xpx

The question is, where would you wear them? Where, as an adult, would you want to advertise your liking of MMORPG's? It really has nothing to do with the opposite sex, but the fact that you'd have to want everyone to know about you still playing childish games at a half-respectful(compared to the average age of players) age. I have real life friends who have played and know i play RS and i have friends that haven't ever played it and don't know i play it, so because the game doesn't define me or my personality, i wouldn't go around advertising the game as a fool. The only place i can see mature people wearing any of the stuff are game conferences or the kind.

It's kind of fitting that if you were to buy something labeled with 'runescape' it'd most likely be a 'hoodie' as noone would be able to see your face(for good reason).

Even defensive armor with infinite defensive stats wouldn't protect you from KS spec, so it's a terrible example no matter what. The fact that you can't afford/get a divine speaks more about you than anything else, but the fact is, there is already armor that would significantly reduce the power of any weapon. I doubt(and i'll more than likely be right) that the upcoming damage reduction will be significant in a situation pictured in the vid. Also, the upcoming damage reduction will have little to no effect on dragon claws- with 50% soak percentage, a 800 from claws will still hit for 700(overall 12,5% reduction, and it's doubtful soak percentages will get anywhere close to 50%).

No, he was dead serious. Aren't we all sick of getting KO'd by 700's from spirit cows? I mean, they've got to put an end to it some way. Green, awesome quote, it sounded just like jagex had written it.

I don't see the inconsistency. So speeding up c1's is negligible but he still wants a whole new bind slot to have both hex hunter and be able to GGS in c1's isn't a tad inconsistent? Fast and efficient c1's are a big part of dungeoneering at higher levels. lol wrong. Quite wrong. C1s take me 45 minutes for every 23 large floors I do. Only 2 people need laws. Hell' I've duoed c1s WITHOUT LAWS for either of us and it took us an hour. The time to do c1s is a very small amount of time comparatively. I'd like to try out primal long, baxe, and spear, but since its such a PITA to get back prom 2h I probably won't. Thats the thing. It may be small, but any change to it can make a big overall impact, and as said, it wouldn't only change c1's. As for you wanting to try out other weapons, change every reset would easily allow that and would give you a clear understanding of what the weapons are like as you have to go trough all floors with one. It's a bad example, though, as prom 2h is one of the easiest items in dungeoneering to get back. Which is why some of us consider if the ideas pitched are realistic or not(easy to implement).

You and ancient did that, i assumed, and this is in accordance with your current post that they would make c1's 20 seconds faster. What is significant and what is not is very much debatable, and i wouldn't actually agree with you on this subject. around 24 hours of time saved is a big deal for me. That's still alot of work and alot of areas where jagex could screw this up. Keep it simple(like it is right now).

Every little bit counts- 20 seconds per c1 is 13 minutes for c1's, and atleast a day(24h) of dungeoneering going for 120. Also, why the hell did he pitch the idea of wanting laws anyway when he is saying they wouldn't help him much? Fact is, it does help, and this would make dungeoneering easier, whether it is only a little or alot, every little bit counts. Also, a way this system would clearly make larges easier is that you can decide what ammo you bind for specific floors, and you know what are the most frequent bosses on those floors. Thus, when you know there is a good chance the boss is necro, you'd bind arrows, while when there is a good chance the boss is blink, you'd bind box, and this can also be applied to the specific weaknesses of the monsters on different sets of floors. Another reason why i think jagex wouldn't want to implement it for every floor is that it would make things too difficult and you'd have to make an interference pop up every floor where you'd change binds, with every reset, however, it could be dealt with much more cleanly and easily(which is what jagex wants, and we want them not to screw up going over their heads).

I don't see the inconsistency. So speeding up c1's is negligible but he still wants a whole new bind slot to have both hex hunter and be able to GGS in c1's isn't a tad inconsistent? Fast and efficient c1's are a big part of dungeoneering at higher levels.

Errm, why were you so huffed up about wanting to bind both laws and arrows, then? definite inconsistency here. Also, it's not about how much this makes something easier rather that it DOES make things easier(larges, too, as your binds don't have to be good for every floor, rather that specific floor), and why i'm against it. You can argue all you want how small or little the change is, but the fact is, there is a difference and it would make it easier, which is not in the spirit of what any of these ideas are about. I like the idea of swap on reset because it next to doesn't make dungeoneering easier(the time some people save by coordinating with a perm team is countered by others testing non-optimal setups) and achieves what it's supposed to do- add variety.

How would it not make dungeoneering quite a bit easier if you could change binds every floor? You could use rapier, golden brace, blood necklace+ laws for c1s and 2h, ssh, hex and arrows for larges, which would SIGNIFICANTLY increase your speed of doing c1's, which is why i'm against it. Being able to swap binds on reset would allow you to effectively use different rare binds and try them out, which keeps the difficulty intact. Also, i'm all for updates that improve dungeoneering in different ways like adding variety and promote strategy/teamwork, GRANTED that they don't make dungeoneering easier in any way. The current rigidity of the bind system is a major par of what makes dungeoneering even somewhat challenging. If you want to prove that you are looking to improve dungeoneering without making it easier, then please, i haven't yet seen any ideas from you(i think Obtaurian thought the idea of a bind bank was yours, which it definitely wasn't).

It's not gamebreaking, but it goes against the spirit of the idea of making dungeoneering more varied because the major reason why you like it so much is rather because it would benefit you while training dungeoneering, and this it not a good thing. People like you don't actually want variety in dungeoneering, they want dungeoneering to be easier to them, and i'm against any idea that would accomplish that(for the record, no, swapping items at the start of floors wouldn't make it alot easier, but as you'd be able to adapt your binds to the kinds of floors you are doing, would make dungeoneering easier none the less). That said, it's kind of ironic that you don't like the idea of bind bank with item swapping on reset because, lets face it, this idea is ONLY about adding variety and nothing else. It doesn't speed up dungeons, it doesn't promote teamwork or develop new strategy's for binds, all it does is, and as you so emotionally said was needed for dungeoneering, VARIETY. Why are you against adding variety? Maybe i was right all along, you want efficiency, not variety, and all of the ideas masked as adding variety just deliver both(and there is no reason to not like them in that case). Squab, binded items taking memory space would be a logical opposition by jagex, and if the items took same space as bank spaces, they should be OK with it(and there would be a balance with people wanting to bank bind alot of items).

This is the utmost stupidity that really drives me crazy. People assuming things that are not even close to being true. For the record, efficiency doesn't exclude fun, you can have fun and be efficient at the same time, and more often than not, being more efficient allows you to have more fun. In other words, people aren't efficient because they hate having fun.

If it's 300k P/H that means its going to be about 450k - 550k per Floor seeing as the bigger floors can take you anywhere from 90 minutes to 120 minutes. Or so i have heard. actually you are both wrong in some ways. f60 with every bonus is something like 220k xp. Warped larges take around 25-35 minutes.

I haven't delved very deep into how to calculate the reduction of overall damage right(and i'm not going to make a complete fool of myself, either, like, for instance, Golvellius) but, any reasoning on why the graph is not linear? By logic, if your max hit was infinite, overall soak -> equipment soak, and the higher your max hit, the higher overall soak will be, but i'm not completely sure why the graph would have a maximum in the x=y scale. Other than that, it's a nice analysis and somewhat shows what i've already posted, the soaking ability will not be in any way game-changing, it will just mimic the pking we had some years/moths ago without chaotics etc.

DFS>Rune defender: MHing, Dragon hunting, tanking, Safe pvp. Rune defender>DFS: Slayer, 1v1 pvp, pking. So thats 4 out of 3 in favor of DFS. I would say that Rune defender is a good candidate for replacing DFS in many circumstances. However, I don't think dragon will make any phenomenal difference since it's crappy defenses can only go so far. Nice one... I have to agree, though, that defender is much more useful then DFS(not considering the pricing etc). Firstly, it's +2 str(not 3, as grimy said) and minus 20 stab, which is a huge difference. For pvm, dfs is only better when you really, really need the defense. For solo bandos, they are more or less equal(as you are protecting melee anyway), for solo DK's, dfs is somewhat better assuming you can't use soul split enough. If you can soul split both supreme and rex, defender is better. For all slayer, defender is much better, only exception being wyverns because you can't really use it there. For pvp, you'd be stupid to just have one of these, so it's hard to debate this- dfs while tanking- defender while dishing(damage).

I still think most of you don't get where i'm coming from. The WHOLE point of the idea is not to benefit ANYONE, but only add variety. This is the most important aspect of any changes that may come to the bind system. If people want more variety, sure, have some, but if the need for variety is actually masking the need for easier dungeoneering, then no thanks. Per reset would keep the difficulty intact as much as possible while allowing you to use and swap rare binds without the fear of losing them. Variety. Also, Obtaurian, which grimys idea do you particularly like that much? Also, another twist to the bind bank would be for it to coexist with your normal bank in the way that the items in your bind bank count toward your bank space- thus you could bank bind alot of items, but it'd also limit your normal bank items, and jagex wouldn't have to worry about this system needing more memory space.

I don't think for a moment it's hard to achieve both keeping the skills difficulty and adding variety, but the problem lies in the nature of the ideas that are proposed- most people are not after fun, they are after making dungeoneering easier(and thus propose whole new bind slots and what not). The bind bank idea would work assuming you'd be able to access the bank very rarely, like, for instance, every reset, which would keep the difficulty intact and also enable you to switch difficult binds more easily.

I think 7 str, 30/29/28 stab/slash/crush is most likely, or something very close to that. In either way, both of these updates will further favor chaotic rapier over longsword, first one mostly for pvm(cr>cls for bandos, likely) and training, second one for pvp(smaller max hit, less damage reduction).

Its a question. Answer it or dont post, no need to be an idiot about it. You are my hero. (this really shows something about sy's attitude) Sy, are you going to correct his grammar now?

Actually, in runescape, as nothing really takes any skill(relative, may have something to do with boredom/grinding), the hardness of skills is mostly, if not entirely defined by how fast the skills are. Runecrafting, in no way, is a hard to level skill(doesn't take any extraordinary talents), but it is said to be the hardest skill because it takes most time. On the flipside, fletching and cooking are seen as easy skills, just because the xp rate is high. If cooking was 30k xp an hour, it'd be considered hard. That said, dungeoneering is a skill that does take a bit more 'skill' than the others, but at the same time, it is also more fun. The difficulty in training dungeoneering depends largely on two factors- teammates and binds, and we can't just change the balance. It is next to confirmed ~45 dungeoneering will get another bind, so with 4 binds at level 100 and 5 at 120, i think we are set in the number of items we can possibly allow to bring into dungeons. While some binds will forever be more worthwhile than others(mage gloves/boots, for example), having to make this choice also adds difficulty. I can see how swapping one 'normal' bind for a second 'ammo' bind could work(further in the light of the upcoming new bind slot), and i can see allowing the binding of the same tier of the same combat class gloves/boots in one normal slot, but not introducing new binds for these items. As for bind bank, it's a good idea, but it'd need good balancing. I can see it working assuming you have 10 normal bank slots and ~3-4 ammo slots and can only access the bank while you reset your prestige to not allow making dungeons much easier(changing weapons for what specific dungeons you are doing). I think this would keep the difficulty intact while allowing you to bind and use items that are not always the best, but add variety.

Yeah, because there is only melee void... ignoring the fact that deflector is more range/mage based...

Why is it not supposed to happen? Mages can wear melee armor and soak range damage, can't they? Also, i think people are overthinking with the damage absorptions- The dungeoneering shields really suck, and they'll likely have the highest single item values for those(apart from ely/divine). So yes, while you could get like 30% damage absorbed(with full armor), a 50 from magic would still be 41. And get -20 Mage Bonus. Not only does like 90% of mage bonus come from your ARMOUR, but melee armour has negative mage attack. For many armour combinations, 100% of your melee bonuses come from your weapon. Or a defender, which you can wear with hides. Other items that give attack bonuses for melee (such as fire cape, onyx ring, barrow gloves) aren't class specific anyways; and can still be worn with hides. The strength of melee is high defense against melee and ranged, and then they wear hides, they have neither. Thus yeah, they will be more resistant to mage, but be extremely vulnerable to the other classes. As it has been said time and again, the strength of melee is the independence of armor, but the catch is the very short reach, thus being frozen means being completely useless, and with the accuracy of mage, melee doesn't have any chance against mage even with hides.

Why is it not supposed to happen? Mages can wear melee armor and soak range damage, can't they? Also, i think people are overthinking with the damage absorptions- The dungeoneering shields really suck, and they'll likely have the highest single item values for those(apart from ely/divine). So yes, while you could get like 30% damage absorbed(with full armor), a 50 from magic would still be 41.

The bind system is good, but it removes any reason for level 11 secondary items such as gloves and boots. There was some effort making these items and putting them as boss drops but nobody looks at them past the boss floor. What he's (Zamorak) asking is a balanced manner to introduce these in a way they can be kept. Offering more binds is not the solution. If Jagex raises the binding number, it won't mean people will bind boots as they'll bind another weapon or armor piece. However, if they introduce a "upper item" (weapon, shield, armor, slayer item) and "lower item" bind (glove, boots, and med helm maybe) so that a level 50 can bind 2 upper and 2 lower items then players have a reason to keep boots and gloves. Yes, it's more bound items but it's more of the minor stuff. Secondly, introduce a "DG Bound Item Box" that can be accessed at the end of a dungeon after a boss. This prevents players from shifting their strengths mid game, yet are not held hostage to one combat type or hybrid. Currently, you can be limited to the team you can participate on. However, at the end of a dungeon during the winter face(say a quicky at level 1) you can shift from Melee to Mage or Range and join another team as another aspect. That's not unbalanced as you're not given more binds to work with in a dungeon, and it's more fun and varied. So yes, the suggestions make things a little easier (bounded gloves and boots), and offer variety for players going for 120 (changing combat settings). Still, it does nothing more than make Dungeoneering more fun and approachable at very little cost to balance. Kudos to whoever thought of both ideas. The problem is, any idea that would make dungeoneering easier wouldn't fit the bill for that this thread is about- giving more variety. Ofcource you'd use gloves when you'd have more binds, but that's the thing- more binds- which makes the skill easier. I would understand something balanced like giving up binds for a gloves/boots bind or something of that kind, but the last thing you want to do is make it any easier. I can think of a hundred ways of how to make dungeoneering more fun, but most of them would mean getting 120 would become a joke, because, face it, the only hard part is that it takes quite a bit of time.

Zamorak, your ideas are all fine and fluffy(and i've heard similar ones for a hundred times) but really, what they all tell me is that dungeoneering should be easier in the sense that you would have more binds to work with. I have yet to hear a realistic idea of how you would add variety to the binding system without making dungeoneering easier(as making it easier shouldn't be your goal anyway). Can anyone do that? Seems like a great system to me.