1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice

[Feedback] Should "Immunity" be done away with?? (Poll)

Discussion in 'UO Test Center' started by Bombastic Fail, Mar 27, 2010.

?

Should "Immunity" be done away with??

  1. YES!! Please get rid of immunity! (Like On Prodo Shards Now)

    14 vote(s)
    66.7%
  2. NO!! Please keep the immunities in!! (Like On TC)

    7 vote(s)
    33.3%
  3. Everything should have "IMMUNITY". All spells/specials/items (Specify)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. All of the new changes should be reverted.

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. Undecided! (Post a comment/reason)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Bombastic Fail

    Bombastic Fail Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,514
    Likes Received:
    112
    Just as the title states. Please keep the ARGUMENTS and FLAMES minimal.

    Post you comment on WHY or WHY NOT!!


    Mine is simple. No other "skills" or "classes" have Immunities. Why should mystics? All or nothing I think.


    Not to mention; the spells they want to have "IMMUNITES" are already 'IMMUNED' when you have Resisting Spells. Simple Logic.

    :gee:
     
  2. AzSel

    AzSel Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    870
    Likes Received:
    4
    Re: Should "Immunity" be done away with??

    I agree, the immunity system should be removed or be implemented into magic resist skill somehow. Magic resist skill needs further use, not less use.
     
  3. Storm

    Storm UO Forum Moderator
    Moderator Professional Premium Wiki Moderator Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,469
    Likes Received:
    361
    Re: Should "Immunity" be done away with??

    I am going to wait to vote on the poll till I hear more arguments and have time to test more but so far i would say do away with it !
     
  4. WarUltima

    WarUltima Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Only way immunity is gonna work if the action that cause the immunuty is "useful" enough and possibly no counter or at very least hard to counter.

    Sleep/Mass Sleep, owned by tbox instantly. with 26 sec immunity? It should be, if its broken before the full duration or when it's broken by a SELF-INFLECTED (like a tbox) damage there will not be an immunuty timer.

    Purge... it got nerfed so bad I wont even mention it. 8 second to take a night sight potion off... yet it doesnt take them 8 second to rechug it. You can take 1 buff off once every 8 second... I can chug a GAgility + GStr pot in 2 seconds no reuse timer.

    BAD IDEA...
     
  5. Stupid Miner

    Stupid Miner Guest

    ... Every attack should be able to be defended against in some way or another, and ideally there should be more than one way to defend against a certain attack.

    Immunity is fine for minor things. Paralyze Immunity works since its just one of 64 spells (granted not all 64 are useful, but still). Sleep Immunity is worse since Mystics don't have nearly as many useful spells as mages.

    Immunity to major things would be ridiculous though. Such as "Immunity to weapons" or "Immunity to spells" or "Immunity to pets."

    So it all depends on how significant an investment the attacker has to put into the attack.
     
  6. Cloak&Dagger

    Cloak&Dagger Guest

    I am not voting right yet. But I somewhat agree with the OP.

    Basically make everything have immmunities, but not inate immunities but rather one skill should be able to justify another skill.

    If you have 120 resist, then 26 second immunity is o.k., add it to all the other spells that resist works against and I am happy. Thus if you get cursed and remove that curse with another skill (chiv, mystic) it can have an immunity timer, or force it to be a combination of using a skill to remove it and having the adjacent "shielding" skill (in all cases, magic resist.....unless someone can think of another skill which nullifies the effects of other skills).

    The way immunity is now just does not work, first only on 3 spells? Out of how many actually spells? And out of how many Offensive spells? I don't think those spells are/were so powerful to warrant this action, also sleep is nearly identical to Para and yet they do not share this immunity? Not sure how that works out in anyone mind.

    I know my description is not the best, and in all likely hood not the best idea for the implementation of Immunities, I am simply putting it out there that I do not mind having them but under the right checks and balances, you should not get an immunity when you can the effect back on before the opposing party even casts another spell, or performs another action.
     
  7. Cetric

    Cetric Grand Inquisitor
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Messages:
    4,110
    Likes Received:
    906
    Definitly believe, like in the other post, that disarm should have something like this, but i do not agree with the mystic spells having it really. get resisting spells, simple.
     
  8. Gelf

    Gelf Guest

    until they remove the -35 resist spells penalty from protection, i'm all for immunity's
     
  9. Airhaun

    Airhaun Seasoned Veteran
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    22
    I voted to remove the timers and here is why:

    The effectiveness of a spell should be governed by the target's Resist Spells skill. Those running with zero Resisting Spells can quickly break the effects of sleep with the use of a trapped box (as has been pointed out a plethora of times already), thus cementing a sleep free period for 26 seconds. I offer my opinion unbiased as I PvP with both 120 Resist Spells and 0 Resist Spells templates so with a balanced play style I believe I have a certain amount of credibility towards this argument. There needs to be a reason to continue putting Resisting Spells on a PvP template…

    And here is why:

    For a while now entire templates have been built around the use of a speed enhancing program. This means Mages, Archers, Dexers trade Resisting Spells for Ninjitsu. The methodology here is the over-reliance on speed; I’m sure most of you have seen this and are familiar with it. If someone running this template gets dismounted, they pop into Llama, Ostard, or Wolf form and speed away… you can’t catch them unless you also are running a speed enhancing program as well. One of the ways those of us who choose to play by the rules & NOT to run speed enhancing programs can combat this is to sleep them. If the timer remains it will be one less tool (which UO provides us with) that we have to combat these players.

    Implementing a timer will effectively make the spell worthless and unused and all the time the developer's spent will have been a waste. If a timer must be used... let it be on the ability to break the sleep with damage; effectively nuetralizing the trapped box escape.
     
  10. AzSel

    AzSel Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    870
    Likes Received:
    4
    Well its fine as long as its got something to do with Magic Resist.