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

Unannounced changes to Chivalry?

Discussion in 'UHall' started by GalenKnighthawke, Apr 24, 2010.

  1. GalenKnighthawke

    GalenKnighthawke Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    6,641
    Likes Received:
    1,163
    Not too long ago, I went from 100 Chiv to 90.

    I noticed no changes in my ability to cast Enemy of One.

    Since the recent batch of Patches and Publishes, however, I have noticed that I fail at least 1 out of 3 times.

    Were there unannounced changes?

    I am not complaining per se. Just curious.

    It could be that my chance to cast went down from 100% as soon as I lowered the skill, and that by mere coincidence I didn't fail often, or at all, until recently.

    If a change was made, though, I'd like to know. It wouldn't necessarily be an inappropriate change either, because Enemy of One is a major reason people still use Chivalary, and making it fail more often at lower levels would be an incentive to have it at higher levels.

    If that was your intent, though, I'd recommend raising the minimum skill to cast.

    -Galen's player
     
  2. WarUltima

    WarUltima Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some personal experience...
    The difference between 100% and 90% in UO seems to be HUGE.

    1. Try running a mage with 98 lrc you will get the no reg message quite often and putting 2 more lrc making it 100% you will never ever see that msg ever again.

    2. I run 60 Chiv on one of my pvm char, I cast EoO successfully 3 times in a row with 60 and I also one time had to recast it 32 times to get one going. Also 65 chiv gives you 100% chance to sacred journey and 60 shouldnt be that far off yet I fizzle on SJ at least 50% of the time and sometimes I have to recast it 4 to 5 times to get a recall off.

    3. 106 magery is the magic number to cast 7th circle 100% of the time, and try run 105, you will feel like you fizzle on FS more than you should.

    I dont know what to say other than blaming the whole thing on RNG. And human brain tend to register/memorize the UNUSUAL events even tho I could almost sware that 98% LRC will cause no reg to cast msg once every 10 casts or so instead of the supposedly 1 in 50.

    You just got unlucky most likely.
     
  3. Kellgory

    Kellgory Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    1,639
    Likes Received:
    1
    In theory you might have a 10% failure rate, but in UO you will fail 90% of the time when you absolutly need it to go off.
     
  4. Cloak&Dagger

    Cloak&Dagger Guest

    The chance to cast 100% of the time for EoO is 95, so at 90 I would assume you have just run into a rng situation where when you lowered it from 100 to 90 you got lucky to not fail until now? Unless I read your post wrong, but either way you need 95 to cast 100% of the time (assume you knew that) so at 90 you would of course fail.
     
  5. Gelf

    Gelf Guest

    i remember testing fail rate on 99% lrc a few years ago, did in groups of 1000 casts(4 times). odd results, had a avg 5% fail rate in town, and almost 10% in dungeons
     
  6. Viper09

    Viper09 Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    6,680
    Likes Received:
    824
    The most improbable occurrences are quite common in UO. In some cases more common than the probable occurrences.
     
  7. QFT! I played around with LRC as well. If you don't have 100%, even if you have 99%, the fail rate is far, far, from 1% or 2% with 98.

    *shrugs*
     
  8. BeefSupreme

    BeefSupreme Guest

    I've noticed in the last few months, that SJ fails a WHOLE lot more @ 60 skill.
     
  9. Garm The Green

    Garm The Green Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    0
    Surely the lrc thing is because it checks on each reg?

    say you need garlic, bloodmoss and spider web?

    Chance to cast = 0.98 x 0.98 x 0.98
    chance is = 0.94

    At 98 LRC you should fail 6% of the time, or 1 every 16 spells or so.
     
  10. Zalan

    Zalan Babbling Loonie
    Governor Stratics Veteran Alumni Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,919
    Likes Received:
    346
    Could be that rng doesen`t like you :p
     
  11. Sevin0oo0

    Sevin0oo0 Guest

    why can't they just assign a fixed value, and do away with RNG?
     
  12. gjohnson5

    gjohnson5 Guest


    I'm assuming RNG = Random Number Generator.
    This is an excuse more then anything

    If the number you need to roll for success is a 20 and the RNG is designed to pull numbers from 1-19 , it matters not what the RNG does.

    A simple look at any C++ manual will show that pseudo rangom number generator will generate a range of numbers from 0 to RAND_MAX or it will generate a number in between a specified range of values. The issue is what do you need to roll for success and what do you need to roll for failure. This depends on the formula that the number is being run through and the range of values the RNG is designed to pull from....
     
  13. Fink

    Fink Guest

    It checks once per cast. If it succeeds, you need zero reagents. If it fails, you need all applicable reagents. You don't ever burn any reagents at all if you succeed.
     
  14. Violence

    Violence Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    0
    In a hand-full of occassions while I was in StatLoss from Factions, I have been hitting more often than when I have my normal skill. On the other hand I've had casters with shields block my hits more than 4 times in a row.

    The RNG is just too.. Random?! And it does seem to be against you at the worst moments possible! ;D

    I don't know if it would be better if there were thresholds, where depending on skill levels there would be absolutely no chance to, say, miss 4-5 hits in a row or fizzle a spell more than 3 times in a row. Okay, maybe the spell fizzling is a bad example since there's a "magic number" as mentioned.. But you see my point.. rolleyes:
     
  15. WarUltima

    WarUltima Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    It could work like he described, if one or more checks didnt pass it's deemed no cast, and will not consume any reg.

    Like-wise if all checks passed, LRC takes effect and substitute for all the needed regs.
     
  16. Garm The Green

    Garm The Green Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanksyou! :eek:)

    though i don't wanna start an arguement with fink. Fink, you're far tooo lovely for that :p