Solidus_77

well done :

And that problem will be fixed

Merchants don't sell at minimum price, they buy at minimum price. The price is determined by supply and demand, not merchants, therefore the only way it will constantly drop is if the supply constantly increases or the demand constantly lowers.

How does it bother you? Are you jealous by hearing the people shout out their superior levels?

Just figure it out then, all it takes is some common sense. This thread has been out for just a few weeks, do you really think the deadline for the read is 8 months ago, as in, WAY before this thread was created? :roll: Yet you still felt the need to ask him? If you are asking him and him only a question, then you should use PM next time, not a public response Or written it the European way.

Um, they said themselves that they are trying to control it. "Stabilize" is just one form of control. I disagree, here's the quote you're referring to I believe: Look a bit at the context. All they are saying is that they used these limits so and "stabilize the economy" so that nobody can manipulate prices. That's entirely different from trying to take over the entire economy. Actually, the fact that they still let people trade with complete liberty is proof enough that they are not seeking to control the economy; they just want to prevent a possible abuse of the GE. Well, go ahead and tell us the proof behind that "humble opinion" of yours. I'm eager to hear it. The staking limit was to stop real-world trading, not control the economy #-o . Way to miss the point

Just figure it out then, all it takes is some common sense. This thread has been out for just a few weeks, do you really think the deadline for the read is 8 months ago, as in, WAY before this thread was created? :roll:

100% agreed. :lol: No seriously, the last thing we need is to lower almost every single item requirement in a skill, and the last thing we need is something smithable about rune. Pieces of dragon armor are all obtained via monster hunting. Smithing isn't a great a skill for cash and neither is mining (85 mining is 200k gp per hour, that's not so great for such a hard achievement). The sooner you admit this fact, the easier it will be. Besides, there are plenty of other moneymaking skills out there, use those to get cash to spend on smithing. You will not only get more cash but you will also get high smithing a lot faster. Talk about a win-win situation.

Just cut the crap and answer the question: Why did you come and announce your criticism if this thread contained none of the qualities you mentioned? Do you really think that we care about your irrelevant opinions? :roll:

The idea that they are trying to control the economy has yet to be proven :roll:

And explain which prices went "way way down"? the GE doesn't have that much influence, and most of the dropping in price was due to lots of people stock-piling stuff to sell at GE.

^ Now you've got the hawtest skillcape neo, construction ftw 8-) Also something i forgot to mention that helps: Your first skillcape is always the hardest because it's new and unfamiliar territory. So, now that you've passed that challenge, don't be afraid to surpass yourself :

By definition we all have an unlimited supply of cash, but the rate at which we get the cash is a huge variable. If a person has an income of 100k per hour, they will spend 850 hours just getting the cash. and then another 50 or so hours getting the levels. Once you get the ball rolling it's "relatively" easy, however if it takes 850 hours just to get the ball rolling, then that's a hell of a hard skill. Even with 1 mill per hour, the best income a skiller can make, it still takes 85 hours to get the cash for 99 construction. That time is shorter but I can guarantee that it certainly isn't worth neglecting. I understand that the time taken to get the levels (btw you should go with oak larder/doors and not flatpacks, it's a lot faster) is quite short, and so if the person has the skill banked, it's easy. Problem is, getting the skill banked is the hard part. As a matter of fact, apparently it was possible to get 100m in a matter of minutes at the duel arena by staking so now that the tournament update has happened, that argument doesn't work anymore. That being said, I do want to thanks for acknowledging the difficulty of the construction skillcape.

Not bad, you're part of the "skillcape people now", so enjoy. Oh and whatever you do please don't go for 99 cooking now. 99 fletch/cook is really an infamous and overused duo.

I feel like just getting a couple or mills together with some friends, going to world 2 and see just how many people can fit into the party room :D . TET event anyone?

You know what's interesting about this guy's arguments? the first post is quotes me defending the HUNTER skillcape, and somehow it proves that I use "circular reasoning" to "defend my construction skillcape". So apparently, by defending the hunter skillcape, I am "defending my precious construction skillcape"? Wow, that totally makes sense. Also, this is a DEBATE CLUB. So, may I ask, why are you so incompetent at producing any form of evidence? First of all, get rid of the "i'm superior so I'm excused from providing evidence" crap, you're completely wrong, in fact you haven't even bothered to read the whole debate. The fact that the only thing you can come up with is "poopyhead" tells me a lot about your reading comprehension abilities :roll: . When did I ever say that "my construction cape rocks"? Even if I said something remotely close to that, it was backed up by tons of evidence. Something that you have nothing of. I have been constantly arguing back and forth defending my view points. If you had read or understood even one of my posts, you would have realized that my main argument is that time taken to get the supplies for buyable skills is included in the time taken to get the skill to 99. There are two other complementary points that I use to support my argument. One talks about AFK-potential of skills and how this can determine the better skill, the other talks about the return on investment in skills, which is yet another determinant. It's all there, yet you claim that my only argument is that my skillcape "rocks". :roll: Riiiiight. Incorrect, I proved them wrong and supported my proof with evidence. That's right, evidence, the service that you seem to be unable to provide. If you're blaming me for using the same logic applied for a different skill, then prove me wrong. I used determinants of 99 skills to support my arguments in favor of 99 construction. Since 99 hunter is also a 99 skill, then therefore the arguments are perfectly valid and may be used to do the exact same comparison. PS: Thanks rebdragon, you've been very helpful in getting rid of this ignorant

:lol: No, sorry, not even close. On eBay buyers and sellers are free to agree upon prices that they like. No Politburo stands around telling them what the "official price" is. On eBay you put items up and they sell. You offer to buy items and you get them. And for that reason, eBay works... And the Grand Excrement doesn't. Who cares if great exchange doesn't work for some goods? Just sell the damn things on the forum and stop acting like jagex is forcing you to choose a price. They aren't and I'm starting to get sick of seeing this attitude of yours in GE related threads.

Varrock armor 1 Reward for doing all varrock easy achievements in achievement diary

What we have here is a catch 22. You're asking me if I want to start a debate. But how do I express myself fully? If I answer yes, then I will have admitted to starting a debate. Since this is not my original intention then therefore I must conclude that I cannot answer yes. If I answer no, then by disagreeing with you I will have effectively started an argument, and I can be safe to assume that you will eagerly take part, by trying to prove that I did in fact want to start a debate and therefore we would have caused a debate anyways. Why would you want to start a debate about proving whether or not I started to debate? In the end, clearly if I answer no, I will not be able to communicate my message that I do not want to start a debate. Perhaps you mistook my logical conclusion for an invitation to a debate and frankly I don't really mind. What is, however, interesting is if you look back at the original post to get a bit of insight. Now the first thing that strikes me when I read this is the context. I was showing my acceptance of the "1k+ views" in this topic and all of a sudden? Someone randomly comes in and throws their opinion in. It seemed pretty odd that you would just toss an opinion in for no apparent reason so I ask you: why did you spent 1 minute reply to my post (which didn't concern you) with something unrelated? It's not like we were having a debate, so why the sudden opinion thrown in? The second thing I find strange is the tone of voice. It's basically saying: "In my opinion, I believe [such and such] and I'm usually right. That's just perfect for someone to say "erm, sorry but your wrong" and thus start a debate, except that according to you, you were not trying to start a debate. The "in my opinion" stresses the fact that this is an opinion, which makes it very much prone to debating. Except that, according to you, you were not trying to start a debate, so quite honestly I don't see why post with such a tone of voice. The "I'm usually right" part is used as a vague form of justification. Why is it even included? It makes it sound like you're trying to start an argument except that, according to you, you were not trying to start a debate. Now back to the catch 22. If I was to reply, we could end up not only having a debate over whether or not I wanted to start a debate, but also a debate over whether or not your reply was an attempt to start a debate. That leaves only one solution left: We both shut up and let this thread get back on topic. That's exactly why I pointed out that this thread was an exception to your rule. I wasn't trying to start a fight at all, in fact it seems that I was helping you improve your research by showing a specific scenario where your theory doesn't fit. You should be thanking me. Although I do sympathize with you, because I make the same kinds of statements:. You know, just by looking at a person's username, I can generally tell the maturity of the person, and I'm also even more usually right :

I am sick to death of people who preach about the past, about how everything was better before and everyone lived in this sort of paradise land. It's all just an exaggerated version of the past that excludes all the problems at the time.

Yes there are, and if the price is not worth it for smithers, then smithers might stop producing. However if there are no more smithers to produce stuff like you said, then supply falls and therefore price will increase so no, you're wrong.

Incorrect, it's not that the person buying the red spider eggs is lazy, it's that he's better off doing something else. Why would I spend an hour gathering 1k random stuff for a value of 100k if my income is anywhere above 100k per hour? Comparative advantage would state that you're better off doing what you're best ad doing and then trading for anything else. So it's not "laziness", it's "efficiency".

How about we try and get more than 1 person per category? :wink:

Wow! That's quite impressive. Several skills going from "below average" to "absolutely aweome. That alone is quite awesome, but then you did all of these in just one year? that's even greater =D> <3 the construction and runecrafting. Great skills and great achievements (I know you did 91 rc via the abyss :wink: ) Fantastic goals! About runecrafting, I did a big rcing spree myself from 94 to 99. Hope you can accomplish the same. 99 prayer/range/mage are all great levels to have both in terms of impressiveness and mostly in terms of use. Great goals and I hope to see these accomplishments soon : Also, you know how summoning is coming this year? Apparently it's gonna be based on runes (life runes for sure, and probably other). Any guesses as to what that might do to the price of nats? \

You know what's the difference between economists and moralists? Moralists view the world the way they wish it was, while economists view the world the way it really is. It's not that people ignore things that "really matter", it's actually that people don't believe those things really matter. Basically, value is subjective, and a lot of people in this world don't believe that fresh air and water are very valuable things and the mere fact that you disagree is simply your opinion. That's life :-w