Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About klankaos

  • Rank
    Dark Wizard Robe

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    In mah house. Or Falador Library, whichever's closer.
  • Interests
    Music, computers, sports, books, good food and chocolate.

RuneScape Information

  • RuneScape Status
  • RSN
  • Clan Details
    Phoenix Collective
  1. Indeed, its just like anything you do that doesnt involve earning money for food/shelter; if you dont want to do it don't. Hey, man, if you don't want food and shelter, don't do that either. =P It is entirely a function of what you get out of it. If you get enjoyment out of it that is, in your opinion, worth what you put into it, then the time has been entirely worth it. If not, well, you should get out more.
  2. So which is better? The attack of vambraces, or the HP regen of the bracelet? I'm talking about a fact/efficiency basis, not a preferential one. This has a lot more discussion value than the old scimmy vs longsword debate, until somebody proves one superior to the other. Ugh, that debate. Don't remind me. =P Unfortunately, I really haven't been around RS enough at all to answer this one, so I'll leave it for now, being proven wrong. I never even heard of a regen bracelet before this topic o_0
  3. Actually, I'd disagree with vambraces ( :lol: ) For a regen you get the health restoration, too. Since you're tanking, chances are you want health. The regen, in addition to defences, can help you use less food. Ahh. Forgot about that :P While this doesnt have pages and pages of argument in it(who would have thought that about the torso vs addy chain) its certainly has some interesting discussion value. But really, discussion value != debate value. There's not really any two sides to this - it all depends on what you want. If you want the HP regen, go for the regen bracelet. If you want the attack bonus, go for the vambraces =P
  4. To me, it looks like the vambraces would be better, because the ranged attack bonus offsets any defence bonuses gained, considering you're not using the regen bracelet's attack bonuses or strength bonuses anyways. However, this topic is probably better suited to H&A than DC. There's not much potential for debate in this.
  5. So are you thinking that I don't use my imagination to think of those things when I read? I do that too - in addition to all the imagining the sensory input that you get with TV. It takes more imagination, because I do everything you do and then some when I read a book. You're taking that out of context. I was talking about how I consider TV a more vegetative experience than reading a book, not how people who read books get outside more. The outdoors thing was an addendum to a point already made, not a point in and of itself. TV is not to video as bookstore is to books. TV is to video as library is to books. I often go to the library and pick something off the shelves that just looks interesting, not necessarily something I would normally pick, just as you do while channel surfing.
  6. I don't believe skillcapes are disadvantageous at all. You say they've devalued 'finished' products such as cooked fish. However, I don't believe that's true. If memory serves me correctly, when I played back in '06 - well before skillcapes came out - raw food was still worth more than cooked food in P2P worlds. Why? Because people still wanted 99 in a skill, even if there was no fancy cape to get out of it. It's still worth bragging rights to them, so they went for it. Maybe there weren't as many of them - but you can just as easily attribute the price drop to the number of people that are currently playing RS as compared to the number back then, as well as the way the PvP updates worked out - cooked fish simply aren't as valuable any more, because nobody needs them for PKing. Also, you're only looking at one side of it. What about the people who fish fifteen million lobsters to get 99 fishing? Aren't they flooding the market with their product, too? Why don't we complain about the way raw fish prices have dropped since skillcapes came out due to more people getting them? Because they haven't. Simple as that. People aren't just using more raw products - people are producing more too. It works the same way on either side of the equation. Also, how do they devalue the skill they are supposed to represent? I don't understand that at all. If anything they add more value to a 99 skill, since it is now recognizable more easily. Before, 99 was only useful for the pride and bragging rights and the stuff you could do with it. Any skill that had no use at 99 was useless except for highscores XP and telling people all about it - and you seem like a total jerk if you just walk around going 'I have 99 fm lol'. Now, people can wear the cape and get the respect that much easier. The skillcapes add value to a 99 skill, not devalue it. I'm really glad to see someone in DC with a legitimate, well-thought-out OP who seems well interested in defending it.
  7. This would still be better than having the word 'bump' plastered over a thousand posts, wouldn't it? Either way, the moderators can still have a crack-down on spamming. It's not generally hard to find, and if you implement a report feature (does the RSOF have one already? Haven't been there in nearly a year) then it makes it even easier for mods to deal with this kind of thing. Sure it'll be done, but overall it'll make the forums a lot cleaner if you up the character limit. Or maybe there could be a post-count threshold at which your character limit gets raised? The post-count thing is just inviting more spam. I'm not sure if I'd rather have "bump" spammed or pointless topics. But I'm not the one to make that decision. It's your idea, so it's your call. That's just my input on this discussion. Dangg, man, this is debate club! I only came in here to here other peoples' ideas presented as fact. =) But I agree the post-count threshold is a bad idea. So maybe just open up the character limit wide and crack down harder on spamming.
  8. This would still be better than having the word 'bump' plastered over a thousand posts, wouldn't it? Either way, the moderators can still have a crack-down on spamming. It's not generally hard to find, and if you implement a report feature (does the RSOF have one already? Haven't been there in nearly a year) then it makes it even easier for mods to deal with this kind of thing. Sure it'll be done, but overall it'll make the forums a lot cleaner if you up the character limit. Or maybe there could be a post-count threshold at which your character limit gets raised?
  9. This is what disappoints me about TV, and what turns me off of it. Books cater more to me as a reader than TV shows ever can as a viewer, because they can still be published if they're not instantly mass-marketable. TV shows have to follow the formula that works to get on the air, and if they're not instantly popular with the lowest common denominator, they're out. And to be fair, the lowest common denominator usually isn't all that into using their imaginations. Sure, visual/auditory input can be useful - but the last time I was engrossed in a movie the way I can get engrossed in any worthwhile book was... I can't think of when I watched a movie that engaged me that much. Maybe that's just me, but I still tend to think of TV as a more vegetative experience than reading a book, and vegetative isn't good for you. I guess I'm just not the majority =P But then again, everyone's worrying about average health and etcetera declining, so maybe I'll stick with my books. And my outdoors. And my things that require thought =P That may well be a generalization (and I totally planned to end this post here, in case you couldn't tell =P), but realistically, TV does not ever require engagement. People often have TV in the background, or do other things while they watch it - it's not something that intrigues you and activates your brain the way a book does. When was the last time you saw someone doing their ironing while reading a book? It doesn't often happen. Books are the mental equivalent of a brisk jog, to TV's chillin' on the couch.
  10. Well I do somewhat. You got me on the imagination part, but I also like to look at it from the creators point of view. Maybe they want to give you a vague idea and let your imagination fill in the rest. But I think it is just as valid for them to want to show you what they were imagining. That's fair enough, and they're certainly allowed to do that, but it's admittedly not as beneficial to you as reading a book would be, right?
  11. I didn't refute it because I don't have a good refutation. I just said that I was going to mention it in my first post since someone inevitably brings it up, and it is funny to me that people with good imaginations form reading books always have the same arguments. Oh =P I see. And here was me thinking we could have a big fight now too =( I was looking forward to it. However, your linking us having the same arguments with not having an imagination isn't fair at all - if it's a good idea, why not stick with it? Nobody's come up with a fair defense yet, so why should we change our attack just to prove our imaginativeness? Really? That's a little disappointing. I was kinda hoping you believed what you were saying =P
  12. What are your thoughts/possible solutions on this? I'd like to hear what you think, considering you're the OP and all. Make this into a debate! We're in DC, not general =P This is a fairly legit idea. But you've hit on the only problem. Maybe have people who are going to post lengthy posts that are worthwhile contact a forum mod and build in some code so that the forum mods can remove the restriction from select users for a certain period of time? Another idea is that forum mods could crack down harder on people bumping their posts with posts rather than the bump button. Maybe warning - > one-day ban -> three-day -> seven-day -> permanent? Give everyone plenty of warning before you make the switch, but come down hard on people who abuse the system when there's a perfectly legitimate one in place for the same purpose. So what would they do differently with new forums? They handle the issues they have well within their ability, and changing the URL of the forums, or even clearing all the old posts off the one they have, is going to do nothing. The solution lies in correcting the problem, not in leaving it and moving on while committing the same mistakes and exacerbating the same problems.
  13. Why not? What's wrong with it? Be specific, man, we're in debate club, not general. As for me, I think it would be interesting, and if they could figure a way to work it while still keeping it feasible with respects to security and the amount of time they work on it vs. the amount they get out of it, it would be awesome, especially the ability to configure your UI the way you can in other games. However, I just don't think it would ever be feasible for [email protected] financially - it's a lot of work to put into something that nobody will buy, meaning it has to be up for free, and that's a TON of work to put into something you're not gonna ever market for more money. It's impossible, but it would be awesome. The ability to preload the entire world and not have to freak your computer out every ten minutes to load something new would be really awesome as well. However, even then there's only so much benefit you can get out of anything like that, and again, I'll say it - it could never work. This isn't going to be much of a debate, tbh - it's going to be a case of everyone going 'it's nice, but it'll never work'. =P
  • Create New...

Important Information

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