Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Changes to Taste ID, but its still useless.

8 views
Skip to first unread message

The Searcher

unread,
Nov 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM11/3/99
to
Check out the new changes to the IN TESTING.

Love the runebook, but why dont they just lose Taste ID?

Green17

unread,
Nov 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM11/4/99
to
The Searcher <kim.s...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:7vqp1p$9ha$1...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net...

> Check out the new changes to the IN TESTING.
>
> Love the runebook, but why dont they just lose Taste ID?

No kidding!

Wes

unread,
Nov 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM11/4/99
to
>> Check out the new changes to the IN TESTING.
>>
>> Love the runebook, but why dont they just lose Taste ID?
>
>No kidding!

For everyone's information Taste ID is the ONLY reason why we
don't have stackable potions. If potions were automatically ID'd
then there would be no reason for the Taste ID skill and we would
be able to stack potions that were the same type and strength.

I WISH SunSword would realize that Taste ID is worthless and
give us what we really want - STACKABLE POTIONS (not kegs).

Maybe a petition is in order?


.../Baja

jx...@po.cwru.edu

unread,
Nov 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM11/4/99
to
Wes wrote:
>
> >> Check out the new changes to the IN TESTING.
> >>
> >> Love the runebook, but why dont they just lose Taste ID?
> >
> >No kidding!
>
> For everyone's information Taste ID is the ONLY reason why we
> don't have stackable potions. If potions were automatically ID'd

For your information, potions are already "automatically ID'd". The
reason they're not stackable is because potions of a given type are
considered the same, with the strength being a variable similar to a
weapon's state of repair. As weapons can't be stacked because of such
variables, potions are the same.

Bad design, IMO. But taste ID has no effect on potion stacking.

-Smedley

Wes

unread,
Nov 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM11/4/99
to
>For your information, potions are already "automatically ID'd". The
>reason they're not stackable is because potions of a given type are
>considered the same, with the strength being a variable similar to a
>weapon's state of repair. As weapons can't be stacked because of such
>variables, potions are the same.
>
>Bad design, IMO. But taste ID has no effect on potion stacking.
>
>-Smedley

WTF are you talking about??

When I loot a lesser heal potion off your dead body it only says
"a yellow potion". It does not automatically say "a lesser heal".
The biggest reason Taste ID is in the game is so that we know
what potions are what kind. The only way a potion is automatically
ID'd is when YOU make the potion yourself. Know one else will
know what it is unless they ID it.

Also, FYI, potions do not have the same kind of variables as a
weapon. That being a very poor analogy, you could easily stack
lesser heals with other lesser heals and greater heals with greater
heals. All you would need to do is click once and the stack would
say "13 greater heal potions". The fact is Taste ID should get the
boot.


.../Baja

jx...@po.cwru.edu

unread,
Nov 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM11/4/99
to
Wes wrote:
>
> WTF are you talking about??
>
> When I loot a lesser heal potion off your dead body it only says
> "a yellow potion". It does not automatically say "a lesser heal".

Have you ever used taste ID? "This tastes like a healing potion". Then
single-click on that potion.... well guess what, it's still "a yellow
potion". Oops. Now where's that "lesser heal" again? To quote you,


"WTF are you talking about??"

> The biggest reason Taste ID is in the game is so that we know


> what potions are what kind. The only way a potion is automatically
> ID'd is when YOU make the potion yourself. Know one else will
> know what it is unless they ID it.

False. Any and all potions are automatically ID'd for *everybody*. Buy
a potion from a player alchemist or his/her vendor. Or loot one off
another player. Guess what, that player made heal potion is already
ID'd, "a greater heal potion". As far as monster loot goes, those
potions are actually a different "strength" then the corresponding
"lesser" potion. Although a yellow potion may heal the same range as a
lesser heal, there are also such situations as "a blue potion", which
raises dexterity by 15, whereas the player made equivalents raise dex by
10 or 20, never 15.



> Also, FYI, potions do not have the same kind of variables as a
> weapon.

False again. For items to stack, there must be no variables between
those items. The strength of a potion was apparently programmed in as a
variable. As the game code views all katana's as of one "type", the
reason they don't stack is because of the existence of variables, such
as different states of repair, different quality, etc. To verify that
potion strength is a variable of a "type", rather than a "type" all on
its own, I'll just point you to the fact that UO Assist, when counting
resources, counts all potions of a color as the same, no matter the
strength.

That being a very poor analogy, you could easily stack
> lesser heals with other lesser heals and greater heals with greater
> heals.

False again. From a programming viewpoint, to make these potions stack,
OSI would have to retroactively re-class every individual potion in the
game. That is, where all heal potions currently have the same class in
code, they would have to create four new classes, one for each strength
of heal (yellow, lesser, normal, greater), and then go through the game
data and switch each and every heal potion to it's corresponding class.
Not quite so easy. Of course, I doubt you've any programming
experience, so you wouldn't know.

All you would need to do is click once and the stack would
> say "13 greater heal potions". The fact is Taste ID should get the
> boot.

There's no question as to the worthlessness of Taste ID. However, the
point which you seem to have missed is that, I'll repeat, "taste ID has
no effect on potion stacking". The only reason why potions don't stack
is a bad design decision.

-Smedley

Eric A. Hall

unread,
Nov 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM11/4/99
to

> Love the runebook, but why dont they just lose Taste ID?

Since the Taste ID skill can be locked, anybody with a decent amount of
int should be able to Taste ID anything in the game without raising the
skill. Just use the stat-bonus skill points that you already have.

I wish they would do the "exceptional" patch in the same way. You should
have to use the Item ID skill to tell if it was made poorly or
exceptionally. With the skill locks, it doesn't really matter, but will
make players use more skills.

Eric A. Hall

unread,
Nov 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM11/5/99
to

> Since the Taste ID skill can be locked, anybody with a decent amount
> of int should be able to Taste ID anything in the game without
> raising the skill. Just use the stat-bonus skill points that you
> already have.

DOH!

Taste ID has no stat-bonus points, so that is wrong... The same is true
of Item ID. They certainly SHOULD have INT-bonus points, but they don't,
so the suggestion to just use the freebies is wrong.

Richard Cortese

unread,
Nov 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM11/5/99
to
Eric A. Hall <eh...@ehsco.com> wrote in message
news:382326AC...@ehsco.com...
Have you tested this since the last *unannounced* rounds of stat gain
patches?

Taste ID is a classic from commercial introduction of UO for building ~100
100 25 tank mages.

The best thing about using taste ID was: If you used spirit speak to gain
int, eventually some idiot ghost would oOOOOo frantically and get you to use
it again, and it wouldn't atrophy. If you used arms lore to gain strenght
you may actually check the condition of that bow of vanquishing you are
looking to buy, and it wouldn't atrophy.

But you knew there was no way in f'ing hell you were ever going to use taste
ID again in the game, so it would atrophy nicely.

0 new messages