compfreak847

But what fun would that be? It's your suggestion, you fix the problems I point out. You should be honored, I only respond to the suggestion I'm interested in, and it's generally ones I don't think are possible :lol: That being said, if you get totally stuck, I can try and help out. Think of a solution, though... (Hint: you need a solution that distinguishes between clans and solo players)

Then you haven't tried it long enough. 100 hits is next to nothing, you need at least 10,000 to see any sort of a pattern.

Good, then you agree with me.

Track players in the room? What do you mean? So if someone else is in my DKS room I don't get the benefit of my solo kills? What if someone has lowered bandos before I kill them, as happens very frequently with soloing?

Not true. I've been proven wrong three times. You lose that argument :lol:

So who sets these arbitrary time limits? I've killed bandos in 7 hits before soloing, yet taken almost a minute to kill him in a team due to extremely bad hits. What about single way combat monsters, where whoever can click fastest to the monster gets it? How many people would be whining about Jagex unfairly treating people with slower interent?

Depends what punishments are in question. To a child, it's generally a matter of 'cigarettes will kill you eventually'. Some children have advanced to the point where the huge long term consequences outweigh the small short term gain, although that is usually offset by short term fear of parental\lawful punishment - but many have not, as evidenced by the high rates of smoking in high schoolers and the average age of the 'first try' nearing 13.

The prices of all boss items come down thanks to teams on your worlds, soloers who can only get a spot on non-theving worlds get gypped as the prices of their items fall.

Nope, they are not the same. A response can appear rational without the full logic behind the decision revealed. Take the example of two types of logic: 'smoke this and your parents will punish you' or 'smoke this and years from now you'll suffer from various illnesses related to this habit'. One type indicates maturity and long term planning ahead; another indicates simple, direct punishment of "touch this wire and you get hurt", something even primitive animals can manage.

No, they can't. We, the players, set the prices on items based on difficulty to obtain and usefulness. The only way they could change that is by implementing a change like a store that sells them for 3 gp each. Only after hundreds of hours of work, not 3 seconds spent picking up an item off the ground. Unfortunately for you, Jagex and the majority of players, including me, think otherwise. They make the game, they call the shots.

And why should we? I know I'm not lying, he's not going to suddenly convince me I was. It's an opinionated debate, but we're arguing about each other opinions, which is why I find it stuipd and pointless. But it's an argument, and I find it interesting, so I'll keep it up as long as he wants.

Then the price of all those other things become restricted. Your punishing the soloer who camps DKS, KBD and KQ, and the person with a slow internet connection for any single combat spot. Why make the game less skilled and more dumbed down, "just set up a cannon at DKS and earn monye" oriented? Most high levels I know, including me, want to move the opposite direction :-#

No, they couldn't; players would junk trade or use other methods to bypass the trade limit. Players establish the value of the item, and Jagex can't wave a magic wand to make that go away. Rares are worth a lot, and represent an unfair advantage to those who spent a few seconds picking them up versus those who must work to earn them. How so? Everything you have now besides rares can be earned back by a new player. High skills? They can train them just as easily as you. Made a lot of money from GWD\DKS\Shark Fishing\Camping somewhere? They can do that just as well as you. But what they can't do is go back and pick up a hat from the ground to instantly become unbelievably rich.

I don't have a clue what your talking about, and I don't think you do either. That post was a direct and complete response to yours. Not sure about 1. I would say they probably can't in most circumstances, but I haven't given it enough thought As for 2, it depends on the circumstances. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Whether or not they do so is determined in part by their brains physical maturity. He is accusing me of lying and meaning something other then what I now say in a previous post. I'm saying I am and was telling the truth, and that he misinterpreted my response when he read it without seeing the underlying discussion. This isn't a 'both of us are right' situation; it's a direct argument about who is right. We already did that, and we are in complete agreement. Zero refuses to believe, however, that I told to truth about what I meant, and I respond each time he posts that - that's the argument you've been seeing for the past 5 pages.

Wait, so only ONE person can be in the DKS room at one time, in the Corporal Beast room at one time, in the Tormented Demon room at one time, in the green dragon room at one time, in the rock crab room at one time? Also, where are those 'borders' going to be drawn? Am I not allowed to train at Armored Zombies because someone else is occupying the room 3 hallways down? Can I go kill metal dragons in Brimhaven if someone else is killing black demons at the same time?

Is that my argument? No, I don't think it is. Perhaps I could quote it again? Himm, what part of that says that I'm always right? Oh, and for the record, at age 32, I'm at least halfway mature. So far as I know, my brain shows no abnormalities, and an IQ of 142 seems to indicate it has developed normally. Oh, so your more qualified to tell me what he meant without even reading the posts? Like I said, he had not distinctly separated the two arguments, and in the manner in which we were discussing them they both crossed over.

Nope. I think Thieveing worlds are going to be completely overrun by teams, and a much higher drop rate coming in from half a dozen worlds 24\7 by the top teams and players as fast as possible would have a significant effect on prices.

Please point out the line where it is 'required'. Now, as I was saying, it's helpful for farcasting.

No, it's not. You obviously missed the whole background to the post, and I suggest reading them. You have two choices: #1 Assume me to be correct, and read past posts to verify #2 Assume I am incapable of comprehending basic english Now, feel free to look up a few debates from other threads such as my disagreement with ydraisl, and I think you'll find that I seem to be capable of understanding and responding to basic queries. It's rather unlikely I would have lived to middle age without possessing this extraordinary skill.

Older players certainly aren't guaranteed to be rich by now, and your suggesting that NOW items become tradeable - an unquestionable advantage; just because I was around a few years ago, I picked up a couple items and was 1 billion richer. Talk about an advantage, I can't even think of any bigger then that. Look, they posted it directly on the main page. Why are you trying to argue with indisputable facts?

Nope. Like I said, he had not distinctly separated the two arguments, and in the manor in which we were discussing them they both crossed over, as Jac pointed out for you. I'm not sure how many times I have to repeat this over and over to you, but I guess you can keep it going.

No worries, I debate for the fun of it too, as evidenced by this thread :lol: Just saying, there's very few 'balanced' players that would need to train slayer higher then 70-80, so it doesn't really make a good argument :P

Ok, how about this. They don't want older players to become rich simply because they picked up an item that was meant to be in fun years ago. Very simple and obvious, specifically stated years ago by Jagex, and none of your made up reasons apply.

Nope, your quite welcome to disagree with me and\or call me a liar. And I'm just as welcome to prove you wrong. I've already mentioned why, and your welcome to read previous posts. Let's see, I've said that I agreed with 2 well over 20 times now. I'd really advise reading posts before responding, you would be amazed to find all of your questions already answered.

I'm not talking about our or my comments, I'm talking about the discussion I was having with him before you jumped in, took one quote out of context, and used that as the entire point of your argument. I suggest you read the whole story before jumping in and trying to make someone out to be a liar. Maturity and intelligence aren't dependent on one another; just because the kid was a genius doesn't mean he was mature. It's mostly an opinionated argument, and I don't have a strong opinion on it so I'm not that interested, but it's an unusual discussion :lol: