Tip.It Times Presents: Anything Goes

[norwayman4]

I disagree with the author of this article. I think that if everyone prayed protection prayers, 1v1 fights would be extremely boring. I agree with Djmans on this one.

[LordoftheSquishies]

I disagree with the author of this article. I think that if everyone prayed protection prayers, 1v1 fights would be extremely boring. I agree with Djmans on this one.

 

 

 

Hence we have Smite.

[0ne_time]

I disagree with the author of this article. I think that if everyone prayed protection prayers, 1v1 fights would be extremely boring. I agree with Djmans on this one.

 

 

 

Hence we have Smite.

 

 

 

This is in the General forum for F2P.

[Twisted_Orgy]

I totally agree with everything except!:

 

 

 

The clan thing! In a war that's where Honor matters, like in 300 (which is actually based on a true story, though exaggerated obviously) if one of the Spartans had run, that's not excusable. The way I see it, I have tons of friends in my clan, I am willing to give anything to them and help them out anyway I can. It's like a family. I am also willing to die for my clan, which is expected from true clan.

 

 

 

When i've gone to wars, I've never seen one of my clan members run or the enemies clan members run. If you can't afford the items your bringing, don't go to a war :boohoo: . There's two roads, not an imbetween.

 

 

 

As always I love every article (and can relate) to every article that's been written :thumbsup:

[quitthegame]

I disagree with the author of this article. I think that if everyone prayed protection prayers, 1v1 fights would be extremely boring. I agree with Djmans on this one.

 

 

 

Hence we have Smite.

 

 

 

This is in the General forum for F2P.

 

 

 

All discussion threads for the Times go in this forum, including the one about hunting. BTW, the smite comment was drawn directly from the actual editorial, I suggest you reread it before making more snarky comments.

[Sir_Squab]

I agree with this article. There's not much I can really say 'cause the article says it all. My motto in video gaming has ALWYAS been no honour. Like the time in a shooting game where I had following missles and low health and my friend just respawned full health and bad gun... I hid behind a door and killed him :) I'm gonna be a farcast pker when I get 70 mage and 65 rc in lvl 20+ wilde and be proud wearing full ghostly and ancient staff.

 

 

 

(And I wonder if any of these pkers who complain about lack of so called "honour" obey it themselves? I HIGHLY HIGHLY doubt it. They probably just haven't done ancients or slug menace)

 

 

 

EIDT: Afer reading some posts, please let me summarize in one paragraph my little article/opinion on this.

 

 

 

Teleports were put in the game not only to transport but to escape if your dying - otherwise they would all be like the home port spell. And Jagex put tele block/snare and no tele in 20+ wilde for a reason. Ancient magic was put into the game FOR farcasting. There is no where in the rules saying you have to bring expensive items into wilderness and stay and fight. Protect prayers are allowed in wilde and if your opponent uses them - well it can get annoying but there's not much you can do other then use d scimmy spec or use prayer yourself. There is no time limit before attacking someone - you can attack without permission or without letting them pot up. You can respawn and head back to wilderness and harass other the guy who killed you by attacking him. (Verbal harrassment = no.) All these things you CAN do but don't have to. If you want to have an honour fight then good for you - just make sure your opponent knows this and be prepared for those without honour. Most people do like their pixles more then honour. Get used to it. Stop complaining about honourless pkers - and if someone one wants to obey honour code in wilde, that's their problem. I would never use honour in wilderness but respect those who do. Not that I wouldn't attack them or use honour with them because of that. STOP FREAKING COMPLAINING WILDERNESS HAS NO RULES SO IF YOU WANT TO OR NOT OBEY HONOUR THAT'S YOUR CHOICE

 

Oh and even if world 18 is a "honour" world or "dual" world, alot of guys there aren't going to obey it....

 

P.S.Personally I think honour pkers should just go to dual arena, but hey there are no rules, so if they want to honour pk in wilderness they can go ahead

 

P.P.S. I'm pretty sure I have selling mistakes

 

P.P.P.S. As to my comment " (And I wonder if any of these pkers who complain about lack of so called "honour" obey it themselves? I HIGHLY HIGHLY doubt it. They probably just haven't done ancients or slug menace) major emphasis on the ALL part of this, as some pkers do go into wilde wanting honour and obeying it too, and actually have done desert treasure and slug menace.

[Father_Time89]

If the 'honorable' players are so concerned why don't they hunt out and eliminate the most dishonorable pkers, the abyss pkers. Also i have a question to the honorable pkers, if you saw a guy in deep wildy wearing a party hat who is skulled and you are fully equipped would you attack him? Be honest.

[Artificial_Doom_Flavor]

if you saw a guy in deep wildy wearing a party hat who is skulled and you are fully equipped would you attack him? Be honest.

 

 

 

No.

 

 

 

(And I wonder if any of these pkers who complain about lack of so called "honour" obey it themselves? I HIGHLY HIGHLY doubt it. They probably just haven't done ancients or slug menace)

 

 

 

If I'm in a "dueling world" wild, I don't pilejump, I don't protection pray, I don't safe, and I don't run or tele from DMs. kthx.

 

 

 

It's a bit of a different story when I'm mining rune and am low on food, of course- unfair circumstances and I'm obviously not there to fight, so I pray and use whatever means necessary to get the hell out of there.

[gantail]

Sausageman10 DUDE ARE YOU Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeengliiiiiiiiiiiiiiish?

 

 

 

 

 

 

cause you spell honor with an extra "u" :honour

 

 

 

Good Read tho

 

 

 

 

 

~Gantail

[Makoto_the_Phoenix]

Well this article is a pretty nice read. Let me go ahead and express my points to it (although it's been echoed thoroughly throughout this entire thread):

 

 

 

If you go into the Wilderness, expect things to happen. You can expect to be teleblocked, bound, frozen from someone that's possibly off-screen. You can expect to be hit a double-33 from a DDS special. You can even expect someone to teleport, pray, eat (even when you see no real reason to), and run like hell to safety. If you don't like it, you don't have to go across the ditch to go PKing anymore. The Wilderness is neither organized nor a massive dramatization of anything structured, such as Duel Arena. The article said it best: ANYTHING goes.

 

 

 

I don't PK anymore; I was formerly a member of BlacKnights and didn't really enjoy PKing back then either. I didn't like the way that the rule structures flowed; if I was going into the Wilderness I sure would use every advantage to my benefit. I wouldn't care what my reputation would look like; I'm not going to be bound to someone's silly rules of engagement.

 

 

 

For those of you that can't see the Wilderness for a no-holds-barred zone of engagement, then you really shouldn't be in the Wilderness. The Duel Arena's more suited to your style of playing and mentality.

[Mageonthat]

The people who ice burst blitz or barrage are annoying but not dishonourable, they become dishonuorable when all of a sudden you pull out d hide (as you said out smarting your oponent) they start splashing, so all of a sudden they getting attacked and then they tele.

 

Same goes for the non pures, they run in with theyre mith and dragon dagger spec 0's cause they got no pots or aint praying, call you a noob for theyre incompetence then tele.

 

Mageonthat

 

Tank 4 Lyph

[walleyeguy7]

its people like this that ruin the wild for all of us.

[starev91]

In all seriousness, an article detailing the other side of the issue should be done by someone if you're going to put a biased article...

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but simply because you don't agree with the article does not mean it's biased. It means that you don't agree with the author's opinion. He has an opnion, and so do you. Which one is correct? Both and neither. That's why they're called opinions. And if you feel that strongly about it, then why don't you write that article and submit it for publication? Remember, one of the Times' goals is to stimulate debate and discussion -- and this week, it certainly has. Mission accomplished.

 

 

 

 

My rather silly (and inflammatory, I realize that) comments aside:

 

If it were a non biased article it would look at the point from more then just one point of view. The article looks at an issue from one point of view, the author's opinion, does not consider the opposing point of view, which is a widely accepted opinion as well (which is why the article was written in the first place). It would be a non biased article if it went into why these unwritten rules were made, arguments for and against them, and the like.

 

 

 

But then putting aside the bias:

 

Perhaps the most important thing is that it attacks the opposing opinion in quite inflammatory and not very constructive ways. That part of it is insulting and doesn't have much point to it. For instance, the sentence: "It means they're craftier than you are and maybe, just maybe, you're just not good enough." serves little purpose other then to start fires. It's intended to say that those who care about honor pking aren't good enough or crafty enough, when neither is often the case... The point of those rules isn't to keep them from knowledge, it's to be followed.

 

 

 

If you insist, I will submit an article sometime this year; although I don't think that I'm the best qualified to write an answering article to this (nor do I feel particularly inclined to), and I'm sure there are many who are both better qualified and more eager to have their opinions heard. That way there can be two equally biased articles counterbalancing each other, instead of a biased article and a lackluster leaning article, which wouldn't satisfy the honor pkers at all, they'd only complain that such a badly written article supporting them got in. The ones that weren't just applauding it then leaving, that is. Perhaps an article on Role Play, the two elusive letters in MMORPG however, which I would be much better qualified to write as far as experience with things goes.

 

 

 

Other then that, as long as every tip it times article is as inflammatory as this one, advocating actions that a decently sized group of Runescape's population dislikes, and then insulting that same group (see the last two paragraphs), then there will be plenty of debate, although I'm not sure all of it will be civil.

 

 

 

 

 

 

While I don't share starev's sentiments about bias in the original article, this does seem like a good topic for another article with a different viewpoint. But it's not like one can just take the opposite viewpoint-- the original article is basically "1 a certain subset of the pking world has made their own rules, 2 i don't like it, 3 and they should stop making their own rules because there are no rules in the wildy" The first part is so well known that it's redundant, the second part is irrelevant, and the third part is incoherent. What's the opposite viewpoint to that?

 

 

 

An equally redundant, equally irrelevant, and perhaps just as incoherent writing. First, you would start with "A certain subset of the pking world has made their own rules", then move on to "I like it, here's why", and then end with "Everyone who is pking under *conditions* should honor pk, because it's good for the wildy". *conditions* would probably be "low level wilderness near Edgeville", or something along those lines. Not particularly interesting, in my opinion, but some people might want to read it, if only to accept it as a sort of "apology" from the Tip it times to soothe whatever burns this article caused.

[Makoto_the_Phoenix]

In all seriousness, an article detailing the other side of the issue should be done by someone if you're going to put a biased article...

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but simply because you don't agree with the article does not mean it's biased. It means that you don't agree with the author's opinion. He has an opnion, and so do you. Which one is correct? Both and neither. That's why they're called opinions. And if you feel that strongly about it, then why don't you write that article and submit it for publication? Remember, one of the Times' goals is to stimulate debate and discussion -- and this week, it certainly has. Mission accomplished.

 

 

 

 

My rather silly (and inflammatory, I realize that) comments aside:

 

If it were a non biased article it would look at the point from more then just one point of view. The same would go for an article for only honorable pking. It looks at an issue from one point of view, the author's opinion, does not consider the opposing point of view, which is a widely accepted opinion as well. It also attacks the opposing opinion in quite inflammatory ways. So yes, I would say that it is a biased article. Just to make a point, the same would go for an article written by a pker detailing why Honor Pking is better and all the other people just aren't good enough to honor pk.

 

 

 

If you insist, I will submit an article sometime this year; although I don't think that I'm the best qualified to write an answering article to this, and I'm sure there are many who are both better qualified and more eager to have their opinions heard. That way there can be two equally biased articles counterbalancing each other, instead of a biased article and a lackluster leaning article, which wouldn't satisfy the honor pking community at all. Perhaps an article on Role Play, the two elusive letters in MMORPG however, which I would be much better qualified to write as far as experience with things goes.

 

 

 

Other then that, as long as every tip it times article is as one sided and inflammatory as this one, advocating actions that a decently sized group of Runescape's population dislikes, and then insulting that same group (last two paragraphs), then there will be plenty of debate, although I'm not sure all of it will be civil.

 

 

 

Well there's another opinion/biased point: You believe that honor pking is better, whereas PKing in the Wilderness with whatever resources you can, however you can, and whenever you can is a cardinal sin and a mark of dishonor.

 

 

 

It's an opinion, you're entitled to disagree, but don't say that it's entirely biased. I for one don't pay attention to "honor" PKing since that's not what it was ever about. Is my opinion biased?

 

 

 

By the by, since I'm going to go by the text here, I don't see anything on Runescape.com about PKing with honor, nor do I see anything that says that you have to not do certain things. These are private taboos which (seemingly) have gone out of hand. [Rhetoric] If I have ancients and I want you to freeze, I'm going to freeze you whether you be eight or two squares away. If I have prayer I'm going to use it against you. If I have potions I don't want to hesitate in using those to counter your abilities either, and if I have food I'll eat it when I please. [/Rhetoric]

[starev91]

 

Well there's another opinion/biased point: You believe that honor pking is better, whereas PKing in the Wilderness with whatever resources you can, however you can, and whenever you can is a cardinal sin and a mark of dishonor.

 

I believe honor pking is more efficient use of resources on all parties, which doesn't necessarily make it better. But yes, that is my opinion, and if one was to assert that pking (without honor) is better, I would assert my opinion, which is partially counter to it, if not entirely counter to it.

 

 

 

It's an opinion, you're entitled to disagree, but don't say that it's entirely biased. I for one don't pay attention to "honor" PKing since that's not what it was ever about. Is my opinion biased?

 

 

Bias:

 

2. a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice.

 

So until your opinion prevents you from considering "Honor" pking as a system that is a viable way for some people to pk, even if it isn't you pking that way, then no, it isn't. As soon as you start to regard your view in a higher one then "honor pking", and look down on those who honor pk, then yes, it becomes biased.

 

 

 

By the by, since I'm going to go by the text here, I don't see anything on Runescape.com about PKing with honor, nor do I see anything that says that you have to not do certain things. These are private taboos which (seemingly) have gone out of hand.

 

Which is why honor pking isn't just pking in general. Of course, I don't see anything that says anything about setting up a clan to pk either. The only large mention of player clans is a FAQ question stating that they aren't an official part of the game, but you can feel free to start one. By that line of thought, Runescape clans are just as these honor pkers, just better organized. Yet they are quite important to many people, and have their own leaders, rule systems, and events.

 

 

 

Also, I see nothing about not being able to take over low level wilderness and enforce your own rules for pking through numbers, or call someone a "nh noob", after all: Anything goes. So...

[lotdt2]

everything there about pking is true people who obey these rules have a very strange way of thinking, however clan wars are slightly different, mostly they have agreed gear sets that everyone must bring so violation of this can be very annoying and you can make a case for why people shouldnt bring fireblast in a full rune war, also standing and fighting in clan wars even at the risk of loosing your stuff is still something worth doing, if you hug rocks your clan has time to kill members of the opposing clan and maybe win the war while your running around and distracting the clan from killing members of your own clan

[Sarahlk301]

I like this post a lot, its time those pures and pkers who think they run the game of runescape learned something, and making a public statement about it usually seems the only way to work since there usually so ignorant towards the idea(s). They also need to learn that they make up about 2% of the RS population.

[Metallicakn]

Strongly Agree with this article

 

 

 

and anyone who doesnt is just another noob that as he said is lazy

[Morpheus_002]

Great article. It makes a lot of sense and has valid points :D

[Asphodel]

I agree, you make some interesting points. The wilderness is dangerous and its ridiculously that people have to 'obey' the rules, so to speak.

 

However, and I may be slightly contradicting myself here, but there are certain rules that are more courtesy than anything else. Sure, anything goes, but Pjing is sad. There will always be a few who do anything for power, but the majority should hopefully follow common courtesy. Unfortunately this is lacking in rs.

[Aresgodowar]

 

 

 

The "honor" term, is just another way of saying respect.

 

By not teleporting, or any other of those examples you said, you are basically saying that you respect your opponent enough to give them what they deserve. If you are both fighting, low on sharks, and they are about to kill you, by teleporting, your slapping the person in the face, and denying them of your loot because you are too pixel hungry to even get close to risking anything.

 

 

 

 

 

Yah im gona just let you kill me :

 

 

 

You get my rune leg+plate,runeboots,helm,ddp, and other loot i have won

 

 

 

I get i sense of nowing i died nobelly

 

 

 

OR

 

 

 

I get to keep all my stuff and i just wasted all your supplies so you have to bank. Even a 5 year old would choose to keep all his items.

 

 

 

Like the auther of the artile said (GO GET 85 MAGE or mage pot AND TELE BLOCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

Good article

[Aisona]

I have some friends - a pair of them, really - who go out to the wildy basically every day and either

 

 

 

a) Complain the HELL of it to me, no pause

 

B) Exclaim with tons of question marks on their victory and boast/brag about what kind of stuff they got.

 

 

 

So it makes me wonder, as I read this article, what these guys are really thinking. And how they're acting. >.< If you don't want to lose a bunch of good armour, don't wear everything. Just bring a sword(weapon in general), platebody and legs/skirt/shield, and tele runes - if you happen to beat someone with good drops, take the items, then tele to the bank so you won't lose any of your stuff. That's how I would do it >.> Though, I'm still a bit weak when it comes to fighting other players in the wildy/castle wars. I die quite quickly -.- (Combat lvl 65.)

 

 

 

So, all in all, I AGREE. Whole-heartedly.

[et_magic]

I'm going to have to be the odd one out and say, that this article was completely wrong, and it seems like you have never pked before. Which isn't good considering you're bashing pkers throughout.

 

 

 

The "honor" term, is just another way of saying respect.

 

By not teleporting, or any other of those examples you said, you are basically saying that you respect your opponent enough to give them what they deserve. If you are both fighting, low on sharks, and they are about to kill you, by teleporting, your slapping the person in the face, and denying them of your loot because you are too pixel hungry to even get close to risking anything.

 

 

 

I totally agree with you, people now always agreeing to a DM(DEATH Match) but load of people constantly run or bring teles. Isn't it supposed to be a fight to the death? Even though we do invent checks they never alway work, they always can still run.

 

 

 

Going to the duel arena is also very different. People are willing to bring torags or ahrims to the duel arena, but are they willing to bring it to wilderness and die with it? Mostly NO.

 

 

 

Overall I think this article was OVER biased and that it gave no thought of the pker prospective. I am very disappointed at this article and i hope you will construct a better one next time.

 

 

 

~ET_Magic~

[jackal_55]

i dont much care for the "honour system" myself, but i do have a few rules.

 

 

 

1) i hate people who tele.

 

2) if you pray on me first i'll pray back AND eat at half health until im fully healed

 

3) tag me i use step 2, regardless of whether or not you pray first.

 

 

 

just 5 minutes ago i was pking with ace of bow on a F2P server at the dark warriors castle.

 

i was attacked by a team with 40+ people, only 1 person lower level than me, and all the others at least 4 levels higher.

 

they tagged out as soon as they had to eat, they prayed as soon as they tagged in, and what worse, i still acctually KILLED one of them.

 

 

 

they then proceded to unssucsesfully try and kill me yet again, after 10 minutes of being tagged, i WALKED away with 4 lobsters left, 12 prayer points, and full health.

 

 

 

i could do this because, gues what, they were all F2P rune pures, aka 40 attack and 40 defence, my tank is 50 defence and wearing rune and dragonhide, therefore my defence trumps their attack.

 

 

 

honour system = no

 

clean fight = yes

 

basically, fight without being stupid about it, why would i want to fight someone who is praying (cutting my damage in half, at best) and being a jerk? (other than to prove that they have absolutly no skill at pking)

 

as a policy i havent brought tele's since my first few members pk trips, while i was getting accusomed to the damage output.

 

 

 

well, thats my two-dollars :anxious:

[daskos99]

Wow, if you people don't like teleing, go into 30+ wildy where glories and ring of lives don't work. don't complain to us if you are a hypocrite; you hate people who are "chicken" and use a tele, but then you are "chicken" by not going into a higher level to avoid the telers...