Deletion

Has there been anything said about fixing dual-wielding being underpowered? Maybe it's just me but dual-wielding at the moment seems rather pointless, due to the offhand not being effected by abilities, unless using Momentum where it is probably slightly better (less overkill).

The whole game has changed as a result of this update, items that were useful before are no longer useful, and vice versa. It's ridiculous to write off an update because a single set of items has had their use minimized. I honestly get why you're crushed; I have quite a few non-tradeable items that are no longer useful and tradeable items that I've lost money on. But that's no reason to quit the game. If you don't enjoy the new combat system, then that's a reason to quit. If you're going to quit because an item has become obsolete, then you're playing the game for the wrong reasons.

To add; shouldn't the cost of now not having to buy combat runes outweigh the fact that you now have to buy fire runes if you really want to wear an anti-dragonfire shield with a wand?

Since it seems using armour of not the combat style you are using decreases your DPS in the EoC I would say Sagi top will still be a good bind for a range-only setup.

Cannonballs with Morytania 2 are apparently (according to a guy who did them to 99) 19k/xp hour and 200k gp/hr. Which is basically terrible. As loreal said the best method for pure smithing would be smelt gold bars (actually superheat since you aren't 99 magic)with goldsmith gauntlets then at 88 Addy plates. Another method, if you plan on maxing, is to mine concentrated gold, superheat, and drop (with the last two being able to be done losslessly). This method will be much easier after EoC is released.

I don't know if this has been asked already and Jagex have already explained; but why don't they just add the option on regular weapons to change then to off-hand and vice versa? So instead of going out and having to specifically create off-hand items, you can just just right-click a regular version and wield it in the off-hand (or wield-X in the case of thrown ammo)? I mean sure for items like whips which we are graphically limited to only having one in the on-hand it wouldn't work, but any other reasons why not?

I completely agree with that. But in the context: "Most of the people I have talked to about their quitting of the game and declaring Runescape's death have not really come up with strong reasons when pressed for details", not liking the update is a completely valid reason to quit. Declaring RuneScape's death is just being melodramatic.

To be fair; "I don't like it" is a legitimate reason to quit. Not liking EoC is generally due it straying quite far from how the game is now. It may not have a rational reason behind it, but it's definitely a valid reason to quit.

Why do you think I am nostalgic for restricted-trade? I don't long to go back to that time in RuneScape. I played RuneScape for a long time before restricted-trade, and I'm still playing now, with the present being my favourite time in the game. I'm just open to the possibility that restricted-trade could be overall beneficial to the game - I never said it definitely will be. It may have be worse for you, but that doesn't mean it will be worse for everyone. I honestly understand your points and issues, and have experienced them. I would prefer other options to stop RWT and botting, but if these other options fail I'm just undecided whether I would prefer to continue with free-trade or a modified version of restricted trade.

Both free-trade and restricted-trade hurt people, I was questioning which hurts the average players more. As Decabal said; Removal off free trade mitigated botting. Yes, it didn't stop it, but it definitely slowed it down. Do you really think the removal of free trade increased the prevalence of phishing and hijacking? Because I really doubt it. Even if it did now, with the increased security, hacking would be a small issue. As for the effect of RWT on me personally; it increases the number of bots, brings in a connection between real-life and in-game, decreases the integrity of the game, and has an effect on the price of items. If you're only talking about RWTers that gain their gp from gambling then exclude the first point. Yes, it will hurt those players that engage in PvM and PvP. But with changes to the GE, lootshare and bounty systems the effect can be minimized. Restricted-trade is preferable to a large number of players; mainly those in the low-to-mid level range. I'm not going to argue that restricted-trade is better for everyone, because it isn't. But you can't say with absolute certainty that it's worse for the average player.

If modifications were made to those systems (GE and Wilderness) they could become a lot more functional and less of a hindrance on a those that used those systems. Whether or not it is worth (for the general player - each system benefits a different type of player) reimplementing restricted-trade to reduce botting, RWTing and gambling is another story.

That sounds awesome. Thank you very much. But I still don't understand how to catch the two different kinds of fish at say the lake? Can I catch each separate fish at a different 'spot' in the lake? Like north is fish X and south is fish Y? Or do I catch a different fish if I use a different bait?

Hi guys, Sorry if this is a stupid question. But I've been trying fish flingers for the first time, and I can't figure out how to catch the different fish at the same spot. Am I supposed to move slightly, or does changing the baits change which fish you catch? I tried moving round but I always just end up catching the same fish. I feel like I'm missing something. Thanks.

Offensive prayers are basically useless in EoC, although everyone is hoping this will change. At the moment Bandos = Barrows.

To be honest, Runescape should be something you enjoy, not a job. If you're getting bored playing it, you should stop for a while and do something else.

And the other 100,000 people or so ahead of him.

I really can't decide if this is going to cause team dungeoneering to go to shit or not. On one hand there's going to be a whole lot less people wanting to dungeoneer in a team as solo xp rates will be close to those of 5:5, but on the other hand those that do want to dungeoneer in a team will generally be those who want maximum efficiency and generally (from my experiences anyway) make better team-mates.

This is anecdotal but in my experiences, and information from friends; F2P runecrafting is ~10-12k xp/hr making air runes (without gloves), and ~15k xp/hr making body tiaras. F2P Runespan is ~40k xp/hr (this value I'm not entirely sure about). ZMI runecrafting is ~60k xp/hr and P2P Runespan ~100k xp/hr.

It's all a balancing act, as you have previously said. I don't want to get into hypotheticals, but since I don't know the inner-workings of a gold-selling I can only hypothesise. You may be right, and 140B is only a drop in an ocean, but you could also argue that it would be in the websites best interest to not drop the price. A business would be trying to maximise profit. So if 140B was a large amount the company would have to balance: chance of getting banned (time to move the gold) and other gold companies dropping price, to maximise not only initial profit, but also future profit. The company may have decided bleeding off the gold was a better decision rather than trying to dump it. Although this is all just speculation. I'm curious, how many players do you think sell gold to gold-selling sites? Now this is all just speculation but 6B/week is equivalent to ~71 bots earning 500k/hr running 24/7. Even if the company has a ten thousand bots running 24/7, 10 players earning 6b/week is still ~7% of their gold supplies, which isn't an negligble amount. I guess what I'm saying is do you really think players are only contributing a non-negligible amount to gold sellers? I understand that 6B is an upper-limit, but I haven't taken into account banned bots and mules, and bot downtime.

Have you tried foreign language servers? I doubt it will work, if it isn't yet. But it's worth a shot.

Have you tried different worlds, and changing your graphics settings? I get that message a lot (as in unable to log into the world) trying to log into high-pop worlds on high graphics, but almost never with the graphics turned down and on low-pop (try foreign worlds) worlds.

The first sentence of my post was asking why you chose to put bonus experience on Construction, rather than Prayer or Herblore. Both of the latter two skills are more expensive (actually not entirely true right now), and more useful so they seem like the more attractive and logical choice. The only argument I can make in benefit of putting bonus experience on Construction is that it isn't nearly as afkable as the other two, but I feel the benefits of the other two outweigh this. As for my choice on which skills to put experience on: I was a reasonably high combat level before Slayer was released and even though I put experience on Slayer I still reached my combat goals (99 Attack and Strength, 85 Defence) a long time before I maxed Slayer (20m Attack xp, 40m Strength experience). Even starting from scratch generally Slayer is maxed after maxing combat. I swapped between Slayer and Summoning because I wanted to max them around the same time. Although in hindsight I wish I had maxed Summoning before Slayer as it increases profit and speeds up xp/hr of Slayer. I'm doing agility now because it is the next slowest skill I have (counting money making times for buyables).

I never disagreed with you. Not even remotely. All I was saying is that your examples are anecdotes by definition, and trying to justify an activity by using anecdotal evidence (whether it is true or otherwise) is flawed (You can debate this if you like, but it is widely recognised). Which is what Blyaunte's point was. I then went on to ask whether In these exceptional cases do you think the ends justify the means? In my opinion, maybe. On one hand it helps them personally (although it is debatable whether they could be doing something less harmful to others), on the other it contributes to the down-fall of the community and the game which millions enjoy world-wide.

Actually, I used four examples, and choose not to believe them if you like, but both are untrue and not exaggerated, literally, in ANY way. Perhaps if you had friends who made billions a week that you spoke to regularly, the idea wouldn't be so far-fetched. You don't, and I do, and I am not about to rat their names out, because some of them depend on this to survive. And of course RWT is victimless, unless you count the game as one, which I don't. The only victims are either a) the fools who buy gold, or b) the stupid parents who leave their credit cards lying around. Anyone who chooses being in poverty (in some cases) over breaking rules on a video game, is the biggest fool on the planet. Firstly; You don't know anything about me, so please refrain from assuming you do. Secondly; My post was pointing out the flaws in your post that Bly pointed out. Which you didn't address and got defensive about. Thirdly; The game and community are they main victims of RWT. It's crazy to exclude them, even if you don't care about this game any more.

Not taking sides, and I highly doubt Logdotzip is lying, but Bly is right. Her sarcastic post basically summed up the flaws in your post. Firstly you used anecdotal evidence to try and justify an activity as a whole, and secondly this anecdotal evidence was not witnessed first-hand. An anecdote by definition is a short and amusing or interesting account based as a real incident. So by definition what you posted was an anecdote. I do not doubt what you are saying is what you believe to be the truth, but using two quite possibly untrue examples to justify an activity as a whole is ridiculous. Lastly, as others have mentioned, do you really believe that because the end result is desirable, the means of getting there is justified? Also, do you really believe RWT is victimless?