After reading this week's development diary i became concerned about my rares investment.

 

 

 

Its a fact that bots and their net of rulebreakers can gather enourmouse quantities of recources in exange for RS money in an exponential way... After reaching their 'mules' that money is sold for real life cash ( during 2006, they banned bots and real-world trader accounts carrying RuneScape gold and items worth over 200 billion gp)

 

 

 

So now my question is, wich percentage of the price of rares is beeing afected by this? I strongly believe that in january the grinding to replace bots supply in member objects will raise prime materials, no doubt about that, but what will happen to rares i cannot predict and here are 2 (contradicting?) ideas:

 

 

 

1- Money value will increase, cause money will be harder to get getting the prices of raw materials up

 

 

 

2- how many rares will those RWT acounts take with them (during 2007, so far, they've banned over 525 billion in RWT acouts)

 

 

 

If there is a limit on the amount of money u can have so either they got rares or the potential to buy them... As a non profitable source they could easily alch it or leave the acounts behind...

 

 

 

It all aims to the fact that they will climb in price a lot or fall in price a lot...

seems like it could go either way, but i have no regrets for the things i have bought in my time playing. i wish everyone else was that same way.

I think Rares will fall, because they have no practical use in the game and people will have far more incentive to pinch pennies after the trading update. I think most things will deflate, except for God Wars items, which will probably become the replacement for rares, seeing as very few people will venture back to that place, resulting in the supply becoming far less than the demand.

Rares will barely change in price after january I'll explain why:

 

 

 

From january you won't be able to trade items 3k off their value, this value is based on the Grand Exchange price.

 

 

 

Let's assume it's 1 january and a santa is worth around 22M on the GE (currently a little above 21.5M).

 

You are only able to buy or sell santa's for 2197K-2203K.

 

This means the maximum the santa can change in price a day is 3k, if everyone sells and buys at the maximum price that is!

 

 

 

A maximum price fluctuation of 3k means a maximum drop or loss of 1M a year. Looks like jagex finally found a way to stall rare prices :-s

 

 

 

If you got a santa now: don't panic. Prices won't drop if people don't sell em below the market price (wich is stupid but encouraged by greedy merchanters). I suggest sticking to your santa untill after the update in january so the prices of santa's go up as much as possible now so you'll be able to sell for a nice profit :

 

 

 

 

 

Important note: This theory is only correct if you won't be able to buy/sell santa's for more than a 3k difference on the GE wich we don't know yet since it hasn't been mentioned yet by Jagex.

This means the maximum the santa can change in price a day is 3k, if everyone sells and buys at the maximum price that is!

 

 

 

I supose the 3k limit is for trades outside GE and acording to the items main price, it suposed to be working as it is now with the 5% fluctuations, else a lot of items would be stalled

 

 

 

I think the 3k limit is restricted to player trades, GE was never mentioned when imposing trade limits as it is a methode owned by all players where RWT can never take place.

From what I assumed, the 3k would be from the minimum and maximum price, not the average price.

 

At least that's how it should be, but looking at the new trade screen, I suppose not.

I think Rares will fall, because they have no practical use in the game and people will have far more incentive to pinch pennies after the trading update. I think most things will deflate, except for God Wars items, which will probably become the replacement for rares, seeing as very few people will venture back to that place, resulting in the supply becoming far less than the demand.

 

 

 

i agree