Strange Imbuing Issues...

[RaDian FlGith]

Issue 1 - On pretty much every item, I can seem to imbue 18% in a resist, but earlier today, my chest which was at 6 cold would only go to 17% cold, even though it would let me do 18% anything else. So what determines the max a resist can be raised to?

Issue 2 - Putting on a ring or bracelet:
15 DCI (110), 15 HCI (130), 25 DI (100), and 5 INT (68) = 408, right?
Try to put on +10 Healing, a 92% value, and it says 501/500 and won't imbue.
What gives?
The system should used the displayed value, rounded, not some arbitrary, invisible decimal.

 

[Basara]

What determines what the max resist on a piece from Imbuing:

The base resist of a non-exceptional piece of that armor, made of normal materials, +15.

So, if cold resist has a base of 2, it can only be imbued to 17%, no matter what exceptional bonuses or material bonuses were already applied.

As for Issue #2: It aggravates the heck out of me, too,

 

[RaDian FlGith]

What determines what the max resist on a piece from Imbuing:

The base resist of a non-exceptional piece of that armor, made of normal materials, +15.

So, if cold resist has a base of 2, it can only be imbued to 17%, no matter what exceptional bonuses or material bonuses were already applied.

Makes sense... a bit strange, but makes sense... I guess. Thanks for clearing that up though, at least now I know why it's happening.

As for Issue #2: It aggravates the heck out of me, too,

Yeah... that one I just don't get. If all they're going to display is an integer, then the system should only be recording and using integers. heh

 

[Pinco]

for the n° 1: my UO Template Editor manage the base resist for armor (if you want to try different kind of armor) and for hats.

for the n° 2: for what I saw (while retriving the formula), the decimal values are truncated completely, so if you have a 32.8 the result is 32.

 

[Martyna Zmuir]

Does your tailor have GM Arms Lore Ra (it increases bases resists)? Having that often allows me to get to 21 in resists...

 

[RaDian FlGith]

for the n° 2: for what I saw (while retriving the formula), the decimal values are truncated completely, so if you have a 32.8 the result is 32.

That should certainly be the case, but it's clearly not in general practice. I don't know what's wrong with it, but it definitely is not adding like it should somewhere along the line.

 

[Harlequin]

From my experience, it doesn't seem to be rounding down (truncating the decimals) in all cases.

Some individual properties get rounded up, and others get rounded down. But most of the time it doesn't matter as it's only 1 point off.