Yoko Kurama

Unless PoP armours are given a set boost/effect, they very well may not be better than Nex, which would be a real scam.

I'm willing to settle for their current policy where apparently the best armours in the game are reserved solely for the wealthiest players in the game, provided that they give us a somewhat decent alternative(such as barrows) to everyone else. If they keep barrows relatively useful, I will accept it quietly.

Just to follow-up some more on the Og Blog: WTF were they thinking? They insist that people aren't investing in higher-level armour, well, that's because they are insanely expensive and a great deal of us have better things to be doing, and various real-life obligations that prevent us from spending hundreds of hours for items. How does Jagex repeatedly(this is second Og Blog attempt to hike up the price of Nex) trying to cause instability in the Nex market, making them even more ridiculously expensive, help the situation? It doesn't. To add further insult to injury, they're now buffing up what are basically outdated bosses anyways so that we can't even fight them unless we get these armours? Ridiculous. Do they ever think any of this through? At the very least, I hope Barrows is still useful, and at least at equal to or higher defensive capabilities than Gwars armours.

To all those people that claim that this is really Jagex looking out for the wellbeing of their players by making sure they don't play excessively, I say: bullshit. If they were really interested in trying to ameliorate the worst excesses of addictive games like RS, then they'd do a lot more than just instituting some silly once per 6-hours automatic forced log-out that anyone can bypass by simply logging back in. The only thing the 6-hour log-out does is pose as an infinitesimally small annoyance to people who play excessively; I am not opposed to this, but let's not pretend that this is some sort of earnest effort on Jagex's part.

Why would you do that? As far as I'm aware the tradeable version degrades to nothingness after 10(or however many hours it is) and that's it. Whereas the Superior version can be repaired and has marginally better stats.

Yup. They should ban Woox, and all of those other guys. Assuming Woox was one of the abusers and Jagex is refusing to ban Woox, and if this is all true, then by refusing to ban these people Jagex has exposed themselves, as well as the rules to be nothing more than a sham. Edit: Just found a thread discussing this on RSOF: 15-16-530-64180943

I don't really have any suggestions of my own, I simply felt the need to reaffirm what Gingy said: I feel the same way as well, there are certain things that must be changed, regardless of how certain segments of the community feel. On Cwars: I am opposed to ridiculously long/difficult requirements on principle(mainly for reasons that you describe in the quote below) but I can't find anything disagreeable in your proposal. It's much like how the Castle Wars armour was, it wasn't promoted heavily, nor did it have much use beyond cosmetics, and it was a nice reward for a minority of people that really liked Cwars, perhaps they could get it after a few years of intense casual Cwars. That's the way these sorts of things should be, it's a nice reward but there's actually no compelling reason or incentive to obtain it unless you truly enjoy it. This, times a thousand. No, a million times.

Why the F would you want to do T70 content when you have T70 gear??? And how are you supposed to do T80 content when you needed T80 in the first place. It's like making it so that you'd need something like Shadowmourne to do Icecrown Citadel raids, but Shadowmourne comes FROM ICC itself... What Gingy said encapsulates that situation perfectly to anyone who's been here in RS for any length of time. The game's been very very poorly developed in a lot of respects for years now. For instance, you were able to attain level 99 from the very start, yet most skills did not offer tangible benefits past the 80's -- this took years to correct. There are various skills in which the fastest way to get XP is not the higher tiered activity that you can do -- this also took years to correct. Nex armour is only a pitiful level 80 level, yet Maxed Combat players, most of them, they are told "either commit hundreds of hours or settle for less". For the longest time, one of the best ways to make money was just to do Gwars. So yeah, you have in-game armour for level 80's that only be obtained if you go out of your way and applying pseudo-economic tricks from the real world(this is what the first merchers/grand exchange people discovered). And now since Nex armour is going to be even more ridiculously expensive(as if their idiotic blog in 2012 wasn't enough), and is going to be actually be way more than just substantially better than barrows, but will be a necessity for certain bosses, and so a lot of people who are way past t70 gear won't be able to qualify and will just have to go back that if they're lucky.

What a completely idiotic flip-flop on entire concept of the EOC. Also, I despise that they are reneging on the only thing that made EOC worthwhile: the reduction in monetary elitism. Though I have complained about this before, but in EOC, despite the fact that high-levels were unable to afford level 80 Nex Armours because of their expensive prices, at the very least barrows were a suitable replacement. Now, I have stated in the past, that this shouldn't be the case: Maxed players should have alternatives to being obscenely rich to get level 80 gears, but at least we had a temporary band-aide in that Barrows were relatively close.The high levels shouldn't have to settle, but at least they could. Now, they can't even settle for that, let's all go back to armour that isn't only insanely expensive, but is also increasingly becoming a necessity. That's how it will be until PoP armour is into the market(assuming it gets a nifty ability too). Just ridiculous really. I *am* an elitist, but I favour elitism that is contingent upon hard-work, skills and engagement with the content, not this sort of elitism("I had 2B before, and after they announced this update, I rushed to the GE, bought more sets and now I have instantly trippled my wealth with no effort" elitism). Apparently constantly causing instability in the market is apparently what they do for fun, these days.

I do know of the sort of people that Randox referred to, but such people usually deny playing the game at all rather than insisting something along the lines of, "Well, I don't really like the game and play it is so uncool/lame, so I bot."

As I explained prior to this, when people say "ZOMG, I don't like RS so I am going to go bot", what they are implying is that they still want the reward/end-game stuff, but they don't actually want to work for them and consider it a waste(in many cases, it is a waste). To go back to the "people who cheat on exams" analogy and modify it somewhat: I don't like writing exams or tests, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize they have instrumental value or that I don't like the reward(grades, passing classes) and so I still write them. The difference between someone like me and these other people is, whereas I play by the rules, they simply take their distaste of the structure of the game to it's natural conclusion: they cheat.

What exactly is so hard to understand about this? The entire premise of RS is and has been that you do activities, which are for the most insufferably dull in exchange for some social-status or item/rewards of value. That's the "legitimate" way to play the game. Naturally, however, there are those who want the reward as desperately as anyone else but are incapable of actually doing it legitimately, or refuse to do so; so they take shortcuts. I don't engage in this behavior myself(I don't bot or abuse bugs), but it's not entirely perplexing or irrational behavior. They like one aspect of the game(rewards), but abhor another(the work/path required to obtain said rewards). There's no contradiction or anomaly about these sorts of people, you encounter them in real life all the time and some of these people happen to play the game. Have you never encountered the sort of people in school who cheat on exams or plagiarize assignments, or have them ghostwritten?

The analogy is ridiculous. Not all the players were aware of the bug. I said it was known to Jagex(I know that because I have several friends who reported it to them), I never said anything about the general public. I, for instance, was aware that some players were getting instant voyages, but I was not aware that this could be manipulated at will. That, alone, should have set Jagex investigating after people such as my friends(who, too, were not aware of how to manipulate the bug at will, but suspected that would soon be discovered) reported it to them. Not everyone, including buyers of this(particularly if they bought it from GE, as I am certain many people have offers on there) knew of the bug, So your entire analogy falls apart. If you really want to make real world analogies, you should be aware that Jagex is unique amongst authorities in that it refuses to return, say hacked or scammed items, or even items lost to bugs that are Jagex's fault: it merely bans the offending player, as well as the items(belonging to the victim, not the offender), if it ever does something about cases. It never returns items to their rightful owners, which is something that in the real world, authorities will typically endeavor to do. So making real world analogies is pointless as it is, because unlike real world authorities, Jagex behaves rather differently. I don't particularly care for fat-cat rich players, and nor did I buy any armours, but I'm still opposed to this hypothetical measure.

This is complete nonsense. Unless Jagex is willing to recompense the players who bought these items, why should people who legitimately paid for these items lose their money/items because of Jagex's incompetence? They knew this bug was here for weeks, whether it is due to their inability(maybe they tried to figure it out but couldn't) or incompetence or disregard for it, there's absolutely no reason why players should have to suffer such penalties.

Alright, thanks for the information. I was particularly interested since I was one of the early birds for the God Statues D&D so I wanted to confirm that I hadn't inadvertently glitched. Thankfully, I did not. As for the POP one, I was aware that some people were getting instant voyages(I never got one), but I didn't know there were ways to control it. I don't even know why people bother with glitches that give lots of experience, particularly on accounts that they have spent considerably effort on. There are several sites and players that regularly pay attention to the Highscores/Rank/XP Gains; surely these people know that they *will* be caught? I can understand in instances(such as say botting) where they at least have some chance of getting away, but racking up 20M Construction XP, or whatever, in one hour, will most assuredly be detected and get you banned. What are these people thinking?

Can someone give me the details? Was there a bug that people exploited? And what did it do? What are you referring to?Has there been some bug that has been exploited? Or are you being jocular? I apologize but I cannot discern what you mean?

I take issue with the word "responsibility" in this context. This is not some situation with some notable moral consequence, thus that word is somewhat inappropriate. It's a game, that's all, to the extent that you aren't directly harming other people or negatively impacting them(say for instance stealing their items, or passing negative externalities onto them), it really isn't a moral issue, and you don't really have responsibilities. If Jagex designs a rational and sensible game, the number of cheaters will be infinitesimally small(it won't be zero, because some amount of people will always cheat) and the other players will play as they are expected to do so by Jagex; for cases such as these.(I emphasize that because my stance on this should not be generalized into other cases) If they don't structure it rationally, players will try to find shortcuts including cheating. I should clarify once again, that I don't condone botting and I would never encourage anyone to do it; I am instead suggesting that the game be maintained and designed in such a way as to reduce the number of cheaters to as low as possible. @ Sara Mage: There are a variety of reasons, and I am by no means privy to all of them. My guess would be addiction, status-seeking behavior or something of the sort. The player is in the subordinate position since they don't actually get to design activities/rewards/incentives, so it's really up to Jagex to make sure they are properly structured. I can't speak to any of this personally because I decided moments after the trimmed cape was released that I would never, under any circumstances, even attempt to go for it(much like my decision to never pursue 200M XP in skills), because I don't think that's a healthy or productive use of my time. I don't ever want to legitimately try it, nor do I ever want to bot for it; I just don't care about the cape and can live without it. It's not even a matter of this particular requirement of 5,000 games for me, for I would not pursue the trimmed cape even if they removed this particular requirement tomorrow, despite me nearly being maxed. But then, not everyone is like me. There are people out there who for whatever reason are willing to spend inordinate and ungodly amounts of time on the game for virtual achievements and while their conditions/motivations can't be faulted onto Jagex, I do think that Jagex should act responsibly and not try to exploit or encourage them. That's my response if you were inquiring about people who legitimately make an effort to accomplish these kinds of things. If you're talking about the people who feel the need to get the cape but can't actually sit through the thing and would rather bot, I presume they are hooked onto the game enough to want to have such things but they don't have the patience/time/"real-life skill"(if it can be called that) or what have you, in order to pursue it "legitimately". I don't think Jagex is at fault that there are people who obsess over games to such an extent that they would do these kinds of absurd things(there are obviously personal reasons for that), but I do think that Jagex should not try to encourage them. So, there are people in the game who would be willing to do ridiculous things(like play 5,000 games of Cwars for a virtual cape without botting), but if Jagex didn't make it a requirement for a desirable item, then those people, despite their temperament, would likely not play 5,000 games of Cwars.

Though I agree with Muggi, you need not even go that far. Just as it is in real life, if you sign contracts with people that are against their interests they will try to find ways out of them. Furthermore, the power relationship is not even anywhere resembling fairness or equality, abstract concepts though they may be. After a certain amount of time has passed, and you have spent a couple of years in the game, investing your effort, time and emotions into it, the whole "just leave if you don't like X" strategy is de facto, to put it simply, not a viable option, no matter how much you may contest this. People have spent way too much time in the game and invested far too much to leave after a certain point, just because we don't like "X"(insert recent update here). So, long-term players tolerate more and Jagex has the upper hand in this situation, because with their long-term player base, they can push their buttons somewhat more because they know that they have got them hook, line and sinker, to use a phrase. Therefore the onus is on Jagex to make sure that they treat the players with some measure of decency and respect if they want their "contracts" to be taken seriously. The long-term players are somewhat cornered, and when Jagex introduces idiotic incentives that are clearly unacceptable to long-term players, well, they can't just "get up and leave", so they find ways around them. It's simply rational pursuit of interests. Don't force people into a corner and they won't try to break previously made agreements with you. Even a 5-year old child with minimal familiarity with Runescape could have told you that 5,000 Castle Wars game is an atrocious requirement on a thousand different levels(if it was really that fun and rational, people wouldn't have to be incentivized to do it, they would already have played 5,000 games), and thus if you incentivize high-level players into doing it by making it a requirement for the most prestigious cape in the game, a lot of them -- unsurprisingly -- will take shortcuts. TLDR version: Don't be an abominable prick to people and they won't try to break previous agreements with you.

I do think Construction needs a re-work, but I don't think it was a matter of technology. There was a lot they could have done with it over the years, but it's served its purpose, which was always to serve as a luxury skill that also operated as a money-drain. It has certainly accomplished both things and did so particularly well for the time it was invented. I think it's time for it to move past that, but it hasn't exactly failed Jagex's initial intent.

I can't say I fault the players for botting for those 5,000 Cwars games. I fault Jagex for that instead, for creating such an idiotically and destructive requirement, and for fostering an absurdly fanatic environment over the past 6 years(since the advent of the skill capes) that has encouraged people to obsess over XP above all else, to the detriment of the community. NOTE: I am not endorsing nor encouraging anyone to break RS rules, I am not telling people to bot, nor have I ever botted myself, I am simply refusing to condemn players who botted in Cwars for their trimmed-comp cape.

Panic-selling is usually fueled by some update or recent development that already lowers demand for items. So for instance, Nex armours had been dropping steadily for quite some time, but the announcement of armours that were superior to it, was going to result in reduced demand regardless of panic-sellers. Certainly it is true that panic-sellers exacerbate this tendency, but they do not cause it themselves.

My thoughts were precisely the same when I found out about this. Why is my interface so idiotically clunky now?

@ Thus, I am not going to bother with the rest of your post(s), as we've reached an impasse. If you can't understand that people will dump armour that is less useful to them or if there's viable and cheaper alternatives, well, then I can't help you. I don't mean that in some smarmy or condescending way, but if we can't agree on basics such as supply and demand. well, then we're simply going to be talking past ourselves and that's pointless. I will however address this portion of your post though, because you have revealed a clear contradiction and case of projection: On one hand you are implying that other people are lazy and entitled leeches who just want the armour to drop in value so they can afford it, while you are Mr. Hardworking and how you have every right to be mad at people who are supposedly causing the items to crash. In just about every item in RS history(with the exception of same rare[pun intended] cases), as supply increases, or demand decreases, the price of the item will inevitably plunge. That's something you accept and agree to when you purchase an item, no if's, ands, or buts. Most people who have purchased items in RS history were "hardworking" people who worked just as hard as you, if not more, and they all accepted that their hard-earned items would one day crash, and they did. I bought a set of Full Pernix for 1.6B last year, remind me, how much is the set now? Do you see me complaining or blaming panic-sellers? When you purchased your item you were perfectly aware of that. So there's absolutely nothing special about Nex armours crashing, nothing; unless of course you have been living under a rock for the entirety of your RS career, this is what happens to just about every item. So what made you think that when you bought your Nex Armours or whatever it is whose plunge you're lamenting, that it would stay constant in price forever? Furthermore, all these so-called panic-sellers, bought their armours just like you did, so they have every right to do with them whatever they wish. If they want to alch them, give them away, drop them, or in this case, dump them on the GE, that is their right. Why should they hold onto an armour that they feel has no use to them, just because you want them to hold onto it, for your own personal interests? That's the height of selfishness and entitlement mentality. You, not they, are the one who has a sense of entitlement. "Everyone hold onto your armours, even if you don't want to, because otherwise I might lose some money! And heaven knows, that can't possibly be allowed to happen, can it?" I also take issue with this part of your post: It's not a matter of actively supporting crashes, the items were going to crash regardless of the wishes of anyone(except Jagex). That's the natural state of the market. Though, there are some people who wanted this item to be cheaper so they could save some money or afford it(this has been the case with every item in the game), that has absolutely no impact on the market. People don't simply make a wish, "I wish that Torva Armour was 50M!" and it comes to be. Regardless, if people want to wish that an item crashes because they can't afford it, that is their right as well. If it's in their interests for an item to be cheaper, why shouldn't they wish it so? There's absolutely nothing wrong with that as well.

This is simply not true. But it is. And the rest of the post you are just agreeing with him. It is not true that the items in question "had no reason to crash"(this was Sly's assertion), I explained as to why in my previous post. I also disagree with his assertion that the panic sellers are the sole/original cause of items crashing(panic selling contributes, but usually is rooted in some update), and I also disagree that panic selling is irrational(he sort-of called panic sellers "idiots").

I also had Nex sets immediately after their release last year(when they were worth far more than they are now) without gambling. That's beside the point. This isn't about whether I or you can personally afford things, it's about economics and game incentives at a macro level. It's also about the present state of things, which are different from what they were in the past when people could reasonably afford these things. [edit:harsh Ad-hominem/tone rescinded] I have never suggested anything of the sort that players should be given free stuff, I challenge you to provide evidence of your claim. On the contrary, I specifically stated that I wanted high-end gear to be "challenging to get", yet not "nonsensically ridiculous", which is not the same as free things in any reasonable dictionary. Also, I resent the condescending implication of your statement. As I have already demonstrated, this is not about "free-stuff" so that's a complete distraction. It's about a sane economic structure and proper incentives/rewards for high-levels. This is also not about giving poor people or lower-level people things for free, it's about giving high-level players what should rightfully be their reward for having spent so much time and effort in the game. No real-world economy that I know of is structured purely on "luck" as the RS economy. If in a real life economy it was established that the only way to climb the social ladder, even for hard-working or intelligent people(in RS the analogue would be High Level players) was to gamble, play the stock market, or pure luck, you'd have social discontent pretty quickly, which is precisely what's happened in RS. So your example fails pretty hard there. People are asking for a meritocratic RS where people who actually take the time to level their skills, engage with the content and put in their time be properly rewarded -- that this is apparently upsetting to you is only indicative of a delusional outlook. There's nothing absurd about what I or, others such as Muggi or Ginger have said in this thread.