Should skilller worlds have a total level requirement?

[Fools_Taco]

Quit your crying and level your total if you want to get into one of these worlds.

 

You sound like a noob.

[NukeMarine]

Thinking about it more they should make the f2p world only recognise f2p skills so ex members won't have an advantage.

 

This is completely reasonable. Even the original poster pointed out most on f2p 1000 world are ex-members.

 

F2P 1000 Worlds - Only f2p skills count for total (which averages to about 60 levels per skill, which is pretty high)

P2P 1000 Worlds - Increase total level to be average of 60 level per skill (rounded to 1500 xp, which is reasonable)

 

As for the xp versus total level, I think Jagex choose total level on the idea with just XP you have those that grind fewer skills for whatever reason (Pures, Skillers, 200 mill Club, etc.). Though they appreciate people play the game in unique ways, they want features to reward those that try many aspects of the game. If you want to specialize, then getting to these worlds becomes more difficult, but you chose that.

[Tim]

Whole point of rs is to interact, I find nice players doesn't mean a high total depends on the person.

 

I'm against total level or total exp worlds all together.

Agreed, next thing you know we'll have fights in Chats, Forums etc over "You're not in a Mature, Skilled World. THus your a noob" and so forth. :|

 

Quit your crying and level your total if you want to get into one of these worlds.

 

You sound like a noob.

With the way your sounding, you're better suited to that. :|

[kingbrooks]

Personally I would like skiller worlds to be more exclusive, however my idea of exclusive (total level and exp wise) would be very hard for level 3 skillers (not impossible exp wise of course). Therefore my perfect reality for these skilling worlds wouldn't really benefit you so I can't really comment...oh I just did :blink:

[ArtemisCatal]

I think that because of the exponential relationship between exp and lvls that total exp would be a better way to do the worlds. It would also give anyone, no matter how they played the game, a chance to make it into the worlds. Even someone who only trained one skill, they could concivably make any exp world under 200M (and I don't see jagex making worlds with that high of reqs).

 

People have the right to play the game however they want, but I don't think that in this instance the way they enjoy the game should hinder them in getting on these worlds, as they are really meant as a reward for dedication to the game.

 

edit: when you play the game a certain way, you expect to have in-game things denied to you. but these exp worlds are meta-game, and as such, I don't think that playing style should be a factor.

[bedman]

I disagree. The reason people with all skills lvl 41 can enter is because the total level requirement for the p2p worlds is too low. Make it 1500 or even 2000 and you will need to be a balanced character to enter. Make it 50M xp, please no, we already have enough people training cooking and fletching, I dont want these worlds to turn into cooking worlds.

[Emmentail]

Lvl combat then.

 

Jagex shouldn't have to cater to the whims of people who stunt themselves on purpose. It's like agility armour having a HP requirement. Get over it.

[NukeMarine]

Ultimate solution: Allow for total level or total experience

 

F2P

 

Consider: 1000 levels for 15 skills is about 67 levels per skill. Level 67 is about 550k XP. That means 550k XP for 15 skills is about 8250k XP

Therefore: Players with total 8250k XP or 1000 skill total in F2P skills ONLY can get on the F2P 1000 server.

Problems: XP is not created equally. If Jagex want's to be complicated, it can "weight" skills giving full value to "rare" 99 skills and less to the easier skills.

 

P2P

 

Consider: 24 skills on P2P; Level 67 in all 24 skills is about 13,200k xp and 1600 skill levels.

Therefore: Players with 13200k XP or 1500 skill levels can get on the P2P 1600+ server.

Problems: Same as F2P in that XP is not created equally. Again, it can weight the xp of the skills to determine if a player has put in enough time to rate entrance.

 

How to Weigh Skills:

 

Actually, this is pretty simple if you assume that more players have higher XP in the easier skills: Take the top 10,000 active player (only those that played at least once in last 6 months) in any skill. He/she is a great indication of the difficulty of that one skill. The skill with the lowest XP for the 10,000th player is the hardest (x1 multiple) while the one with the higher XP are the easier skills (divide hardest skill XP by easiest skill XP for your multiple). The multiple reduces your xp for that skill to see if you get on the server. Ok, so maybe not too simple.

[Romy]

As I see, most of you think I'm here to complain about my very own situation. This is NOT the case.

 

I gave my skiller as an example, nothing more, to show the flawed system.

 

 

 

 

 

I brought and pointed out arguments by saying that a player who's dedicated to skills, may not be able to enter these worlds even though someone else who dedicated a lot less does.

 

And for those of you saying level 3 skillers don't belong there- If SKILLERS don't belong to SKILLER worlds, who the hell does?

[langer]

And for those of you saying level 3 skillers don't belong there- If SKILLERS don't belong to SKILLER worlds, who the hell does?

 

Skillers with 1000 total levels, players who actually train their skills - all their skills.

Crippled accounts are a choice. Lvl 3 skillers are not "skillers", they are powernoobs.

[Romy]

And for those of you saying level 3 skillers don't belong there- If SKILLERS don't belong to SKILLER worlds, who the hell does?

 

Skillers with 1000 total levels, players who actually train their skills - all their skills.

Crippled accounts are a choice. Lvl 3 skillers are not "skillers", they are powernoobs.

 

Who are you to judge someone's playing style?

 

 

And players with 1000 total aren't necesarilly "skillers". As I had already mentioned, it is possible to have 1K total without even having all skills at 42.

[NukeMarine]

 

Skillers with 1000 total levels, players who actually train their skills - all their skills.

Crippled accounts are a choice. Lvl 3 skillers are not "skillers", they are powernoobs.

 

Who are you to judge someone's playing style?

 

 

And players with 1000 total aren't necesarilly "skillers". As I had already mentioned, it is possible to have 1K total without even having all skills at 42.

 

He's the type of person that's judging the playing style of a person that judging Jagex's corporate decisions. Using the "Who are you too xxxx" usually means you have no retort, but can't stand not having the last word either.

 

By the way, in that reply, he's distinguishing that a skiller is someone that levels skills, not just a sub-set of skills (what is normally termed a Pure or Level-3 skillers). Combat skills and non-combat skills are all skills. Calling oneself a "skiller" yet ignoring 7 skills seems like a misnomer, no? Now, I wouldn't call them powernoobs, though the term level 3 skiller sounds apt.

 

Of course, you're also right. Level 1000 on F2P is too low for ex-members if one can use member skills. In addition, 1000 is too low for members cause it's an average of 42 for all skills. I think my post above solves most issues with fairness though.

[lcchs]

Why do lv3 skillers want to enter a 1000+ skill world anyways? You melt into the mass of f2p players and will not be bothered by other players.

[stonewall337]

Combat skills are skills too...You chose not to train, you don't get the benefits.

[mega_vegeta6]

And for those of you saying level 3 skillers don't belong there- If SKILLERS don't belong to SKILLER worlds, who the hell does?

 

Skillers with 1000 total levels, players who actually train their skills - all their skills.

Crippled accounts are a choice. Lvl 3 skillers are not "skillers", they are powernoobs.

 

Who are you to judge someone's playing style?

 

 

And players with 1000 total aren't necesarilly "skillers". As I had already mentioned, it is possible to have 1K total without even having all skills at 42.

Who are you to say his opinion is not allowed to be voiced? Who am i to say that? Well, I'm the god of the internet, so there. Btw, my powerlevel is over 9000! <3:

 

Do you expect Jagex to categorize players, limit them based on totally meaningless self-imposed ranks and then favour some of those ranks? Do you really think that a skiller world is actually something you want anyway? All the training spots would be full and nobody would use any of the other content in RS, including bosses and most minigames, because after all, in a true skiller world nobody would go for the slow xp. There would also never be anyone at the lower leveled training spots since that's not viable when you have high skill levels. And, If there was a world for lvl 3 noobs, What'd be the point? There'd only be so much space for you to go without combat. Even worse, since the exp cap would mean that even less training spots would be vacant, and then that nulls the whole point ofthe world in the first place.

 

Is there any maturity gained in exp or levels? There are literally millions of idiots with a great number of exp or levels. That's because it does not take intelligence or maturity to play runescape. Many very high leveled players i met have had the maturity of 13-16 year olds, wich really isn't high. If any improvement in maturity was to be noticed, the minimum maturity cap would be that of a +25year old. Even that is pushing it in my opinion. There's really hardly enough mature players to fill ten servers.

 

You must admit that not levelling combat is your own choice. And thus, along with that choice come limitations and a lot of content you willingly pass upon for whatever reason you might have, Be it a craving for attention, rebellion or plain momentary stupidity. Demanding or asking for the game to be customized for the minority that does not play the way intended is really..., I can't find the word for it. Point is that you can't expect the game to change because a few players want something changed because the own choice of not getting the requirements in the first place.

[Salvette]

Total XP and total level measure different things. Total level can be best gained by training all your skills; lower level skills level up faster, and you can get to about level 30 in anything with reasonable ease. Trying to get a high total level will give you a balanced character.

 

Total XP can be best gained by training a single skill as high as possible. The time it'd take to train your lower skills could be spent training Cooking or Fletching even higher, and below about 80, any exp gain is rather insignificant next to the amount you could get if you just stick with Cooking. Trying to get a high total XP will give you a character with with one or two skills far past 99 and the others would be lucky to get to level 30. It gives an absurdly unbalanced character.

 

Total level restricts it to players that train their skills equally. Total XP restricts it to players that only ever train a handful of skills. People with high total levels don't tend to have any major weak points; People with high total levels tend to have nothing but that. I'm not particularly interested in skillcapes. Basing it on total XP will appeal to those that wanted a trimmed skillcape and thus have two 99s in skills they don't enjoy. I don't think these skillcape-hungry people are the sort we want.

 

The most fair way I can think of is by rank. Level 83 in Strength or Cooking isn't very impressive, and that's shown by the rank at that level: around 400,000. Level 83 in a harder skill, like Agility or Runecrafting, will give a rank of more like 12,000. This is a rather good way of showing the value of different types of XP, since the easier ones will have a lower rank for a given level.

[ghost4sale1]

I agree that the p2p 1000 total level is too low, but I think instead it should be a total exp requirement.

[Romy]

And for those of you saying level 3 skillers don't belong there- If SKILLERS don't belong to SKILLER worlds, who the hell does?

 

Skillers with 1000 total levels, players who actually train their skills - all their skills.

Crippled accounts are a choice. Lvl 3 skillers are not "skillers", they are powernoobs.

 

Who are you to judge someone's playing style?

 

 

And players with 1000 total aren't necesarilly "skillers". As I had already mentioned, it is possible to have 1K total without even having all skills at 42.

Who are you to say his opinion is not allowed to be voiced? Who am i to say that? Well, I'm the god of the internet, so there. Btw, my powerlevel is over 9000! <3:

 

Do you expect Jagex to categorize players, limit them based on totally meaningless self-imposed ranks and then favour some of those ranks? Do you really think that a skiller world is actually something you want anyway? All the training spots would be full and nobody would use any of the other content in RS, including bosses and most minigames, because after all, in a true skiller world nobody would go for the slow xp. There would also never be anyone at the lower leveled training spots since that's not viable when you have high skill levels. And, If there was a world for lvl 3 noobs, What'd be the point? There'd only be so much space for you to go without combat. Even worse, since the exp cap would mean that even less training spots would be vacant, and then that nulls the whole point ofthe world in the first place.

 

Is there any maturity gained in exp or levels? There are literally millions of idiots with a great number of exp or levels. That's because it does not take intelligence or maturity to play runescape. Many very high leveled players i met have had the maturity of 13-16 year olds, wich really isn't high. If any improvement in maturity was to be noticed, the minimum maturity cap would be that of a +25year old. Even that is pushing it in my opinion. There's really hardly enough mature players to fill ten servers.

 

You must admit that not levelling combat is your own choice. And thus, along with that choice come limitations and a lot of content you willingly pass upon for whatever reason you might have, Be it a craving for attention, rebellion or plain momentary stupidity. Demanding or asking for the game to be customized for the minority that does not play the way intended is really..., I can't find the word for it. Point is that you can't expect the game to change because a few players want something changed because the own choice of not getting the requirements in the first place.

 

First of all, you'd be surprised at the amount of things that changed in this game only "because a few playes want(ed) something (to) change(d)". (And all of that because I wanted to quote what you said, lol...)

 

Secondly, I never said his opinion is not allowed to be voiced, but rather that he shouldn't judge anyone's playstyle because it does not fit his own.

 

Third, as I have already said countless time in this thread, I'm not here to complain about my very own situation (my skiller was only an EXAMPLE! Which I'm going to edit out of the main post to avoid confusion right after I send this post).

 

Forth, I never said high total level/exp gurantees maturity.

 

Fifth (I'm getting there...), I agree that combat skills are also skills and that they should (and already do) count for skiller world acces. And yet, you must admit that having over 40M exp devided to ALL free none-combat skills is harder to achieve than less than 42 in all skills (less than 13M exp by the way).

 

And lastly, having a skiller is a challenge for me, and that is the only reason I created one, not because I crave for attention and neither out of stupidity.

[Saunamajuri]

If these "lvl 3 skillers" dont decide to get combat skill levels and therefore the benefits of them, they can only blame themselves. :-|

[jords]

100M total exp requirements for members. People get 100M exp in a month so if you look at it that way it's not hard for anyone to get just takes time. Also maybe max total level worlds too if they're going down that route.

[Romy]

100M total exp requirements for members. People get 100M exp in a month so if you look at it that way it's not hard for anyone to get just takes time. Also maybe max total level worlds too if they're going down that route.

 

 

That last idea seems unreasonable. Currently there are less than 400 maxed players, taking into considiration that not all of them will play in these worlds, and that they have school/jobs and obviously DO sleep and eat or have other obligations, I doubt these worlds will have more than 20-50 players on at one time at max.

[Romy]

If these "lvl 3 skillers" dont decide to get combat skill levels and therefore the benefits of them, they can only blame themselves. :-|

 

Will you guys please forget about level 3 skillers? That's not the point - the point is that it's absurd that someone who doesn't even have one skill at 50 can enter these worlds, while someone who dedicated much more work into his/her character may not. I'm here to discuss the cons of the current requirement.

[3hitm4g3u]

If these "lvl 3 skillers" dont decide to get combat skill levels and therefore the benefits of them, they can only blame themselves. :-|

 

Will you guys please forget about level 3 skillers? That's not the point - the point is that it's absurd that someone who doesn't even have one skill at 50 can enter these worlds, while someone who dedicated much more work into his/her character may not. I'm here to discuss the cons of the current requirement.

 

It was the way you worded it, made it seem like you were complaining you couldn't get into them on your skiller.

 

I think there needs to be different requirements over like 3 p2p worlds. Like one world has 1000 total level req, one has 1500 and one has 2000.

[jords]

100M total exp requirements for members. People get 100M exp in a month so if you look at it that way it's not hard for anyone to get just takes time. Also maybe max total level worlds too if they're going down that route.

 

 

That last idea seems unreasonable. Currently there are less than 400 maxed players, taking into considiration that not all of them will play in these worlds, and that they have school/jobs and obviously DO sleep and eat or have other obligations, I doubt these worlds will have more than 20-50 players on at one time at max.

They have their own forums, they can have thier own world.

[blakdragon39]

100M total exp requirements for members. People get 100M exp in a month so if you look at it that way it's not hard for anyone to get just takes time. Also maybe max total level worlds too if they're going down that route.

 

 

That last idea seems unreasonable. Currently there are less than 400 maxed players, taking into considiration that not all of them will play in these worlds, and that they have school/jobs and obviously DO sleep and eat or have other obligations, I doubt these worlds will have more than 20-50 players on at one time at max.

They have their own forums, they can have thier own world.

 

I think the point is that their own world would be pointless, barely used, and a waste of space. :P