Tip.It Times Presents: Anything Goes

[magekillr]

agreed with the article for the most part...however...

 

 

 

if every1 used protection prayers then essentially it would make it impossible to die. i agree that hybriding definitely comes into play there...but when you need to bring other equipment along with your 1 type...then it becomes burdensome and you have basically no no room for food.

 

 

 

i think torsos shouldn't be allowed to be picked up again (same with fire capes and defenders and others)...i have clearly said that. thank god me and Newson got the helms changed so they became tradeable..but all the other items should not "stay on the ground" for a short time after you die...it's absurd.

 

 

 

safing? HA! what a stupid term...it's called eating..and i'm allowed to eat anytime i want.

 

 

 

farcasting? HA! that's what a mage is supposed to do.

 

 

 

teleporting? meh...w/e. i don't tele but it doesn't bother me when others do.

 

 

 

attacking before pot? LOLOLLOLOL!!! wtf is this? it's the wild...you must be prepared for anything. i certainly don't remember in runescape classic ANYONE complaining about this.

 

 

 

asking for a fight? same as the potting

 

 

 

one iteming? friggan annoying. protect item needs to be removed

[transcript80]

Teleporting from fights is just lame... i waste 3 prayer pots, 20 sharks on a person, and they don't have the decency to atleast run.

 

 

 

That's what teleblock is for. After all, you still have the xp, or double since you are in the wilderness.

 

 

 

To "quote " the article: I guess you weren't good enough...

 

 

 

There's nothing honourable in death.

[magekillr]

Teleporting from fights is just lame... i waste 3 prayer pots, 20 sharks on a person, and they don't have the decency to atleast run.

 

 

 

That's what teleblock is for. After all, you still have the xp, or double since you are in the wilderness.

 

 

 

To "quote " the article: I guess you weren't good enough...

 

 

 

There's nothing honourable in death.

 

 

 

takes 25 magic to teleport away but 85 magic to teleblock them? not to mention it takes 2 runes to teleport away but 3 runes to teleblock them? actually...only 1 space to tele away (teletablets)

 

 

 

and you also need magic gear to make a successful teleblock, while teleing away will never fail.

[mujtaba]

Teleporting from fights is just lame... i waste 3 prayer pots, 20 sharks on a person, and they don't have the decency to atleast run.

 

 

 

That's what teleblock is for. After all, you still have the xp, or double since you are in the wilderness.

 

 

 

To "quote " the article: I guess you weren't good enough...

 

 

 

There's nothing honourable in death.

 

 

 

takes 25 magic to teleport away but 85 magic to teleblock them? not to mention it takes 2 runes to teleport away but 3 runes to teleblock them? actually...only 1 space to tele away (teletablets)

 

 

 

and you also need magic gear to make a successful teleblock, while teleing away will never fail.

 

 

 

if that is your problem maybe pking isn't for you.....

[Zarfay]

lol its funny how many 'noobs' are posting saying that were pathetic pkers and the such because the point of pking is to gain items from killing other players and making sure they don't take yours these people complain because they do that well your contradicting yourselves arnt you because thats the point of the bloody wilderness!

[randy1009]

Ah I've always found these so called "rules" to be ridiculous. Wilderness honour? More like the idiots guide to instant death. Which I at least, pay no mind to, I like to take every advantage I have pking because it saves me a lot of time and a lot of trouble. So I liked this article, good topic.

[magekillr]

Teleporting from fights is just lame... i waste 3 prayer pots, 20 sharks on a person, and they don't have the decency to atleast run.

 

 

 

That's what teleblock is for. After all, you still have the xp, or double since you are in the wilderness.

 

 

 

To "quote " the article: I guess you weren't good enough...

 

 

 

There's nothing honourable in death.

 

 

 

takes 25 magic to teleport away but 85 magic to teleblock them? not to mention it takes 2 runes to teleport away but 3 runes to teleblock them? actually...only 1 space to tele away (teletablets)

 

 

 

and you also need magic gear to make a successful teleblock, while teleing away will never fail.

 

 

 

if that is your problem maybe pking isn't for you.....

 

 

 

been playing since runescape classic hun...pking is all that runescape is...

 

 

 

you don't see a problem there? teleporting away should require magic gear to do so...or fail...just like any other spell

 

 

 

i also find it funny how many people agree with this article...when the same people are the ones complaining about me attacking them without letting them pot

[HellsBells]

I agree. And then...I don't. I'm going to get flamed for this... :uhh: :pray: Anyways, Teleporting, Prayer, and Potions are "dishonorable" in my opinion. Just comes down to who has more money to blow on one fight.

[Ginger_Warrior]

OK, firstly, a very good article, even if it does point out the blatently obvious at points, but then I suppose the people you criticise in your article should really take note of the obvious in regards to PKing.

 

 

 

I've never been a PKer, nor do I ever intend to. I have killed people, but only in self-defence. I have problems with wiping someone off his hard earned equipment. However, on my trips to get D Bones/Hides, and after reading posts on TIF, I've come to the conclusion that many people, most notably (it has to be said) Pures seem to have an attitude of "My uber-mage/strength/range level owns everyone, thus the items of anyone who I attack automatically belong to me, and I shouldn't be made to work for them, because I worked in getting this much experience in the first place".

 

 

 

This attitude makes me laugh, and frankly I find it amusing when such people do attack me, and I use steel skin and P from Melee so they can't lay a hit on me for their strength to take effect, so I consequently kill them, and they gone down shouting a torent of abuse when I'm the one that's taken their stuff and not the other way round.

 

:lol:

 

 

 

However, as said before, the attitude seems to lie with more narrow-minded pures (not that all pures are narrow-minded, mind you). I think they started to invent such rules when they started to realise anyone with a defence level over 70 can easily take care with them using a bit of brains, and so they made these ridiculous rules to make the Wilderness theirs' again. After all, the only thing that stops them from defeating all of us and taking our items are those bullet points in the article. In essence, it's partly a form of jealousy that someone actually has the guts to turn round and fight them, and not only that, but win; but it's also a very conservative stance. The wilderness as once theirs', and they don't see why these menial things that they're prevented from using should have stopped this.

[starev91]

First, a bit of criticism of Tip it:

 

This (the below quote) shows that most of my comment went right over the author's head. Either that, or he likes to make Straw Men (look it up on wikipedia), which is what else that could be, and both are bad ways for tip it's guest writer, and by extension, Tip it itself, to represent their respective selves. 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 writer who will then dodge the issues about his article brought up by the Tip it community as part of a weekly feature that I generally like reading, retired from Runescape as I am. Although you couldn't predict the dodging of issues, it should have been assumed that this would be an inflammatory article, and if the author offered clarifications and discussion, he should have been instructed in how to do it well, or, at minimum, he should have been instructed in "no nos when answering questions or comments about an article". In all seriousness, next time offer both sides of the issue or neither. Or at least make sure the author can represent himself in a way that doesn't make the more informed readers want to nearly defecate themselves in shame over his representation of humanity. Note that I count myself in the "more informed readers" category, although others might not :P

 

 

 

I don't like how Sausageman10 glorifies the selfish, self serving manner in which many runescape players play the game without offering an alternative way at looking at the matter. His way, nobody wins. At least the honorable way, someone wins, even if it isn't you.

 

You can posture about selfishness all you like, and if people were more generous and friendly Scape would indeed be a nicer game. However, anyone who takes that attitude with them to the wilderness is deluded. The entire point of the place is to kill people and take their stuff.

 

 

 

And that you didn't understand the point of mentioning "self serving selfishness" does not then mean that I am saying "lets all be nice, generous, and friendly so that 'scape can be fun" worries me. It really does. It makes me think that you noticed one word of my well developed two sentences, and based an argument off it, without actually comprehending it, or that you have an affinity for the aforementioned Straw Men, which is making a parody, a close version of an argument, but not the actual argument, and then knocking down that fake version instead of attacking the much harder position of the real one.

 

 

 

Since you see to have an aversion for long words, I'm going to put this simply, without using complex terms such as "honor", which your egocentric mind obviously doesn't understand the meaning of.

 

 

 

The message was more along the lines of:

 

 

 

"Since the entire point of the place is to, ya know, kill people and take their stuff, those who fight in silly ways are making this not work for anyone, and the wilderness's main goal is not in effect for anyone who is not pking with a clan in deep wildy. This is bad for everyone of the players involved, as the good pkers loose food, pots, etc. for no gain, and the bad ones lose food, pots, etc. and telerunes. This means that the wilderness is no longer any good for anyone, and people should have the decency to not pk if they aren't going to pk in ways that make that part of the game more enjoyable. This extends to other parts of the game, in other ways, and make the whole game less enjoyable. That's why I, and probably many others, quit."

 

 

 

That easier to understand? If not, I could simplify it further, but I'm afraid of losing the original message. Now, if you would please, respond to that without a straw man. To be safe, since I'm not sure it'll be easy to wean someone off straw men, this means no summaries, no shorter versions, and no rephrasings in your response, just the response itself. Please and thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: As I realized this might not be clear, I'm going to say it here: I don't disagree with all of the article. Mages are supposed to "farcast", that's a given. I disagree with it's position on teleports, running, using protection prayers, wearing armor that is nearly the same as one iteming, one iteming, and the like. Namely: the things that people do to keep from losing stuff in a place where you should have a good chance of losing more then just the food you ate while fighting.

[kam42705]

I do have to say that this was a great read, although I do have to say that your writings were very persuasive... and utterly biased. You make it seem as if the wilderness is not bound by the rules set up by players. In that point, I agree with you. However, you always have those few rotten apples in a bunch that attempt to rule the others, and that is what is occuring within our beloved wilderness. So now, us players MUST take a stand- Which of these beliefs are will willing to stand and fight for? And that is what is the true essence of this game-all of the players working together to find a solution to their different standpoints.

[Karmastocracy]

Agreed! :P (With the Article)

 

 

 

Great article & a good read.

[Frozen]

Flammcor...You're not even really debating the topic anymore. You're debating the author's ability to debate. Wonderful.

 

 

 

In other news...

 

 

 

 

 

*Applause*

 

 

 

Great article.

[Erk02]

Is this what the Tip.It times has become? A place where someone with minimal writing ability can state their blind opinion? This article disgusts me.

[starev91]

Flammcor...You're not even debating the topic anymore. You're debating the author's ability to debate. Wonderful.

 

 

 

 

Ever debated with someone who can't debate? Tis frustrating beyond belief. I can understand Flammcor's reason for complaining. Indeed, his lack of ability to debate was one of my concerns... most of his responses for comments against him are straw men (don't know the term, then look it up :P), after all, which are horrid things to debate with, but quite useful things if you are trying to convince an audience of something.

 

 

 

I doubt there's an audience raptly listening to him though, so...

 

 

 

Is this what the Tip.It times has become? A place where someone with minimal writing ability can state their blind opinion? This article disgusts me.

 

 

 

And then, to top it off, debate it badly afterwards :P

 

 

 

Only joking..

 

 

 

Main point: Say WHY it disgusts you, not just that it does. Say WHY you think he has minimal writing ability. Only then will there be change for the better.

[quitthegame]

Or at least make sure the author can represent himself in a way that doesn't want to make the more informed of us nearly defecate ourselves in shame at his representation of humanity to us.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure you mean the opposite of the opposite of the opposite of this quote starev, i suggest you edit it yesterday.

[Artificial_Doom_Flavor]

Thank you for your suggestion that we use the Duel Arena for "fair fights" and use "teleblock" and "ensnare." I'll be sure to change my strategy the next time I log into a free-to-play world.

 

 

 

Please. If someone pilejumps, uses protection prayers (when both players can do it- I sort of agree with your point on this), safes, tag teams, or teleports/runs (from a dm) in f2p wildy in world 3 or related "Duel worlds," I have every right to label them an incompetent n00b. I think it is fairly obvious to anyone with the mental capacity of a chipmunk that many of these players CANNOT fight playing by the (arbitrary but helpful) rules between most standard players so they simply DO NOT (there are exceptions, of course, but these are few). To label me and many others as greedy pigs for asking simply that our opponents put themselves at the same level of risk as we do is utterly narrow-minded and callous.

 

 

 

If I wanted to, I could easily do all of these things: I could safe, use protection prayers in duels, pilejump, and tag-team shamelessly, but you know why I don't? It's because I don't need to do that to win. I eat below 40%, I never use protection prayers (which, because of the holy symbol I bring, last far longer than my opponent's anyway), I attack pjers, and I go solo. I believe that it takes a stronger player to win though adhering to a code that makes it easier for them to die. It makes battles more challenging. Most of all, it gives me a sense of satisfaction when I own people who can't play by duel world code but still lose when I DO.

 

 

 

You talk about "taking fights to deeper wilderness," which is one thing f2pers CAN do so that their opponent can't teleport or run. Terrific idea. Now my opponent's friends can sit just offscreen until the battle is over, rush right on in, and kill me while I'm deprived of food, strength potion, and possibly prayer (str/att). Brilliant.

 

 

 

Someone is going to come along and say "HAY D00M! PAY IF U DUNT LIEK F2P FIETANIG!" Yes, I'm well aware that formal dueling is a luxury that only members get. My point is that we f2pers have no other place to call a Duel Arena, so it's up to us to decide whether or not we want to make formal duels a reality or not through sticking to a "code of honor."

[starev91]

Or at least make sure the author can represent himself in a way that doesn't want to make the more informed of us nearly defecate ourselves in shame at his representation of humanity to us.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure you mean the opposite of the opposite of the opposite of this quote starev, i suggest you edit it yesterday.

 

 

 

Well, breaking it down:

 

 

 

Make sure the author can represent himself-Teach him

 

In a way that doesn't make-not to

 

make the more informed of us--make the smart people

 

nearly defecate ourselves in shame--wet ourselves at the shame

 

at his representation of humanity to us--of his stupidity.

 

 

 

Teach him not to make the smart people wet ourselves at the shame of his stupidity.

 

 

 

Other then a vague pronoun (which I will fix), it gets across the idea quite well.

[quitthegame]

Flammcor...You're not even really debating the topic anymore. You're debating the author's ability to debate. Wonderful.

 

 

 

In other news...

 

 

 

 

 

*Applause*

 

 

 

Great article.

 

 

 

I agree with 95% of the article. The other 5% of the article contradicts itself. Sadly, that 5% is the central thesis of the article, which kinda negates the point of the whole thing. I believe I am doing my best to clearly state my positions, the more self-contradictory and unclear lbo is in his replies to me, the more tangled my replies become in an attempt to address his points.

[quitthegame]

Or at least make sure the author can represent himself in a way that doesn't want to make the more informed of us nearly defecate ourselves in shame at his representation of humanity to us.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure you mean the opposite of the opposite of the opposite of this quote starev, i suggest you edit it yesterday.

 

 

 

Well, breaking it down:

 

 

 

Make sure the author can represent himself-Teach him

 

In a way that doesn't make-not to

 

make the more informed of us--make the smart people

 

nearly defecate ourselves in shame--wet ourselves at the shame

 

at his representation of humanity to us--of his stupidity.

 

 

 

Teach him not to make the smart people wet ourselves at the shame of his stupidity.

 

 

 

Other then a vague pronoun (which I will fix), it gets across the idea quite well.

 

 

 

I see that you are trying to say "teach him not make the smart people wet ourselves at the shame of his stupidity", but what you actually said translates to "his actions would rip themselves off his body and force smart people to defecate all over this friday's tip it times, in a shameful fashion" which is both disgusting and insane, and probably not what you meant.

[killjoyfuly]

Or at least make sure the author can represent himself in a way that doesn't want to make the more informed of us nearly defecate ourselves in shame at his representation of humanity to us.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure you mean the opposite of the opposite of the opposite of this quote starev, i suggest you edit it yesterday.

 

 

 

Well, breaking it down:

 

 

 

Make sure the author can represent himself-Teach him

 

In a way that doesn't make-not to

 

make the more informed of us--make the smart people

 

nearly defecate ourselves in shame--wet ourselves at the shame

 

at his representation of humanity to us--of his stupidity.

 

 

 

Teach him not to make the smart people wet ourselves at the shame of his stupidity.

 

 

 

Other then a vague pronoun (which I will fix), it gets across the idea quite well.

you have just basicly said that that you concider yourself anf some others "smart people" when realy your just trying to act smart on a fansite of a game catering towards a younger audience i wish you would stop aruing about how it condrticts it self this topic orgianly startesd well debeating the essence of what the author wrote not how he wrote it i personaly wish every would get back to that

 

 

 

PS: i am in now way denying you are smart im just stating that by say "the smart people" (and obviously including your self in that large number) it makes you see very full of your self

[Artificial_Doom_Flavor]

you have just basicly said that that you concider yourself anf some others "smart people" when realy your just trying to act smart on a fansite of a game catering towards a younger audience i wish you would stop aruing about how it condrticts it self this topic orgianly startesd well debeating the essence of what the author wrote not how he wrote it i personaly wish every would get back to that

 

 

 

PS: i am in now way denying you are smart im just stating that by say "the smart people" (and obviously including your self in that large number) it makes you see very full of your self

 

I cannot read your argument.

[starev91]

Or at least make sure the author can represent himself in a way that doesn't want to make the more informed of us nearly defecate ourselves in shame at his representation of humanity to us.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure you mean the opposite of the opposite of the opposite of this quote starev, i suggest you edit it yesterday.

 

 

 

Well, breaking it down:

 

 

 

Make sure the author can represent himself-Teach him

 

In a way that doesn't make-not to

 

make the more informed of us--make the smart people

 

nearly defecate ourselves in shame--wet ourselves at the shame

 

at his representation of humanity to us--of his stupidity.

 

 

 

Teach him not to make the smart people wet ourselves at the shame of his stupidity.

 

 

 

Other then a vague pronoun (which I will fix), it gets across the idea quite well.

 

 

 

I see that you are trying to say "teach him not make the smart people wet ourselves at the shame of his stupidity", but what you actually said translates to "his actions would rip themselves off his body and force smart people to defecate all over this friday's tip it times, in a shameful fashion" which is both disgusting and insane, and probably not what you meant.

 

 

 

Yes, it's not. And it's not what I said, either, unless you misinterpreted the slightly vague (but not ungrammatical) use of the pronoun "our" as me speaking from Tip it's point of view, which I hardly was doing. Our was from the point of view of the more informed of us, which might be slightly vague use, but not particularly bad use. Either way, us and our was changed to them and their.

 

 

 

Note to self:

 

Defecate would actually mean more general toilet use then the more specific wet ourselves. Keep track of simplifications.

 

Edited to add:

 

you have just basicly said that that you concider yourself anf some others "smart people" when realy your just trying to act smart on a fansite of a game catering towards a younger audience i wish you would stop aruing about how it condrticts it self this topic orgianly startesd well debeating the essence of what the author wrote not how he wrote it i personaly wish every would get back to that

 

 

 

PS: i am in now way denying you are smart im just stating that by say "the smart people" (and obviously including your self in that large number) it makes you see very full of your self

 

 

 

What I am saying is that from a group who usually provides good, easy to read articles, their guest writing this week is particularly bad. I don't think Tip it caters to an audience younger then mid teens, and arguments about an article are reasonable things to do if you agree with them.

 

 

 

P.S. Yes, I'm an egotist. What's your point?

[jessethegreat]

these edge pkers dont know how to fight right. im may be only 75, but i pk in deeper wildy then they do, and trust me, its funner. i actually found someone, 75 at the time while i was 68, sitting at the greaters, in full zammy. i got my friend and we killed him. i got more hits in, so i got the drop. lo and behold, the guy also had 1.6 mil on him, along with 300 nats, and he dropped his scimmy and zammy full helm. thats a bigger profit in one kill than most edge pkers get in a day, depending on if they get a whip or barrows or just some nub stuff. these rules in the wildy have disgusted me. i get tangled, i get teleblocked, i get mobbed. sometimes i get away. sometimes i die. but its all in the name of fun, and its usually my fault anyways.

[Artificial_Doom_Flavor]

these edge pkers dont know how to fight right. im may be only 75, but i pk in deeper wildy then they do, and trust me, its funner. i actually found someone, 75 at the time while i was 68, sitting at the greaters, in full zammy. i got my friend and we killed him. i got more hits in, so i got the drop. lo and behold, the guy also had 1.6 mil on him, along with 300 nats, and he dropped his scimmy and zammy full helm. thats a bigger profit in one kill than most edge pkers get in a day, depending on if they get a whip or barrows or just some nub stuff. these rules in the wildy have disgusted me. i get tangled, i get teleblocked, i get mobbed. sometimes i get away. sometimes i die. but its all in the name of fun, and its usually my fault anyways.

 

 

 

Has it ever occurred to you that the reasons people "Edge pk" MIGHT be the 2-boost altar, monks, nearby bank, rune source (abyssal runecrafters who sell their goods), open terrain (few obstacles in level 1-5 wildy as opposed to those in the duel arena, which many people abuse), and lack of restrictions on fighting style (by this I mean the ability to change from mage or melee or range, use potions and whatnot, not using protection prayers or 1-iteming)? I'm sure that many of these people who "don't know how to pk" could school you if they were going to fight you freestyle.

 

 

 

Congrats on the 2v1 pk, btw.

 

 

 

A further thought on 1-itemers or people who wear cheap items: The reason people get so very annoyed at this is because it is a waste of time to fight an opponent who is not properly armed and who will lose virtually nothing. There is no significant reward for winning the battle and the fight becomes little more than a terrible food-draining annoyance because it is virtually given that the 1-itemer will lose.