Stihl

Notice how he mentions planning to make one for world 1 varrock? Oh em gee, I guess you aren't the originator after all. :lol: There's also this one, it's older still. What's your point? Merchant maps aren't exactly a new concept, hell, I could've told you that. If you want to complain however, first note that both are getting rather outdated, and then be sure to go whine at the plentiful barrows guides.

Wrong, I have seen flat-chested girls in a hottub, and I have seen busty girls walking around town while it's snowing, and therefore the correlation that you suggest is impossible. Life is fleeting.

*Sigh* Tell me, what gives you this miraculous insight? Oh, I've seen this kind of crack justification plenty of times before. If you assume that the adverts work on a CPM payment system, and then you assume that there are X number of active F2Ps, and then you assume that each ad generates Y number of dollars per impression, and then you assume that each F2P server requires Z number of dollars per month to run, F2P magically becomes more profitable than P2P. Sorry mate, but without some concrete, referenced information directly from Jagex HQ, all of this stuff is just an exercise in making assumptions.

Heh. You can post the picture directly like this: [img=http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/9770/buglv9.png] So...in a quest where you're charged with using fatsy toadies and stabbie chuckers, you're concerned with a poorly conjugated verb. Am I the only one who finds this ironic?

Back in charge, eh? In that case, let me put this here too. Lol. I just realised that the sig I made says "black wizard (g) robes" instead of "black (g) wizard robes". I'm shocked I haven't been accused of racism. :lol: Gotta remember to fix that sometime.

Whaddya think, Komodo? Sound good?

Yeah, we did. I think the reason that Komodo's a little reluctant to add that to the original post, is that it's emphasizing something other than what he's trying to emphasize. It's true that P2P gets a lot more neat stuff than we do, but that's not really the reason that Komodo's making this suggestion. Focusing on the fact that we can't use P2P equipment carries some implication that we're asking for something purely because we have less stuff than paying members - which wouldn't attract much support. Rather, the suggestion is based on an imbalance in F2P combat, and potential fixes for that imbalance - which is something your sig doesn't really convey. I hope that makes sense to ya.

F2P is a "full version" of sorts. Like it or not, it's a stand-alone game that is still receiving the odd update (in addition to graphic updates and what have you). There is no time limit, no level limit on the accessable skills - it's no demo. Try thinking of P2P as an expansion pack. A really freakin' good expansion pack, but an expansion pack. Currently, that is pretty much the case. I don't really know why, though; it's difficult to justify purchasing a product when the sample is obviously flawed. I believe the rest of what you've said speaks for itself. :) Pures don't usually have a problem with their equipment being expensive. Check out the level 20-30 mages in Edgeville or Varrock - you'll notice that, despite the fact that their kills are pretty much worthless, they're still blasting away with deaths and chomping on lobsters. So no, I doubt that would prevent the lower-level mages from further skewing the lower-level triangle. Oh, Komodo? You can stick the names of users into the quote directly like this: [quote name="Nameoftheuserhere"]Whattheusersaid[/quote]It's like url tags, you just need quotation marks around their name/handle.

Crackers. Well, I doubt you'll see my edit now, so I'll point it out here. Try using "code" tags instead of "quote" tags to display sig bbcodes. That way you can close "img" and "url" tags properly, and not have to explain how to fix anything. I'll take a backseat on the specific bonuses for the time being. I hadn't given it much thought, truth be told.

We're talking about balance, which means both are relevant - which is fine, because both cases have the same result in my experiences. 40 defense would be odd, for sure. But I'm confused, you said these robes would make mages "dominate the wilderness at all combat levels", and now you tell me the mages using these robes would all be owned by 1-def pures? :-k Splitbark is probably the only suggestion raised that would involve 40 defense. I personally recommended a 10 defense requirement several pages ago, which makes them a tradeoff in the early levels, but an obvious benefit in later levels. Again, feel free to add your own suggestions. Rangers owning mages most of the time is fine, I don't recall saying anything to the contrary, and I doubt I ever will; it is disturbing, however, when both range and melee own magic most of the time. Oh, uhm, Komodo? try using "code" tags instead of "quote" tags to display sig bbcodes. That way you can close the "url" and "img" tags properly, and won't have to explain how to fix it. :P

Nah. Somewhere in the 125-129 range is expected, depending on how closely the emulating formula is to Jagex's true formula. 126 is very probable, considering that it's also the current maximum combat level.

Oh, so they have an advantage in the crappy early levels when nobody drops anything worthwhile, so therefore they must dominate at all combat levels? You've said some zany things in the past, Striker, but that's just plain silly. Get your range pker up to about 80 combat, and watch mages get slaughtered by both melee and range. The fact that there is a "time" to use one class over the others is scary in itself. There have been suggestions to avoid worsening the low-level mage's advantage; Most specifically, a defense requirement for the robes, and a high level spell (hitting for a only little more than fire blast) as opposed to the robes. Rather than bringing up a grievance that has been visited a few times already, you could simply recommend one of those. Also feel free to add your own suggestions for reducing the early mage's advantage without worsening the late combat disadvantage.

Whip's chance, whip's chance. Tbh, that doesn't mean too much to me. The drop rate of whips by abyssal demons, now that's something I can understand. "D-chain's chance" makes even less sense, since there are different drop rates for the chain, depending on the monster in question. KQ and Dust Devils, for example. I have a sneaking suspicion that I wouldn't support what you're suggesting, but I'll leave that door open for the moment, because I'm still having difficulty absorbing it. Perhaps less comparisons would help - it's rather irritating to wade through, "it's like this with a bit of that and this other thing", as opposed to, "it gives +60 to strength bonus, weighs 32kg". That might just be my preference, though. Pictures are always helpful, too, if you're artistically inclined. :P

Consider the following: Full blue wizard robes: +5/+5 Full blue mystic: +45/+45 If we're going to get a set with such bonuses, it might as well be blue mystic. I personally think it's best if the new set is inbetween; both to silence those p2p doomsayers, and to open up the potential for slight melee defense bonuses, or a new quest/minigame. True, magic attack bonuses for f2p seem low compared to the other classes. Yet, consider full Ahrims - a mere +73 respective accuracy bonus, to Dharok's +103, or Karil's +134. True, none of those are the optimized setup for accuracy bonuses, but surely that is enough to convince you that magic attack bonuses are simply lower by nature.

Kids these days and their excuses. :roll: [img=http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/6360/dwfixedcn3.png]

J'ai ma ton ̮̩̉̉cole. Literally, "I have my tone school". The grammar is abysmal, but it was the best I could do on short notice. :wink:

So you're telling me that Jagex's customer support team can check each 60-second report snapshot "through fully" in a mere 3 seconds? I smell beans, dude. :lol: I know about it. I read it. What I saw was essentially a bunch of sugar-coated, politically correct, diplomatic hooey. The pure essense update was effective in reducing the profit margin of 2x nat crafting, and added to the incentive to purchase membership. It utterly failed to deter autoers, and if many of us could see that would be the case, how could Jagex's paid employees miss it? True, the repercussions of such things aren't particularly harmful, so I really shouldn't complain. This sort of thing just really bothers me. I don't dish out my $5/month to run half-truths through a sieve, I get enough of that crap from politicians. We're all human beings here, why can't he level with us?

I am rather sure that you are full of beans. :P Autoers don't appeal, they make new accounts. Legit players, on the other hand, generally appeal heavily when accused of autoing. In some ways, it does therefore make sense to handle rule #7 reports with minimal attention, investigating carefully only when the reported player doesn't appear to be a typical macro at first glance. The CS manpower freed up for other tasks this way is considerable, and occasional slips/mistakes can be quickly remedied when appealed. Merely speculation, mind you, but I doubt intensive operations go into every single report. Dutchdreams clearly has it right, as well. I don't know why Andrew refuses to talk straight with his players, but it sure irks me.

I'm actually not going to support this - not because it's a bad idea, but because I can't think of molotov cocktails without thinking of GTA. First crossdressing princes, now molotovs, next thing you know it's Hot Coffee with the sandwich lady. :uhh: Something closer to the medieval theme might be greek fire - I've heard fables of flasks of the stuff being hurled like grenades. I'll leave you to flesh out the thought, though.

Quite right, though not an accurate comparison to the imbalance in f2p combat. F2p's mages cannot make their own runes, but they do have an 'almost-as-good', and that's direct purchases from members. You can suffice with the alternative, or you can purchase membership. F2p's mages also cannot effectively compete with players of other classes at their combat levels - they have no 'almost-as-good'. That (in my humble opinion) is a problem, because players who try maging as f2p's have at best a mixed incentive to become members. After seeing firsthand that the combat system is imbalanced, would you really want to purchase membership, in hopes that the combat system there is more reasonable? 66 magic...and a number of slayer monsters drop mystic robes, they just aren't blue. Your comments on monsters are cute, but I fail to see how they are relevant. The economy would not crumble like so much damp papier mache just from blue mystic becoming tradeable to non-members. It would initially be more expensive on non-member worlds, as colored gloves are now, that much is true. However, I severely doubt it would be all so bad as you preach, because unlike colored gloves, the robes would have function, and thus significant demand. Between the influx of mystic robes into non-member worlds, and the quick change of hands that mystic sets would undergo thanks to PKing, the price would normalize. I mentionned ghostly robes back on page two simply for the bonuses they had. You might even notice that the equipment I made up back there had bonuses comparable to ghostly robes. I don't need your spaz attack to figure out that Desert Treasure isn't going to become a non-member quest, and neither does anybody else, so calm down. A pity Komodoman already covered that in the original post. Not that anyone would ever want to read that before posting, of course. You might be noticing a light pressure on your trachea right about now - that's your foot. Feel free to post again after you've dislodged it.

I know all about it, mate, I missed out on the chicken too. But that doesn't create any need for further recognition. Do the players who missed out on christmas cracker drops need compensation? Not really - it's unfortunate, but that's life. It's a quaint thought, but why bother adding more data (that I expect will be largely ignored) to the highscores?

And this is supposed to convince us that more useless stuff is worthwhile? How ironic. Holiday drops don't have to have their drop dates etched on them for people to recognize the age involved. Have a yo-yo? I guess you were playing during Christmas, 2004. Got a marionette? Methinks Christmas 2005 was involved. Reindeer hat? My my, you were online over Christmas 2006. Capiche?

Highscore notes? Nah, I'd suggest periodical one-time non-tradeable drops, as both proof of age, and for a little flavor/amusement. ...Oh, wait...

Ethan, see the bits of green text in the code boxes? Copy and paste one of those into your signature box, accessed via the profile button near the top of the window. Normally, in the same space, you open an image tag with alt+p, paste the image's url, and close the tag with another alt+p, but these ones have url tags incorporated too - might as well just grab them. Sooner or later, somebody is going to spew this nonsense about priest robes, so I'm going to clear it up right now. Black robes do exist. It's true that the pictures made by Jiraiya are edited versions of priest robes, but you might notice that the real article was used to create my contributed signature. Don't believe me? See these entries in the items database: Black robe Black skirt Everyone feel free to quote that when (inevitably) somebody says otherwise.

Okay, first of all, cutting sapphires is 50 xp apiece. Next, if you're dealing in "1k cuts/uncuts at once", you really should change the part of your guide that says, "at least 10 of every gem cut". If, however, you're talking about buying the gems with cash, not only does that point fail to apply to jwrm22's comment, but you should have a little note in your guide that a few mill in cash is required. While I'm at it, +1 to everything Dalcyte said. Sorry if that sounds unnecessarily abrasive, I rather like crafting, and I rather don't like inaccurate/incomplete information. Personal flaw on my part.