Jump to content
Due to the significant updates that have taken place, you now need to login with your display name or e-mail address, NOT your login name. ×
Due to posts that are 5+ years old being rebuilt, some of the older BBCodes may not have converted properly but still be in the post. Most posts are unaffected but some using what was our custom BBCode (like [spoiler]) will be a bit broken. ×

i_trollz_u

Members
  • Content Count

    745
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About i_trollz_u

  • Rank
    Scorpion Pit

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    TROLLHEIM

RuneScape Information

  1. I think people in this thread are missing the bigger picture. MMORPG as a genre is dying. The game type lost its novelty a while ago and really just isn't nearly as fun as any other types of games on the market. A lot of other games give gratification/fun without having to grind and do mind numbing tasks and are just as affordable if not cheaper than RS. And even the end game content that people try and grind for isn't as fun as playing other games. Runescape's game content just isn't good enough to foster a competitive growth or have enough of a reason for players to want to spend their time on it. The only players left are the minority who prefer playing MMORPG's and the hardcore RS fans. I mean if you take away nostalgia and community and just look at game content alone the game has definitely improved and no one in their right minds would prefer grinding on OSRS over current RS. EOC might've been part of the decline, but the idea was to create a game that was more complex because the old combat system was archaic and the game would never grow from how it was. Great idea, bad execution. But ultimately is still a minor factor in the reason why RS has declined compared to macro trends. The first decline I've ever noticed was the free trade wild removal in 2007, but I don't think the game started dying until steam games and other free games like League of Legends overtook runescape in popularity. The games biggest weakness was the fact that it's entire brand is that it's simple and playable in your browser. It was great back in 2001 and through 2007 when people were less technologically capable of running application based games efficiently. Now it's just a development handicap to making a competitive game.
  2. Think an updated rant would be that the archer ring's are worthless now.
  3. It's pretty much the same stat distribution as one of the lower level rune/zerkers, only your combat is on the brink between range/melee based. There's nothing stopping him from using normal rune/dhide/mystic for edge pking.
  4. It's been a while, but if I my memory of the old CB formula is correct as long as your combined attack and strength were <148 at 99 range your combat level would be based off of your ranged/defense level, meaning your melee stats wouldn't be relevant in CB level calculation and you could still hit the optimal combat level for being w/e ranged pure you wanted to be. So if you want a ranged void pure you would go for 99 ranged/42 defense/60 attk/90 strength/99 mage as the optimal setup, which also coincidentally allow you to fight effectively with almost every side of the CB triangle at like 90 CB or something depending on hp/pray. The melee stats don't even really matter if you fight with just ranged, it's just there in case you want dds/melee switch for w/e reason.
  5. Me and a friend go to LS worlds and just both bring claw/spec recovers, and we manage to crash teams of 3+ maxed players with neither of us being anywhere close to max cb. I don't see why you just don't go to an LS world, duo is enough to crash LS teams if they're under 5 people.
  6. Brilliant post, I absolutely agree with everything you said. If there was a "like" button I would use it :P I don't. He completely disregards any aspect of principle, or idiocy/inefficacy/asinine steps on Jagex's part. Frankly, his view, while an opinion yes, is logically flawed and thus inherently not only incorrect but irrelevant. The point isn't that people do frosts for all their cash. Its that Jagex is breaking normal game play to try and fix bots, when they do nothing of the sort, and end up making it even harder for legitimate players. This is the point he completely misses, and that is what makes it a "no link" (as it would be called in debate). And people call me a cynic... I'm not sure you've done any form of competitive debate in high school or college, because your post made absolutely no sense at all. If you really break want to break it down, his post would be two fold. First is defense on the "omg it hurts legit players disadvantage", by saying that the status quo wasn't much a better (a non-unique), so the disad doesn't necessarily outweigh the case (decision to make frosts harder). Second was a kritik of your disad with the impact of player pessimism and how it ruins the game (at least for him). The link is simply players being pessimistic (which is supported by evidence on TIF), and your no link argument is silly and completely warrantless. Also, at the time of writing this post anyway, frosts are completely empty. inb4trololololololololololololol Actually, the K was against TIF, not against the game in general, as proven by the reference to "more elegant RSOF". Thus the K is not relevant, bad for education, (fill in random K bad/ theory arguments here) As well, his status quo was about TIF users specifically, and how the change doesn't effect us since we (TIF users) as a rule don't hunt frosties for the main source of our income. Thus, he is specifically talking about TIF users in the entirety of his post. Its not about the SQ of bots, at least not directly. On a separate note, saying the post-aff world is not much better then the pre-aff/post neg world is pretty bad defense, if you look at it from that standpoint. There is no real impact as to why it is worse, with many benefits of reducing bottting or the profitability of botting. That DA wouldn't stand up, and I for sure wouldn't go for it in the 2NR if I were neg. The K, although flawed, is actually the stronger argument if you accept the premise that being cynical is bad for the game, which I reject as false. I still think his argument doesn't link to the topic. Its a bit convoluted, trying to make it fit into debate style TBH, and its 4:45 AM, so I'm done for now, but its interesting to read your response :P TIF should have their own debate topic or two once in a while lol, it'd be fun. Pre change world> post change world IMO. Changing frosts hurts legit layers more then bots. It sets bad precedent, and its disheartening to see how, even with Jagex actively trying to combat bots, they are ineffective at best, destructive/deleterious at worst. Conceding K was against TIF, not sure why that means K is flawed. K's dont have to be germane to the resolution or the affirmative case, rhetoric K's of DA's are independent reasons to vote aff so long as the impact outweighs your offense. (I don't exactly who's going to judge the logic behind cynicalism=bad, or explain how it outweighs the disad but it's certainly something worth pointing out) <insert affirmative K's good framework here>. I don't think he was talking about TIF users so much as aff advantages (no bots), vs the disad (makes it more annoying for legit players). Whether TIF users do frosts or not are irrelevant, this is about improving the environment at frosts in general. And yeah, there really isn't much offense coming from the aff if you win the argument that bots are inevitable, and then the DA prob would O/W the case. But as for now, since there's absolutely no bots, frosts are probably better since it's actually possibly to get kills, unlike before where it was just so crowded you couldn't even get a kill. Reduced KPH>0 KPH, increase in frost bones prices helps too, which proves that case(at least right now) O/W DA/vote aff. And tbh i think it sets a good precedent, in that jagex is actually trying to do something about bots rather than watch it destroy the game. I don't exactly see an alternative or CP, so it's either that or the STQO of massive botting.
  7. Brilliant post, I absolutely agree with everything you said. If there was a "like" button I would use it :P I don't. He completely disregards any aspect of principle, or idiocy/inefficacy/asinine steps on Jagex's part. Frankly, his view, while an opinion yes, is logically flawed and thus inherently not only incorrect but irrelevant. The point isn't that people do frosts for all their cash. Its that Jagex is breaking normal game play to try and fix bots, when they do nothing of the sort, and end up making it even harder for legitimate players. This is the point he completely misses, and that is what makes it a "no link" (as it would be called in debate). And people call me a cynic... I'm not sure you've done any form of competitive debate in high school or college, because your post made absolutely no sense at all. If you really break want to break it down, his post would be two fold. First is defense on the "omg it hurts legit players disadvantage", by saying that the status quo wasn't much a better (a non-unique), so the disad doesn't necessarily outweigh the case (decision to make frosts harder). Second was a kritik of your disad with the impact of player pessimism and how it ruins the game (at least for him). The link is simply players being pessimistic (which is supported by evidence on TIF), and your no link argument is silly and completely warrantless. Also, at the time of writing this post anyway, frosts are completely empty. inb4trololololololololololololol
  8. lol besides kingduffy and jd they are all young ;p Depends which kingduffy ur talking about lol
  9. I don't know when the last time you went to bandos was, but i'd say that at least half of the non-ls worlds are empty, and it's not that hard to even find an empty ls world anymore. Bandos is nowhere near as crowded as people make it out to be (at least from the last 5 trips or so i did with a friend). Also, i'm pretty sure 15-16 spec recovers+brews/claws and a cls+defender switch is better than sharks and a maul for crashing. Crashing also isn't that efficient considering you are going to hop when they hop, unless you plan to solo it in which camping gear would be better.
  10. sucks, but karmas a [bleep] So it's karma that strikes when jagex servers crap out after he has killed players like everyone else? No, he kills people, then he died. Ye its jagexs' fault. Its also ironic, because he just posted a kill. Obviously you guys have no clue what karma is. Karma doesn't necessitate fairness in anyway. Its simply cause and effect. You kill people, you eventually die. It also doesn't necessitate a greater amount of skill on either parties end. In fact, how karma strikes is entirely open ended, fairness isn't an issue. Didn't say I was happy he died, or deserved to die, simply correcting the ill informed on what karma REALLY is. Karma doesn't take effect until a person dies. Then they are "judged" based on their good and bad actions throughout their whole life, and reincarnated based on that. I enjoy seeing the green bar of all the likes on the youtube vid lol.
  11. i_trollz_u

    PKers and Bots

    No, a bot that kills the bots that kills the players who kill the players who kills the bots.
  12. Except farming (seeds--->herbs).
  13. When you say the average falls, do you mean they have gotten faster or slower? Your statement technically means they have gotten faster, not sure if that's what you meant though.
  14. Lol nothing. Never even heard of a punishment for it, at least not for anyone i know.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.