on that piece of code ... no need to ever revisit.

when anything ever does change ... that might require a look ... nono... dear devs ... we had our chance and passed.

 

[Dread Raven]

I honestly feel this is a negative for PvP. Bad enough now a dexxer can keep DPing you even after every cure go offs. Are you going to nerf the amount of DP's they can do in a row or in a minute! Now you have a slimmer chance to cure. I guess we might as well all get back on dexxers, because you just made mage vs dex in the favor of the dexxer. Once again, you played with something that really did not need fixing, when you could have spent the time on something else.

 

[Guest]

I implore you to state the benefits of this change Fayled. I don't scoff developments lightly. If I foresaw any, at all, tangible benefit to the proposed changes I wouldn't be so adamant against it's introduction.

Looking around it's clear I'm not the only mechanic that feels 4 new tires would be a better additions than a steering wheel cover.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

Great googegly Moogegedly !

Can't you Take a WIN ????

Certainly can't take a suggestion
Can't recognize an opportunity
Can't adapt to a new event ...
Can't be bothered to think of what maybe ...

as I said above
slap the hood down on that section of code
no further improvements possible
drop it down to the end of the list
wait for it to cycle back up again

IF ever

now take your win and smirk

g'head
ya earned it

 

[Guest]

<font color="red"> ...
</font>

 

[Cowgoesmoo]

<blockquote><hr>

<font color="red"> ...
</font>

[/ QUOTE ]
You are totally missing the point of what our cryptic friend is saying.
He is not suggesting that the change is good.

What he is saying is that now that they have started playing with poisoning and the cure spells why not take the opportunity to suggest some beneficial changes to the system that will enhance the game.

They are trying to balance the AoE aspect of the spell with its high cure chances and level/casting cost/time.

How can they do this in a better way? Can other aspects be added to curing that can change the dynamics of the game slightly.

Personally I like the suggestions of cure spells and attempts to remove levels of poison rather than flat our curing it. Combined with the suggestions to have 2 level 4 cure spells (arch, as currently suggested, and greater, as arch is currently with no AoE).

This would make even the nerfed arch cure useful as the number of levels removed would be random based on skill weighting (higher skill = higher chance of more levels being removed).

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

They are trying to balance the AoE aspect of the spell with its high cure chances and level/casting cost/time.


[/ QUOTE ]
There is no imbalance with the arch cure spell. The AoE aspect is not a overpowered factor in pvp or in pvm. Can it be changed in a better manner than what is proposed? Sure. I've said so numerous times since the subject has come up. The fact remains the benefit doesn't exist. The spell is not an issue in the game.

 

[Frarc]

<blockquote><hr>

...

But the IMPORTANT question is:

When is Patchurday?!?!?

[/ QUOTE ]


/signed

 

[Olahorand]

<blockquote><hr>

In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.

[/ QUOTE ]

well so when will Telekinesis spell be balanced in favour of Remove Traps skill (which requires you also to have Detect Hidden at at least 50 on top)?

 

[imported_ejpeters]

I think number one that the formula should be based on 100 skill points. How many people can afford a 120 magery scroll at todays prices.
I will go and test it because many times I use the spell with my pets and my tamers do not have 120 skill so I want to see what effect it has on them.
I always thought arch cure was the greater cure.
I think we need a greater cure because mages should have their own way to cure deadly poison like other classes do. And our success should be based on 100 not on 120.
If I needed to outfit my main chars with 120 magery scrolls it would cost me in the upwards of 100 million dollars. That is just crazy just to have a better chance of curing myself.
I do not mind using pots but now that they stack if you die and are looted all your cure potions can be taken at once.

 

[NotACpa]

<blockquote><hr>

In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.

[/ QUOTE ]
As someone else already pointed out, the 63 magery skill level does NOT give you "completely countering" ability, only success at CASTING the spell, not at curing the poison.



On another note : "The Cure formula is as follows: Chance to Cure = (10000 + (Magery * 75) - (poison strength * 3100) / 100.

The Archcure formula is as follows: Chance to Arch Cure = (10000 + (Magery * 75) - (poison strength * 1750) / 100. "

Am I the only person who noticed that BOTH of these listed formulae seem to be missing a closing right parenthesis? And that the placement of that closing parathesis could make a big difference in the results?

 

[Dank]

I play a dp dexer on Atlantic and find that my 80 skill points in poison is barely worth it when you consider that chiv or bushido may be used in its place. First off posion skill pretty much useless if oponent has plenty of cure pots. Mages have arch cure ability to use pots, melee temps have healing, chiv, pots, lots of ways to negate poison. Also with 120 fence and 80 poison I still need to pull a lethal which does not happen on every successful hit.
IMO poison skill is not all that powerful just makes for an easy temp but still requires suplimental weapons and specs in conjunction with dp to be a vialble pvp skill.
Now I also play a necro mage with 2/6 casting and find i can cure out of dp pretty easilly using arch cure though my mage does have a more difficult time with dp dexers than my chiv dexer or my bushido dexer or my bushido archer. Bushido period because of ease of pot use... just in trouble if pots run out. Sort of like omen para and trap box... any way my 2 cents.

 

[imported_athos_uo]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

But the IMPORTANT question is:

When is Patchurday?!?!?

[/ QUOTE ]Sometime next week - we have some time with this on test. And I already have a nice long list of things to itemize to give to Design on this one

[/ QUOTE ]
Is this patch here mentioned the one that we got today?

Or are we going to have another patch next week?

Or, is the patch here stateed as "a server patch"?

 

[Lady-Tor]

What is that freaky looking thing on your avatar?

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

<blockquote><hr>

What is that freaky looking thing on your avatar?

[/ QUOTE ]

pffft!

Thats a Baby Jackalope

 

[Guest]

A Buddha gerbil?

 

[imported_gawin]

<blockquote><hr>

Did anyone comment on Archcure when that was posted? I was specifically looking for comment and I don't remember seeing anything one way or the other.

Also, guys, this is why it's on TEST. We're TESTING it. If it wildly unbalances PvP, tell us!

[/ QUOTE ]

You never asked for input and it also wasnt mentioned as that you were planing on changing it. One of the reasons NO one commented on it was NO one was having a problem with it as IT was.

and as for testing it on test. You know as well as every single player on here or in game that unless it is a GAME STOPPING issue if it is on test IT WILL be on production shards NO MATTER what the input is from TEST.

One more thing that NO player asked for being rammed down there throats and you wonder why peeps close accounts.

*shakes head and walks away* mumbling at this rate nothing has changed and no chance of any of my accounts getting reactivated.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

You never asked for input and it also wasnt mentioned as that you were planing on changing it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, there was a "hmmm" on the end of the line describing cure chances. Ok, that might not have been a strongly worded invitation. Researching the small amount of discussion provoked, I was apparently obsessed only with crafters marks that week.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

RTLFC

So once again, we are fixin what aint broke?
And making a further shambles of what was a good game.

Perhaps I missed em, can someone provide the links to all the many the posts complaining about archcure being overpowered and everyone saying nerf it? Or is this just another "fix" to look busy and make peeps think you are seriously working on UO?

Sorry Jeremy, I just don't think you and the gang get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to second this. Show us the post on people saying it needed to be fixed? There are so many other things to be fixed in this game. Why not worry about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ditto, a change for the Worse this is... Sure as h#!! this isn't for the good of the game!

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that really an argument? Cleanse by fire is 55 point ability, and casts a helluva faster than cure. Nerf arch cure all you want, as long as you make regular cure work the way it did pre publish 25. I'm sick of having 2 cure macros.