Buff Pot Limit status?

If you need support, you can get help here!
User avatar
Screw
Myrmidon
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Nov 18, 2006 01:00

Postby Screw » Apr 24, 2012 19:42

I remember reading a while back that there were plans on implementing a limit of buff pots a player can have going at a time. Something like 2 max (not sure if pom or other regens count toward this?). Just curious as to if there are still plans on implementing this? Haven't been playing in a while.

Sorry if this has been mentioned elsewhere, but I could not find any current info.

User avatar
Rajnish
Eagle Knight
 
Posts: 947
Joined: Nov 26, 2011 00:24

Postby Rajnish » Apr 24, 2012 21:24

Under discussion. No decision has been made if we will or won't do such a thing.
Know of a Missing Mob,drop or Mob Camp? Then Post it Here!
https://www2.uthgard.net/tracker/

TheKrokodil wrote: "Never change a running system bugged-system-where-players-actually-don't-realize-that-it-was-implemented-wrong-in-the-first-place, or people will notice."

User avatar
Magicco
Alerion Knight
 
Posts: 2360
Joined: Aug 01, 2010 00:00

Postby Magicco » Apr 24, 2012 22:04

Rajnish wrote:Under discussion. No decision has been made if we will or won't do such a thing.



no

Uthgard Staff - Spring News wrote: Buff barrel / charges

In future buffs will be limited to 2 max at a time. We could write a huge essay of why this will be done, however to keep it simple we felt this was needed to be on par with our no buffbot policy. Players who do not have buffs should not run full buffed (or close to) without grouping a character with buffs.


cap them and turn them to a livelike value
uh wait, custom and custom.
or custom n livelike
or livelike n livelike? well, idgas

Seethoven
Gryphon Knight
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Sep 11, 2011 05:32

Postby Seethoven » Apr 24, 2012 23:49

I like this, if nothing else, it makes you choose which pots to run more wisely. Would something like that include charges off or armor tho?

User avatar
Screw
Myrmidon
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Nov 18, 2006 01:00

Postby Screw » Apr 25, 2012 00:14

Okay, I just found this from Blue:

Blue wrote:Theres still discussion about this again since its another custom change and we dont really want to introduce more custom changes.


viewtopic.php?f=9&t=25523

I'm curious as to the feasibility of this buff pot limitation with regards to the code. Would this be a major undertaking or is it simply the custom aspect that gives pause? I could see if it was difficult to implement that would probably weigh heavily on whether it's worth the time to do so. If not, then maybe make an official thread for discussion or poll it (not sure how good idea that is though)?

User avatar
Abydos
Game Master
Game Master
 
Posts: 6839
Joined: Jan 22, 2011 21:14

Postby Abydos » Apr 25, 2012 03:25

Screw wrote:Would this be a major undertaking

Yes

Fjott
Warder
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sep 04, 2011 16:38

Postby Fjott » Apr 26, 2012 12:16

Abydos wrote:
Screw wrote:Would this be a major undertaking

Yes

Any change that really makes an impact on the server require some work.

Just look at what I currently see as the 'big five'.
# All abilites working correctly, the work on this one is just insane (juggernaut, bolts, bof, etc.).
# Buffbot-less server, as first intended.
# Defense-penetration, finally working (a lot of workarounds, and custom here atm).
# Old RAs, as promised and servers overall goal.
# Pathing, basically halted until someone writes a C#-wrapper.

None of those are done overnight, but then again if any of those were done, it would be a big milestone for the server.

Hiding under 'no custom'-flag isn't really valid in the buff-issue, considering the aims and changes previously done.
Charges/pots are already heavy customized, just not yet in a way that actually aims for the buffbot-less server goal.

Code: Select all
How can the buffing change.
There are many ways, but I for one, only see a few as real options.

Regens, heal potions, end potions should not be a seperate thing, it should be within the 2-buff limit. If it is seperate, then it is no big change from current settings.

Charges: af, haste, dq, sc, dot, dd, dq debuff, sc debuff, lifetap, etc.
Pots: str, con, dex, haste, dmg shield, end regen, end, hp, hp regen, power, power regen, etc.

How can this be done in reality?
# A player get 2 slots for charges/pots.

Example 1 (simple):
[code]The player use af-charge.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there is, assign 1 slot for the af charge, until it expires.
The player use dq-charge.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there is, assign 1 slot for the dq charge, until it expires.

Both slots are now filled.
The player use sc-charge.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there isn't, the charge fails, and an error message is printed.
The player use instant heal potion.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there isn't, the potion fails, and an error message is printed.

The player cancel/or it expires the af-charge in the first buff[]-slot.
The player use instant heal potion.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there is, the potion triggers.
The player use sc-charge.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there is, assign 1 slot for the sc charge, until it expires.

(Easier to code, but requires the player to manually cancel buffs if they plan to use anything else.)
[/code]

Example 2(complex):
[code]The player use af-charge.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there is, assign 1 slot for the af charge, until it expires.
The player use dq-charge.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there is, assign 1 slot for the dq charge, until it expires.

Both slots are now filled.
The player use sc-charge.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there isn't, the charge have a 50% chance to overwrite either of the two buff[]-slots.
The player use instant heal potion.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there isn't, the potion have a 50% chance to overwrite either of the two buff[]-slots.

The player cancel/or it expires the af-charge in the first buff[]-slot.
The player use instant heal potion.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there is, the potion triggers.
The player use sc-charge.
Check if there are any free slots in the buff[], if there is, assign 1 slot for the dq charge, until it expires.

(Less work for the player, and they can ie. use a dot/dd charge right away aimed at an archer that shot them, but with a random chance of losing either of their buffs.)
[/code]
(Can be a mix of 2 potions, 2 charges, or 1 potion, 1 charge in the buff[].)


# A player gets 1 slot for charges, 1 slot for pots.
[code]Basically the same as previous, but with a few exceptions.
Instead of a buff[], there 'could' now be two objects, one for charges, one for pots.

As for example 1, no real change.
The player use a charge, charge-object return != null, the charge fails.
The player use a potion, pot-object return null, pot-object = this, potion triggers, pot-object = null (if instant, if duration pot, then null when it expires).

As for example 2.
If you try to use a potion, the pot-object is overwritten.
If you try to use a charge, the charge-object is overwritten.
[/code]

These are alternatives I would consider feasible.
However most people who are currently used to running with 6+ pots/charges, would strongly argue that they need a separate slot for regens and instants. Be it dd/dot charge, dq/sc debuff, hp/end/power instant/regen.
They simply would find these options to radical, and hardcore for their current playstyle.

For me it would rather be seen as adding a tactical decision to the players.
Considering the risk, using this regen/instant, will it benefit me more then sticking with the current buffs?
(Maybe bringing potions and charges on the same timer would be needed, to stop people from (example 1), use instant heal pot, recharge the buff you just lost.)
Atm, and with a separate timer this decision would not exist, and a more braindead playstyle where you just use it like candy simply because you can, would occur.
():no change from current setting in that regard)

User avatar
Trishin
Game Master
Game Master
 
Posts: 5048
Joined: Apr 07, 2010 00:00

Postby Trishin » Apr 26, 2012 15:57

It might seem simple. However if you look at how DOL handles spells you might find out that it's not really so simple to create an array ;)

There is different spellhandlers for different spells and overriding etc is also handled in an odd way.

Fjott
Warder
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sep 04, 2011 16:38

Postby Fjott » Apr 26, 2012 19:57

Trishin wrote:It might seem simple. However if you look at how DOL handles spells you might find out that it's not really so simple to create an array ;)

There is different spellhandlers for different spells and overriding etc is also handled in an odd way.

(Simple in that context was referring to the comparison between the two examples :D)

DOL != Uthgard
On many parts anyway.
I guess I had to much faith, to think some of those odd ways was better here :wall:


'To be able to ascend a mountain, you have to take it step by skridt.' :wink:

wcs2011
Warder
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Oct 15, 2011 05:21

Postby wcs2011 » Apr 27, 2012 03:17

Rajnish wrote:Under discussion. No decision has been made if we will or won't do such a thing.

Wow are u kidding me? Seriously discussing this? :angry: Watch how many assasains will quit this server if u limit buff/charges. Especially if its 2 max.

User avatar
Trishin
Game Master
Game Master
 
Posts: 5048
Joined: Apr 07, 2010 00:00

Postby Trishin » Apr 27, 2012 08:34

wcs2011 wrote:
Rajnish wrote:Under discussion. No decision has been made if we will or won't do such a thing.

Wow are u kidding me? Seriously discussing this? :angry: Watch how many assasains will quit this server if u limit buff/charges. Especially if its 2 max.


I think some might even create visible characters. Which I believe many hope they do.

User avatar
jaaro
Myrmidon
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Jan 30, 2008 01:00

Postby jaaro » Apr 27, 2012 08:44

+ for Trishin, my hero is still w8ing for more visible solos and less pa's on my face -.- +viper spam.

User avatar
Magicco
Alerion Knight
 
Posts: 2360
Joined: Aug 01, 2010 00:00

Postby Magicco » Apr 27, 2012 12:53

wasn't there a rumor that everything should be livelike blabla towards 1.69?

oh i forgot... some things are the same, and some thing are more same

User avatar
Blue
Developer
Developer
 
Posts: 15822
Joined: Apr 22, 2005 00:00

Postby Blue » Apr 27, 2012 13:08

Magicco wrote:wasn't there a rumor that everything should be livelike blabla towards 1.69?

oh i forgot... some things are the same, and some thing are more same

Thats why we revised this decision. Nobody in the staff likes customizations. And that is a big one.
It's done when it's done. Thanks for your patience.
Every bug gets fixed. Sooner or later.

"It is an inescapable law of nature that the amount of satisfaction one gains from achieving something
is related to how hard it is and easy things can only elicit a fleeting superficial sort of pleasure."


Blue says, "you used macro tools or macro keyboard"
Pala says, "i am disabled. and i have a mechanic left hand that can be programed. its hard to play woith one hand"

[Appeal] Bxxxxxxxx: "why is RA first aid cann man i stealth use and not unstealth cann man ra if man use unstealth ?????????"
BannedUser: "i was not using automate game action my hand was fall on keyboard during i was sleep .... i was completly fall on keyboard ..."

User avatar
shade
Eagle Knight
 
Posts: 690
Joined: Apr 01, 2009 00:00

Postby shade » Apr 27, 2012 13:26

Seethoven wrote:I like this, if nothing else, it makes you choose which pots to run more wisely. Would something like that include charges off or armor tho?


It would also change specs, which is quite custom. For example pierce users would get a significant disadvantage compared to now.
Assume 2 pots/charge limit, as a non pierce user you would probably pick haste and str/con. Pierce users need to decide between more weapon-damage/stats and haste, which might make quite a few switch to blade spec only for this reason.

That's a VERY custom effect of a custom change.
“DAOC is not about what you can log. It's about what you can play :> ”

Uthgard 1.0: <Die Lettanten> Ivia - 8L8 Nightshade - Lone Enforcer since 8L1.
Uthgard 2.0: <Illuminated Stormriders> Oxy - Hero; Ivia - Nightshade.

Next

Return to Support

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests

Wednesday, 07. May 2025

Artwork and screen shots Copyright © 2001-2004 Mythic Entertainment, Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission of Mythic Entertainment. Mythic Entertainment, the Mythic Entertainment logo, "Dark Age of Camelot," "Shrouded Isles," "Foundations," "New Frontiers," "Trials of Atlantis," "Catacombs," "Darkness Rising," the Dark Age of Camelot and subsequent logos, and the stylized Celtic knot are trademarks of Mythic Entertainment, Inc.

Valid XHTML & CSS | Original Design by: LernVid.com | Modified by Uthgard Staff