Jump to content

Welcome to Ultima Online Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account

Welcome to UOForums

If not already a member, take a moment to join our awesome community. It is free to sign up and there are no ads.

 

When you click on CREATE ACCOUNT, the sign up form will appear at the bottom of the forum.

 

If you have issues, like not receiving a validation email. Then please contact us by email help@uoforums.com and we will help you get set up.

 

If you wish to contact us about our site for other reasons, then please contact us by using the contact form in top right corner of the forum


Photo

When's Magery gonna be "FIXED"? [ HOT TOPIC ]

- - - - - fixed gonna hot magery topic

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1
Tabbitha

Tabbitha

    "Can Set Custom Title"

  • Members
  • 8,727 posts
  • LocationKinver,Staffordshire,England
source taken from UO.UHall


The last Magery "FIX" I remember was the FC/FCR "FIX". I saw Ninjitsu still needs "FIXING", but how much "FIXING" can it take before it's "FIXED" to oblivion? I see Mages still want Bushido "FIXED" and PvPers want Pets "FIXED", but am I missing anything else or will "FIXING" these situations "FIX" UO?

and

Personally I'm just tired of changes designed to affect one aspect of playing totally frelling up others. You can't make changes designed for PvP and not expect the PvM'ers to be effected. I do both and quite frankly I'm sick of it.

and

Not a streight forward answer to what I had in mind, but the meaning is the same

and

Actually, the solution is quite simple. Make Mages be mages again. That's right - no Bushido/Mages, no Ninja/Mages, no Paladin/Mages...just mages. Pure mages, nox mages, true tank mages.

It's very true that nerfing bushido or ninjitsu because a mage has an overpowered attack with it is incorrect. That's not to say that there aren't imbalances present within the skills when combined with a warrior template, but they shouldn't be judged as overpowered just because a mage can dominate with them.

Take them away from mages. If they're still overpowered on warriors, then they need adjustment. A mage who needs those to compete is no mage at all.


and

Mages online? lol

Yeah thats exactly what it is until some uber-suit jackass comes along and does something like AI+spelleffect DP+spelleffect Holylight deathstrike AI dead? lol

or howabout an archer who runs you right down, completely bypassing the 'must stand still to shoot' rule

then it becomes dexxers online

and

Wilki UO Community Coordinator

You can't make changes designed for PvP and not expect the PvM'ers to be effected. I do both and quite frankly I'm sick of it.



There is a misconception that we're only changing combat for PvP. That is far from the case. The amount of burst and sustained damage that players can dish out overall needs to be address, both in PvP and PvM.

We will continue to address it bit by bit with each publish.
.

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]


#2
Terrance

Terrance

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 555 posts
Mages have perfected convincing the rest of the world that the mage template is "pure skill" when in fact it's probably the purest "crutch".

It'll never, ever change either. EA will keep the mage template at its current overpowered level with an occasional yet miniscule "nerf" (which will promptly get whined about across the first 3 pages of U'All nonetheless).

"It isn't over. Your footprints will never fade from Britannia. You shaped
a world of rich treasures and virtuous character. Children who idolized
you have grown into men and women who seek to walk your path.
That's your legacy, Lord British. It's a marvelous thing."


#3
DiP

DiP

    The Anti-Adam (which means I'm cool)

  • Members
  • 9,578 posts
Wait, Mages are crying about Bushido? Half the time, it's the only thing keeping them alive.

I like the idea of allowing mages to be mages only, but then it would take away from UO being UO (in being flexible in all directions).

Just take out "Mage Weapon" properties, atleast it will be a step in the right direction and force them to use skill points in an actual skill.

Posted Image

Thanks again Maddux!

Adri: women don't discuss men while in the bathroom, we sacrifice small animals and smoke tampons *rolls eyes*


Adam: aye and in order to expedite the production of solidiers, i kill off the old people (Carp was right, Adam IS evil!)

#4
Kratos Aurion

Kratos Aurion

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 175 posts
My post on stratics deals with my theory on a good change that would more or less theoretically balance pvp.

My Non-spell Casting Skill Tanking Theory:

As long and difficult as it sounds, my idea is fairly simple. Heres how it works.

the following skills:
-Magery
-Bushido
-chvialry
-Ninjitsu
-Necromancy
-Spell Weaving

Cannot be used in any combination with each other *or very strictly limited*. By eliminating the ability to tank those skills, the over all imbalance of skill templates will be disabled through those means. All the 4/6 casting mages [chiv/magery] or bushido/chiv warriors and archers will be limited to choosing one or the other as a primary spell skill group.

Notice the idea doesn't disable the ability to tank with weapon skills. This will still be an option for everyone.

With every new idea, their comes the good and the bad.

the good as I see it are:
-eliminates highend templates
-eliminates the ability to solo highend spawns [peerless, doom, etc]
-eliminates 1-3 hit kills in a sense you can't combine the spells anymore
-promotes more player interaction
-brings us closer to a more balanced playing field
-all players will play as intended
-pvp will be more challenging in a sense
-potentially could be better for role players *warrirs vs samuri etc.*

The bad as I see it:
-players will lose more player diversity
-players will grief *duh*:P
-players will be more skill limited other than combining skills
*these are all I can think of but I'm sure theirs plenty more*

My opinion on it is that this is my theory and it would work but it takes player to player cooperation. A lot of people these days don't want change that effects them because they're either afraid to lose power or simply don't want to revert. This change doesn't effect items as they would remain the same. All it does is disable the ability to tank spell based skills which is fair IMO.

For everyone else. I'd just like to ask:

What do you think the pros and cons are of this idea?

Do you think this idea would work or not? why or why not?

#5
Faraus

Faraus

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
I personnaly like it.

It should be this way.

These skills are the main guideline of a character building and shouldnt be mixed up. All the pros you said are totaly true.

The only ones who gonna whine are the powergamers, digging far in the game mechanic to get more and more uber, no roleplay or spirit of the game at all in mixing theses skills. Thats unfluffy.

Of course lotta people just dont care. Which is bad. Thats why UO's going down : people just dont care. They want more power, more candies.

#6
Smoknjoe

Smoknjoe

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts
I've got to say I would like to be able to delete any player who utters the word "nerf". Nerfing is the dumbest thing you can do in a game. It only makes people angry and never fixes the problem. Instead of nerfing the hell out of everything, UO needs to bring up the abilities of the class that cannot compete. That would be a better fix without messing up what balance there is currently.

Note to Wilki:

Please leave pvm the heck alone. We pvmers are tired of paying the price for pvp fixes. We are happy with the way the system works now and DO NOT want any changes. Cater to pvp all you like, but please leave the rest of us alone. I know emphatically that I speak for a majority of pvmers. We have been very vocal of late. Please just do something like give pvpers their own shard and be done with it. PVM is NOT broken. Thank you.

#7
Terrance

Terrance

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 555 posts
Good idea, makes sense. I think another simple way to fix the mage problem would be to simply remove the passive aspect of meditation. Either that or add a cumulative mana use to all spells when they're chained, just like special moves on weapons. Would stop a lot of the dingus harm spam, evade spam, et cetera.

From a realistic point of view, I'd like to see changes added that prevent a mage from equipping a spellbook if they have anything else in their other hand. This idea that somone can hold onto a huge shield while thumbing through a book while riding a llama at full gallop is absurd. Maybe that's the "pure skillz" part...

"It isn't over. Your footprints will never fade from Britannia. You shaped
a world of rich treasures and virtuous character. Children who idolized
you have grown into men and women who seek to walk your path.
That's your legacy, Lord British. It's a marvelous thing."


#8
Terrance

Terrance

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 555 posts

They want more power, more candies.


They want...thweedee.

"It isn't over. Your footprints will never fade from Britannia. You shaped
a world of rich treasures and virtuous character. Children who idolized
you have grown into men and women who seek to walk your path.
That's your legacy, Lord British. It's a marvelous thing."


#9
Kratos Aurion

Kratos Aurion

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 175 posts

I've got to say I would like to be able to delete any player who utters the word "nerf". Nerfing is the dumbest thing you can do in a game. It only makes people angry and never fixes the problem. Instead of nerfing the hell out of everything, UO needs to bring up the abilities of the class that cannot compete. That would be a better fix without messing up what balance there is currently.

Note to Wilki:

Please leave pvm the heck alone. We pvmers are tired of paying the price for pvp fixes. We are happy with the way the system works now and DO NOT want any changes. Cater to pvp all you like, but please leave the rest of us alone. I know emphatically that I speak for a majority of pvmers. We have been very vocal of late. Please just do something like give pvpers their own shard and be done with it. PVM is NOT broken. Thank you.


I'm not really sure whos response your post is directed at. My post has nothing to do with nerfing. All it does is limit players to not combine 2+ spell based skills. Most pvm'ers are warriors so it really doesnt effect most of them since they only use chivalry or bushido. I think to make my idea a little more fair, the devs should add new spells to each group. Maybe even put penalties on some of the spells to make them balanced.

The way I see it is all of ultimas current spells are benefital or attack based. I think all spells or some of the higher end type spells should have side effects such as -2 stam, mana or hpr degeneration for # period of time. Or maybe some of the lower end attacks that people cast at a constant rate inflicts 5% of the damage dealt back to the dealer.

I dont think that skills should be made better though. Right now skills are in an over balanced state IMO. Some though are under balanced such as stealing, hiding etc because they've been nerfed so much.

Try looking at different aspects of the game with other view points like "what would a pvp'er want changed" or if your a pvp'er, "what would a blue want changed" Asking your self questions through others views and at different view points really gives you a wider understanding of what is really wrong in the game. Its not the skills themselves, but its the combination of skills that are being exploited.

#10
DiP

DiP

    The Anti-Adam (which means I'm cool)

  • Members
  • 9,578 posts
The major Con to your idea Kratos, is it would take the big part of UO away that makes it better than most other games.

Limiting a skills use because you have a different skill would basically make that skill useless, 100+ skill points invested to not be able to use the entire skill would force players to use the same skills(and not be diverse). This would create templates (I know there are basic templates, "gimp" templates, and the like already, but your idea would practically make things mandatory) and limit everyone into a certain class.

Posted Image

Thanks again Maddux!

Adri: women don't discuss men while in the bathroom, we sacrifice small animals and smoke tampons *rolls eyes*


Adam: aye and in order to expedite the production of solidiers, i kill off the old people (Carp was right, Adam IS evil!)

#11
Kratos Aurion

Kratos Aurion

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 175 posts

The major Con to your idea Kratos, is it would take the big part of UO away that makes it better than most other games.

Limiting a skills use because you have a different skill would basically make that skill useless, 100+ skill points invested to not be able to use the entire skill would force players to use the same skills(and not be diverse). This would create templates (I know there are basic templates, "gimp" templates, and the like already, but your idea would practically make things mandatory) and limit everyone into a certain class.


I already mentioned that in my original post. My idea wouldn't make things totally mandatory.

Mandatory means your forced to use something against your will or your punished. *in theory* example: you wear the wrong uniform at your job and get a warning or possibly fired.

Basically, if a player has 100 skill points invested, they should soulstone it to another character. They can use a new skill like poisoning or take up anatomy/tactics etc. to replace the lost skill. And besides, my changes dont effect every skill, it only effects the spell casting types.

Skill based; yeah a lot of people probably would be the same. But honestly its that way now. What difference would it make? Everyone uses the same "gimplet" of the month in pvp. Most pvm'ers are pure based templates. Now *in my changes* they either got to take up pure tank [example: magery/swords] or pure mage/warrior etc. This is how the game was before AoS. The game wasn't as bad back then as it is now except that mages had distance advantage over warriors.

Besides, I believe they should seperate some of the weapon types within the skill groups to make totally new skills.

Axing for example is swords. I believe that should be in its own skill catagory as an axer.

pole-arms I believe should have their own skill group as well.

No matter what, in life or a game, their will always be mandatories. You can take the lesser of the two evils or continue fighting for balance that will never come. Besides, although skills might be the same amoungest all characters, everyone uses their skills differently. Thats how the new gimplets are formed in current ultima. People experiment with new methods. People use different armors and weapons. I don't believe my change would be that bad for players in the long run.

#12
DiP

DiP

    The Anti-Adam (which means I'm cool)

  • Members
  • 9,578 posts
I can see where your going, but you said it yourself

Basically, if a player has 100 skill points invested, they should soulstone it to another character.


I don't care if it's a "spell casting" skill or not, if you are forced to (and yes, you will be forced to when you're crippled by using 100 skill points in which you don't get the full benefit from) remove a skill for another (to keep up with others) you are limiting playstyles/templates/whatever you want to call it.

It would probably work (for balancing) but as stated, it would take away from the game.

The more unbalancing aspects in game used now is item over skill (points, not mashing buttons on a keyboard).

Where one person uses 120 points into a weapon skill (one form of offense) another picks up a weapon that enables them to have the equivelant with 120 Magery (2 offenses for the price of the same amount of skill points).

Posted Image

Thanks again Maddux!

Adri: women don't discuss men while in the bathroom, we sacrifice small animals and smoke tampons *rolls eyes*


Adam: aye and in order to expedite the production of solidiers, i kill off the old people (Carp was right, Adam IS evil!)

#13
Kratos Aurion

Kratos Aurion

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 175 posts

I can see where your going, but you said it yourself



I don't care if it's a "spell casting" skill or not, if you are forced to (and yes, you will be forced to when you're crippled by using 100 skill points in which you don't get the full benefit from) remove a skill for another (to keep up with others) you are limiting playstyles/templates/whatever you want to call it.

It would probably work (for balancing) but as stated, it would take away from the game.

The more unbalancing aspects in game used now is item over skill (points, not mashing buttons on a keyboard).

Where one person uses 120 points into a weapon skill (one form of offense) another picks up a weapon that enables them to have the equivelant with 120 Magery (2 offenses for the price of the same amount of skill points).



And I see where your comming from. But as I said before, I would rather go for the lesser of the two evils. I would rather the devs implement this type of playstyle rather than spend years of trying to figure out how to make the damage level of a talon bite go from 23 to 15...

Basically would you rather the quick fix that is more or less going to work or the long fix that has no guaruntee?

It does take away from the game in a sense. But look at all the crafters. All crafters use the same skills. All tamers use about the same skills. All warriors use the same skills *besides the weapon style* In todays ultima, its not really the skills that determine diversity. Since its item based, its the armor and weapons you use, and the order and way you cast spells, manage and store mana/stamina/hp . There would be plenty of diversity left in ultima. And besides, pretty much everyone uses the spells they cast in their own style.. [still diverse]

Even if they strickly limited the other spell based skills to be #% less effective, if used combined with your primary spell skill, its still not a waste of skill slot. The spells from the secondary spell based skill would still allow you to use all its skills but they would be considerably weaker than a pure based character [sounds confusing] I'll see if I can come up with a better way to summarize it later though.

My example:

primary spell based skill: magery
secondary spell based skill: necromancy

Lets say you were using magery as your primary skill and you started pvping or pvming. Your magery will act as casual and do normal damage. But when you decide to use a necro spell [secondary spell skill], you can cast and use any of the spells but they are #% weaker than if they were used on a pure necro character.

This idea is still IMO better than the deminishing returns and the pre-pub 41 change that the devs were going to do originally. It may limit the characters in skills, but their is literally no end to the limit in weapons or armor. They would still be diverse.

But by now I'm sure you understand my idea and concept but your not willing to accept it which I don't think you should. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but It wouldnt hurt to test theories everyonce in awhile. Maybe some day the devs will take player ideas into consideration and play around with them until we get a near balanced system.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: fixed, gonna, hot, magery, topic