Constitution Update

[Youmu]

I love this update.

 

The hits are now more accurate = More exp/hour (though not THAT big of difference).

 

Why do the idiots not realize that?

[Atonisk]

It's useless, it's ugly, it throws off the aesthetics of that entire menu, and, worst of all, it blocks a permanent solution by applying a band-aid. The core combat system and damage determination has been in serious need of a revamp for years and instead of getting an actual fix we have a tweak to help new players for the first 2 hours or so that they play the game. In that sense, the update HURTS the game as a whole.

 

1. It speeds up training, as I explained in another post.

2. It makes the game more exciting for new players, allowing Jagex to not lose as many potential customers.

3. It opens up the horizons for many new weapons/armor that could reduce max life points and stuff like that.

 

The problem with that is:

1. It doesn't speed up training, other than the earliest levels. In fact, the day of the update many top players were getting LESS hourly exp. A friend who routinely sets exp records was averaging 8~10k less exp an hour, whereas I was only doing 5k less. After they patched it the next day, we both noticed our exp rates return to normal.

2. There's no way to tell whether or not it actually makes play more exciting for new players, as the rate at which you kill monsters really isn't drastically improved since their health increased and they heal "faster."

3. In the current system LP doesn't show max. They'd need another patch.

 

Plus if they're going to tweak HP, why didn't they do everything else at the same time? Prayer, summoning, energy?

[quelmotz]

It's useless, it's ugly, it throws off the aesthetics of that entire menu, and, worst of all, it blocks a permanent solution by applying a band-aid. The core combat system and damage determination has been in serious need of a revamp for years and instead of getting an actual fix we have a tweak to help new players for the first 2 hours or so that they play the game. In that sense, the update HURTS the game as a whole.

 

1. It speeds up training, as I explained in another post.

2. It makes the game more exciting for new players, allowing Jagex to not lose as many potential customers.

3. It opens up the horizons for many new weapons/armor that could reduce max life points and stuff like that.

 

The problem with that is:

1. It doesn't speed up training, other than the earliest levels. In fact, the day of the update many top players were getting LESS hourly exp. A friend who routinely sets exp records was averaging 8~10k less exp an hour, whereas I was only doing 5k less. After they patched it the next day, we both noticed our exp rates return to normal.

2. There's no way to tell whether or not it actually makes play more exciting for new players, as the rate at which you kill monsters really isn't drastically improved since their health increased and they heal "faster."

3. In the current system LP doesn't show max. They'd need another patch.

 

Plus if they're going to tweak HP, why didn't they do everything else at the same time? Prayer, summoning, energy?

 

HURTS the game as a whole? Can you please use some logic?

 

1. That was just a bug. It was fixed. End of story.

 

I already mathematically proved it to speed up training. Rather insignificantly, but still, small things add up and become big things.

 

2. Monsters heal faster? Really?

 

Jagex has many experienced employees. Don't you think they are in a better position to judge whether an update is going to make the game more exciting than you? No offense, but what experience do you have in the MMORPG business? Unless you tell me you're some employee of WoW or something like that you don't know a thing compared to Jagex, as far as whether an update will make RS more exciting is concerned.

 

Young people like to see hits of more than 0. People find it boring when you hit 0 because you accomplish nothing. Hitting a 1 now, although a much poorer hit than the 1 in those days, would still be better than hitting a 0. As in if you hit ten 1s(or any other combination adding up to 10) now compared to hitting nine 0s and a 1 last time, isn't that more interesting than previously?

 

3. How insignificant will such a patch be? A few lines of code at most?

 

Ok, I won't say this update was one of the most beneficial updates to the game, but in no way did it hurt the game. Aesthetics are subjective. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". What you think is ugly might be pure beauty incarnate for some people.

 

This update WASN'T in any way made to solve the issue of damage determination. I agree wholeheartedly that there is a problem with the damage-determination aspect of RuneScape, but don't randomly associate any HP update with it for the sake of trying to attack the update.

 

It takes more than 2 hours of playing time for a new player to train combat sufficiently such that he/she doesn't hit 0s more often than 1. Don't just pull out numbers out of nowhere and try to pass them off as evidence. It makes it look like you don't have a proper argument and so you decided to concoct some random crap to support your theory.

[Skeptical]

I really just don't understand the value of the update, and it really is an inconvenience.

[Earth_Poet]

People are mainly upset because it's an obvious change they can plainly see. Unfortunately, it was only a cosmetic update. At this point, I do agree that it changes virtually nothing in terms of combat or xp gained. There are some aspects that do seem pointless, such as renaming the skill itself. For now, I don't see the significance of x10 the points system. We'll have to wait to see what the devs intentions were behind this with future updates. As it stand now, I have to agree that the update is useless.

[quelmotz]

I really just don't understand the value of the update, and it really is an inconvenience.

 

How so?

 

Don't tell me you lack the mental capacity to simply remove the last digit from the damage splats?

[Rock Hard]

i hate hitting 10's, its so boring

 

i wish jagex would make it more exciting, maybe add another 0 on the end so my 10s look like 100s!

 

:cool:

[Atonisk]

 

HURTS the game as a whole? Can you please use some logic?

 

Why, so you can ignore it like you just did? I already explained that an update like this forestalls actual change.

 

 

1. That was just a bug. It was fixed. End of story.

 

I already mathematically proved it to speed up training. Rather insignificantly, but still, small things add up and become big things.

 

1. There's really no guarantee it was a bug. It could've been a conscious decision at the time. It really only affected the highest end of the scale, which people have previously complained about being nerfed and too easy to gain exp.

2. The point wasn't just the error, it's the fact that even after the fix the exp hadn't changed.

3. Your "mathematical proof" doesn't account for any other changes made to the back-end system. And if there was an actual incremental increase, players averaging over 100k melee exp an hour would notice it.

 

2. Monsters heal faster? Really?

 

HP replenishes at 10 times the normal rate.

 

Jagex has many experienced employees. Don't you think they are in a better position to judge whether an update is going to make the game more exciting than you? No offense, but what experience do you have in the MMORPG business? Unless you tell me you're some employee of WoW or something like that you don't know a thing compared to Jagex, as far as whether an update will make RS more exciting is concerned.

 

1. That's a complete logical fallacy. The heads of the American banking industry and the trading firms also "knew best", yet look where we are now. Presidents have always had some of the brightest men in the world on their payroll, yet look at all of the blunders. The CIA has been lead by brilliant men, yet their plans often backfire spectacularly.

2. Many Jagex staffers are new and haven't been working with the company as long as Jagex. If you're going to play the experience card, then wouldn't the players who have had far more experience with the game----and firsthand experience, no less---know better?

3. Because you don't understand the business world, I'll let you know that product design doesn't exist within a bubble. The majority of product flaws aren't detected by the creators, they're either spotted by testers or end-users. Jagex has frequently gone on the record to state that most of the flaws with their content are discovered in the live game by normal players.

 

And if Jagex is always right as you claim, then why listen to players who wanted a fix in the first place? Jagex always knows better than the guys actually using their service, right?

 

Young people like to see hits of more than 0. People find it boring when you hit 0 because you accomplish nothing. Hitting a 1 now, although a much poorer hit than the 1 in those days, would still be better than hitting a 0. As in if you hit ten 1s(or any other combination adding up to 10) now compared to hitting nine 0s and a 1 last time, isn't that more interesting than previously?

 

First off, that's a completely subjective assessment. Second, is hitting 1 or 2 any more exciting when your opponent has over 50 health? And third, an actual combat system fix would've been a better solution entirely.

 

This update WASN'T in any way made to solve the issue of damage determination. I agree wholeheartedly that there is a problem with the damage-determination aspect of RuneScape, but don't randomly associate any HP update with it for the sake of trying to attack the update.

 

No, the update WAS clearly directed at solving some of the damage determination flaws at the low end of the scale. And if something like that was fixed on the back-end, they wouldn't have felt the need to buff up the front end.

 

It takes more than 2 hours of playing time for a new player to train combat sufficiently such that he/she doesn't hit 0s more often than 1.

 

Obviously I meant 2 hours of combat, not 2 hours of general play...

 

Don't just pull out numbers out of nowhere and try to pass them off as evidence. It makes it look like you don't have a proper argument and so you decided to concoct some random crap to support your theory.

 

Oh? You're arguing complete hypotheticals without any understanding of the back-end system changes that happened with this update. On the other hand, I'm arguing visible front-end results. Front-end results ARE the ultimate end-goal of any change made to the actual back-end of the system.

[Atonisk]

i hate hitting 10's, its so boring

 

i wish jagex would make it more exciting, maybe add another 0 on the end so my 10s look like 100s!

 

:cool:

 

I know, I wouldn't mind hitting over 9,000 =p

[quelmotz]

Why, so you can ignore it like you just did? I already explained that an update like this forestalls actual change.

 

How can an update "forestall" change that it wasn't even DIRECTED at?

 

1. There's really no guarantee it was a bug. It could've been a conscious decision at the time. It really only affected the highest end of the scale, which people have previously complained about being nerfed and too easy to gain exp.

2. The point wasn't just the error, it's the fact that even after the fix the exp hadn't changed.

3. Your "mathematical proof" doesn't account for any other changes made to the back-end system. And if there was an actual incremental increase, players averaging over 100k melee exp an hour would notice it.

 

1. What evidence do you have to support your hypothesis? None, except a scrap of circumstantial evidence. Very convincing.

2. The exp hasn't returned to normal after the fix?

 

we both noticed our exp rates return to normal.

 

What's this then?

 

3. And they didn't? How many of those people have you actually talked to?

 

HP replenishes at 10 times the normal rate.

 

Obviously I was referring to RELATIVE change.

 

I can pull the same card as you, my dear friend.

 

1. That's a complete logical fallacy. The heads of the American banking industry and the trading firms also "knew best", yet look where we are now. Presidents have always had some of the brightest men in the world on their payroll, yet look at all of the blunders. The CIA has been lead by brilliant men, yet their plans often backfire spectacularly.

2. Many Jagex staffers are new and haven't been working with the company as long as Jagex. If you're going to play the experience card, then wouldn't the players who have had far more experience with the game----and firsthand experience, no less---know better?

3. Because you don't understand the business world, I'll let you know that product design doesn't exist within a bubble. The majority of product flaws aren't detected by the creators, they're either spotted by testers or end-users. Jagex has frequently gone on the record to state that most of the flaws with their content are discovered in the live game by normal players.

 

And if Jagex is always right as you claim, then why listen to players who wanted a fix in the first place? Jagex always knows better than the guys actually using their service, right?

 

1. How do you know the CIA's plans "often backfired spectacularly"? Do you even know how many plans they have per se? Citing a secretive organisation isn't the best way to get your point across.

 

I've nothing to say about the banking industry. The US is just one case. Don't take the US for the world.

 

Let's just put it this way: Do you think you can do better? It's easy to criticise people for their mistakes. Barring blatant idiots like George Bush, I doubt most of us would have done any better (and most probably significantly worse) than the people we criticise.

 

2. Don't the updates have to be approved by the experienced people in Jagex before being implemented?

 

3. I never claimed Jagex was "always right". I merely pointed out that Jagex was in a better position to judge whether an update would be good for the game or not. I never said that players' opinion was worthless. Players are making an overly huge fuss over what they claim an unnecessary update. My question is - do they know better than the experienced Jagex employees? I'm not saying they can't judge an update, but in such an issue where in-game experience DOES NOT MATTER, Jagex is in a much better position to judge.

 

First off, that's a completely subjective assessment. Second, is hitting 1 or 2 any more exciting when your opponent has over 50 health? And third, an actual combat system fix would've been a better solution entirely.

 

No doubt, that is a completely subjective assessment. But since you offered your point-of-view, why can't I offer mine too?

 

Hitting 1-2 is better than hitting nothing at all IMHO. Mathematically speaking, hitting 1/50 is better than hitting 0/5.

 

The point is, the HP update wasn't even meant to FIX the combat system. It was just meant to make the game more exciting for lower-leveled players, and as an update to open the game to further extensions later on.

 

No, the update WAS clearly directed at solving some of the damage determination flaws at the low end of the scale. And if something like that was fixed on the back-end, they wouldn't have felt the need to buff up the front end.

 

The MAIN focus of the update was to make the game more exciting for lower-leveled players.

 

The side benefits were that further extensions could be made and the damage-determination flaws at the low end of the scale were fixed.

 

The update WAS NOT directed at fixing the damage-determination flaws, but rather, the fixing of the damage-determination flaws at the low end of the scale was a side-effect of sorts.

 

On a side note, it's not that easy to make an overhaul to the combat system that completely fixed everything and left no loopholes. In fact, it's practically impossible, and it'll take a heck lot of effort to make an update that was remotely 'perfect'.

[Kenshinjapan]

I personally didn't like the update. However, my only reasonings were because of the new name given to it and how the hit splats look. I know that my reasons aren't a valid reason to hate it so I'm not angry with the update, I'm just stubborn and used to seeing things how they were :P.

[Earth_Poet]

I'll step up and take a few swings.

 

I already mathematically proved it to speed up training. Rather insignificantly, but still, small things add up and become big things.

 

If 1.5 xp was gained per 1 point of damage dealt, than only 0.75 xp was lost by rounding down 0.5 damage. Given the amount of times you would deal fractional hits along the long road to 13 million xp the difference would be, just as you admit, insignificant. It's hardly worth mentioning as an added benefit.

 

Also, we weren't assuming before this update that we were losing fractions of xp, because we didn't know it existed. A 1/100 scale is just as accurate (or inaccurate) as a 1/1000 scale. Theoretically, there will always be a "more accurate" scale regardless of what you choose.

 

Young people like to see hits of more than 0. People find it boring when you hit 0 because you accomplish nothing. Hitting a 1 now, although a much poorer hit than the 1 in those days, would still be better than hitting a 0. As in if you hit ten 1s(or any other combination adding up to 10) now compared to hitting nine 0s and a 1 last time, isn't that more interesting than previously?

 

I never noticed a mass of complaints from new players regarding this. That very Dev. Blog was the first time I had ever even heard of it. Hitting multiple zeroes is a consequence of having a low Attack level, not an inaccurate life points scale. Landing hits more frequently is the reward to training your Attack level. It never was so difficult to gain xp to be considered discouraging or impossible. If it were, we all would've abandoned it long ago. Sure, it may take a little more time to land your hits, but the same could be said about the first few logs you cut, or the first few logs you try to light, or the first few shrimp you catch, etc. The higher the level you attain means the less often you will fail; this has long been the basic formula for progression in the game. If new players were leaving because they were hitting too many zeroes in the first hour or two of playing, then why would they be interested in any other aspect of this game? This is especially true in a game that can take years to master.

 

Ok, I won't say this update was one of the most beneficial updates to the game, but in no way did it hurt the game. Aesthetics are subjective. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". What you think is ugly might be pure beauty incarnate for some people.

 

I agree that many players are being overdramatic, but I think your above statement suggests why so many just don't understand it. At this point, there is no substantial justification for the change. Yes, technically nothing is different, but it's not entirely subjective. It still gives me pause when I'm hit for 54 damage, and I have to remind myself that it's really only 5 damage before I waste my food. It changes what we were accustomed to doing. Eventually, we will get used to it, just like the hp bars last year. The big question is: Why such a change? So new players don't see zeroes seems like a flimsy excuse. Nobody stays a new player for very long (at least that new). We'll have to wait for future updates to see what the developers' true intentions were, but that's all speculation.

[quelmotz]

View Postquelmotz, on 18 March 2010 - 04:37 AM, said:

I already mathematically proved it to speed up training. Rather insignificantly, but still, small things add up and become big things.

 

 

If 1.5 xp was gained per 1 point of damage dealt, than only 0.75 xp was lost by rounding down 0.5 damage. Given the amount of times you would deal fractional hits along the long road to 13 million xp the difference would be, just as you admit, insignificant. It's hardly worth mentioning as an added benefit.

 

Also, we weren't assuming before this update that we were losing fractions of xp, because we didn't know it existed. A 1/100 scale is just as accurate (or inaccurate) as a 1/1000 scale. Theoretically, there will always be a "more accurate" scale regardless of what you choose.

 

Yes, there will always be a more accurate scale.

 

1 damage used to give 4 xp. So now 1 damage gives 0.4 exp. Of the 10 possible hits (X.0 -X.9 where X is an integer) the average hit would be X.5 or so. So you're actually gaining...2 xp more per hit...? That sounds incredulously large.

 

???*confused*

 

Quote

Young people like to see hits of more than 0. People find it boring when you hit 0 because you accomplish nothing. Hitting a 1 now, although a much poorer hit than the 1 in those days, would still be better than hitting a 0. As in if you hit ten 1s(or any other combination adding up to 10) now compared to hitting nine 0s and a 1 last time, isn't that more interesting than previously?

 

 

I never noticed a mass of complaints from new players regarding this. That very Dev. Blog was the first time I had ever even heard of it. Hitting multiple zeroes is a consequence of having a low Attack level, not an inaccurate life points scale. Landing hits more frequently is the reward to training your Attack level. It never was so difficult to gain xp to be considered discouraging or impossible. If it were, we all would've abandoned it long ago. Sure, it may take a little more time to land your hits, but the same could be said about the first few logs you cut, or the first few logs you try to light, or the first few shrimp you catch, etc. The higher the level you attain means the less often you will fail; this has long been the basic formula for progression in the game. If new players were leaving because they were hitting too many zeroes in the first hour or two of playing, then why would they be interested in any other aspect of this game? This is especially true in a game that can take years to master.

 

Good point you bring across. Perhaps Jagex just dreamt that it would be too difficult? Or more likely, the players never complained because they would have left immediately after getting bored.

 

EXP is one issue. Boredom is another. There was no difficulty gaining EXP since every hit gave you a significant amount of exp for that low level range. But hitting so many 0s can get boring, although the EXP gain is reasonable.

 

Many people can stand through the early level boredom, probably because of some kind of feeling of adventure. But some people might still get turned away regardless. I don't know how many percent of them do get turned away or whatever, but Jagex must have felt it was significant enough to do something to try and prevent as many people from quitting before too long.

 

This is just speculation, though, I've no evidence whatsoever to back up what I said earlier.

 

About woodcutting and such. That's different. That's not what people do for fun. People are driven by either quests/bragging rights/what have you OR money. Both of which are strong motivators. Whereas early level fighting is for fun, for exploration. If people find they take near forever to kill a mere goblin (or at least they FEEL LIKE it, hitting so many 0s), they might get discouraged, since there's no real motivation behind it other than fun. And these people might turn to other games for fun any time, since they aren't really "absorbed" into the game yet.

[Earth_Poet]

1 damage used to give 4 xp. So now 1 damage gives 0.4 exp. Of the 10 possible hits (X.0 -X.9 where X is an integer) the average hit would be X.5 or so. So you're actually gaining...2 xp more per hit...? That sounds incredulously large.

 

???*confused*

 

Sorry, but you're wrong. You gained 1.5 xp in HP for every 1 damage dealt. You also gained 4.5 xp in melee experience that could either be used on one skill, or spread across all three at 1.5 xp each. I was only referring to HP/Const though.

 

Now that I've looked it up, they haven't divided up the xp evenly like I thought. Now we divide the damage dealt by 7.5. That means you're actually getting even less than I had assumed for a 0.5 hit. Today, 5 damage equals 0.67 xp. That means truthfully, you're not really gaining any advantage AT ALL with the partial hits.

 

Good point you bring across. Perhaps Jagex just dreamt that it would be too difficult?

 

You were wondering that, too?

 

Or more likely, the players never complained because they would have left immediately after getting bored.

 

If they didn't complain, then how did Jagex find out? Heck, how would you even know they weren't coming back? Honestly, here's how I'd imagine it really happened. Jagex brought in some random kids for a focus group, let them play Runescape for an hour, and then had them fill out a questionnaire about what they liked and didn't like. Then, we all get an update based on the critique of a handful of kids who had never played before and probably didn't like the game anyways. *sigh* Welcome to corporate life.

 

EXP is one issue. Boredom is another. There was no difficulty gaining EXP since every hit gave you a significant amount of exp for that low level range. But hitting so many 0s can get boring, although the EXP gain is reasonable.

 

What does it say about the intelligence level of the player who is genuinely fooled by no longer seeing zeroes in this update? Since that's what we're talking about now: tricking them into believing they're really getting something out of this.

 

This is just speculation, though, I've no evidence whatsoever to back up what I said earlier.

 

Hey, that's all we can do, since this was the first either of us had heard of the problem.

 

About woodcutting and such. That's different. That's not what people do for fun. People are driven by either quests/bragging rights/what have you OR money. Both of which are strong motivators. Whereas early level fighting is for fun, for exploration. If people find they take near forever to kill a mere goblin (or at least they FEEL LIKE it, hitting so many 0s), they might get discouraged, since there's no real motivation behind it other than fun. And these people might turn to other games for fun any time, since they aren't really "absorbed" into the game yet.

 

Now who's speculating? i've only trained combat for skills and cash (and no, it's not because of all the zeroes I've had to endure). Believe it or not, many people do train these other skills for fun.

 

You don't jump right in and make money off of woodcutting or fishing either. It takes time trying to cut "Tree" down with level 1 Woodcutting. Firemaking has very little advantages. It usually takes several tries (and fails) before you can light those first couple of logs. They are very much relevant to the discussion. It takes time to find success in the tasks, then you gain those first few levels, then you gain xp faster, then you access new ways to make money.

 

This game takes planning and patience to succeed in. Runescape was not aimed at casual gamers. That's what FunOrb is for.

[Skeptical]

It really was just a useless update, and after quite a bit of slaying, I still haven't gotten used to it.

 

I mean, I'm not up in arms over it like everyone at the RSOF, but I certainly would have preferred that it wasn't updated.

[Atonisk]

How can an update "forestall" change that it wasn't even DIRECTED at?

 

Because the problems it supposedly addresses are among the core problems with the current system.

 

1. What evidence do you have to support your hypothesis? None, except a scrap of circumstantial evidence. Very convincing.

 

For somebody constantly asking for evidence, you've been pretty slow in providing any yourself. Plus I'm in a position to know about high end exp.

 

2. The exp hasn't returned to normal after the fix?

 

No, meaning the hourly gain is the same as it was before the const update. There's been no increase.

 

What's this then?

 

Again, learn to read.

 

3. And they didn't? How many of those people have you actually talked to?

 

First off, you say "those people" like I'm not one of them. Second, when I'm observing something and other players I talk to, including guys who do over 2m melee exp a day and routinely do things like set daily records, are telling me that they're observing the exact same thing, I'm inclined to believe them over some guy who claims he has math supporting his position yet lacks real practical experience in the subject.

 

1. How do you know the CIA's plans "often backfired spectacularly"? Do you even know how many plans they have per se? Citing a secretive organisation isn't the best way to get your point across.

 

Although it's impossible to know 100% of what the CIA has done, almost all of their blunders make world news. They've helped put more dictators in power than they've taken out.

 

 

I've nothing to say about the banking industry. The US is just one case. Don't take the US for the world.

 

1. All banking industries have suffered similar setbacks at one point or another, even if not as spectacularly.

2. Prominent non-US banks were involved the same crap and suffered similar setbacks, such as RBS.

3. The US is one of the world's leading nations.

 

Let's just put it this way: Do you think you can do better? It's easy to criticise people for their mistakes. Barring blatant idiots like George Bush, I doubt most of us would have done any better (and most probably significantly worse) than the people we criticise.

 

Exactly my point. Just because these guys are in charge of something doesn't mean they know what the hell they're doing.

 

3. I never claimed Jagex was "always right". I merely pointed out that Jagex was in a better position to judge whether an update would be good for the game or not.

 

Not really. Like I already said, just because you're in the position doesn't automatically mean you know best.

 

My question is - do they know better than the experienced Jagex employees?

 

An experienced player is basically on par with an experienced staffer... There are specific areas were certain parts of Jagex staff excels, just like there are specific areas where players are far superior.

 

I'm not saying they can't judge an update, but in such an issue where in-game experience DOES NOT MATTER, Jagex is in a much better position to judge.

 

Again, that's a logical fallacy.

 

Hitting 1-2 is better than hitting nothing at all IMHO. Mathematically speaking, hitting 1/50 is better than hitting 0/5.

 

That's only the front-end system, you have no idea what changes were made on the back-end.

 

The MAIN focus of the update was to make the game more exciting for lower-leveled players.

 

The side benefits were that further extensions could be made and the damage-determination flaws at the low end of the scale were fixed.

 

The update WAS NOT directed at fixing the damage-determination flaws, but rather, the fixing of the damage-determination flaws at the low end of the scale was a side-effect of sorts.

 

On a side note, it's not that easy to make an overhaul to the combat system that completely fixed everything and left no loopholes. In fact, it's practically impossible, and it'll take a heck lot of effort to make an update that was remotely 'perfect'.

 

Again, if actual changes were made to the core system then things would be more exciting for low-leveled players as well as high. However, things WERE exciting for low level players in the first place, just because the exp curve means you gain levels far more frequently in the early game.

[quelmotz]

How can an update "forestall" change that it wasn't even DIRECTED at?

 

Because the problems it supposedly addresses are among the core problems with the current system. It wasn't even directed at solving those "core problems". The solving of the core problem for lower levels was merely a side effect.

 

1. What evidence do you have to support your hypothesis? None, except a scrap of circumstantial evidence. Very convincing.

 

For somebody constantly asking for evidence, you've been pretty slow in providing any yourself. Plus I'm in a position to know about high end exp. Quoting your statement, that's a complete logical fallacy. Just because I've been asking for evidence doesn't mean I have to provide it. It's like asking "how do you know the Loch Ness Monster exists?" and you come back and say "hey, you better provide evidence that it doesn't, since you're asking for evidence that it does."

 

The second sentence is the epitome of hypocrisy. I think you've enough intellect to understand why.

 

2. The exp hasn't returned to normal after the fix?

 

No, meaning the hourly gain is the same as it was before the const update. There's been no increase.So isn't that "returning to normal"?

 

What's this then?

 

Again, learn to read.

 

3. And they didn't? How many of those people have you actually talked to?

 

First off, you say "those people" like I'm not one of them. Second, when I'm observing something and other players I talk to, including guys who do over 2m melee exp a day and routinely do things like set daily records, are telling me that they're observing the exact same thing, I'm inclined to believe them over some guy who claims he has math supporting his position yet lacks real practical experience in the subject. Scanning the forums, I can't find any threads pertaining to the topic of EXP rates being reduced. I'm inclined to believe these players would rant on the recent updates forum where they would have a minutely higher chance of receiving attention from Jagex rather than talk about it in-game.

 

1. How do you know the CIA's plans "often backfired spectacularly"? Do you even know how many plans they have per se? Citing a secretive organisation isn't the best way to get your point across.

 

Although it's impossible to know 100% of what the CIA has done, almost all of their blunders make world news. They've helped put more dictators in power than they've taken out. That's purely subjective.

 

 

I've nothing to say about the banking industry. The US is just one case. Don't take the US for the world.

 

1. All banking industries have suffered similar setbacks at one point or another, even if not as spectacularly. Precisely.

2. Prominent non-US banks were involved the same crap and suffered similar setbacks, such as RBS.

3. The US is one of the world's leading nations.So? The world can now be confined to one of its leading nations just because it is leading?

 

Let's just put it this way: Do you think you can do better? It's easy to criticise people for their mistakes. Barring blatant idiots like George Bush, I doubt most of us would have done any better (and most probably significantly worse) than the people we criticise.

 

Exactly my point. Just because these guys are in charge of something doesn't mean they know what the hell they're doing. Is this a blatant attempt at sidetracking?

 

3. I never claimed Jagex was "always right". I merely pointed out that Jagex was in a better position to judge whether an update would be good for the game or not.

 

Not really. Like I already said, just because you're in the position doesn't automatically mean you know best. But in general, if you're in a position you should know better.

 

My question is - do they know better than the experienced Jagex employees?

 

An experienced player is basically on par with an experienced staffer... There are specific areas were certain parts of Jagex staff excels, just like there are specific areas where players are far superior. Such as?

 

I'm not saying they can't judge an update, but in such an issue where in-game experience DOES NOT MATTER, Jagex is in a much better position to judge.

 

Again, that's a logical fallacy.

 

Hitting 1-2 is better than hitting nothing at all IMHO. Mathematically speaking, hitting 1/50 is better than hitting 0/5.

 

That's only the front-end system, you have no idea what changes were made on the back-end. Meaning?

 

The MAIN focus of the update was to make the game more exciting for lower-leveled players.

 

The side benefits were that further extensions could be made and the damage-determination flaws at the low end of the scale were fixed.

 

The update WAS NOT directed at fixing the damage-determination flaws, but rather, the fixing of the damage-determination flaws at the low end of the scale was a side-effect of sorts.

 

On a side note, it's not that easy to make an overhaul to the combat system that completely fixed everything and left no loopholes. In fact, it's practically impossible, and it'll take a heck lot of effort to make an update that was remotely 'perfect'.

 

Again, if actual changes were made to the core system then things would be more exciting for low-leveled players as well as high. However, things WERE exciting for low level players in the first place, just because the exp curve means you gain levels far more frequently in the early game. Simply leveling up might be exciting for some people, but not for others.

[Atonisk]

"It wasn't even directed at solving those "core problems". The solving of the core problem for lower levels was merely a side effect."

 

...because it's all the same problem. If RS didn't have an absurdly luck-based system, people wouldn't hit 0s so often in the first place.

 

"Just because I've been asking for evidence doesn't mean I have to provide it. It's like asking "how do you know the Loch Ness Monster exists?" and you come back and say "hey, you better provide evidence that it doesn't, since you're asking for evidence that it does."

 

LOL! But what you're doing is claiming that the Loch Ness Monster exists then asking me for proof that he doesn't.

 

"The second sentence is the epitome of hypocrisy. I think you've enough intellect to understand why."

 

Which would hold water if I hadn't mentioned my hourlies haven't increased as a result of the update....

 

"Scanning the forums, I can't find any threads pertaining to the topic of EXP rates being reduced."

 

We aren't talking about a reduction, we're talking about your claimed increase.

 

"So isn't that "returning to normal"?"

 

You said your formulas "proved" the exp would be better than normal with the update.

 

"Is this a blatant attempt at sidetracking?"

 

No, I was giving an example of your blatant logical fallacy.

 

"But in general, if you're in a position you should know better."

 

In general, it's a logical fallacy.

 

"Meaning?"

 

Meaning there's more to the combat formulas than hitting 20 means getting x amount of exp. That's just a front-end exp calculation, which has little meaning compared to the back-end methods of damage calculation.

[quelmotz]

...because it's all the same problem. If RS didn't have an absurdly luck-based system, people wouldn't hit 0s so often in the first place.

 

Since you're attacking the system, why not suggest some ways to improve it instead of saying Jagex is too idiotic to do so?

 

Apparently it's as easy as clicking your fingers.

 

LOL! But what you're doing is claiming that the Loch Ness Monster exists then asking me for proof that he doesn't.

 

Where?

 

You're the one who's been slow in providing evidence, so stop being a hypocrite.

 

Which would hold water if I hadn't mentioned my hourlies haven't increased as a result of the update....

 

Easy to say "if I did such and such" eh?

 

We aren't talking about a reduction, we're talking about your claimed increase.

 

You were clearly claiming that the EXP rates haven't returned to "normal" EVEN AFTER the bug fix.

 

No, I was giving an example of your blatant logical fallacy.

 

On the contrary, this is an example of you blatant idiocy.

 

In general, it's a logical fallacy.

 

Your evidence being? You can't just cite a few cases and hide the other 95%.

 

Meaning there's more to the combat formulas than hitting 20 means getting x amount of exp. That's just a front-end exp calculation, which has little meaning compared to the back-end methods of damage calculation.

 

I'm asking you what you mean by your "back-end methods".

[Owned_Nex]

Can you guys all stop flaming each other? It looks idiotic when its just a long post full of quoting something that is irrelevant.

 

OT:

 

The reason I dislike this update is that its not as simple as multiplying by 10.

 

Before this update(and when I was a member), I can easily kill 10-20 lvl ~90s.

Now, the constant 10s-20s slowly eat away at my health.

 

 

QQ due to not bring OP.

[quelmotz]

Can you guys all stop flaming each other? It looks idiotic when its just a long post full of quoting something that is irrelevant.

 

OT:

 

The reason I dislike this update is that its not as simple as multiplying by 10.

 

Before this update(and when I was a member), I can easily kill 10-20 lvl ~90s.

Now, the constant 10s-20s slowly eat away at my health.

 

 

QQ due to not bring OP.

 

Don't YOUR 10s-20s eat away at the lvl 90s' health too?

[Owned_Nex]

Can you guys all stop flaming each other? It looks idiotic when its just a long post full of quoting something that is irrelevant.

 

OT:

 

The reason I dislike this update is that its not as simple as multiplying by 10.

 

Before this update(and when I was a member), I can easily kill 10-20 lvl ~90s.

Now, the constant 10s-20s slowly eat away at my health.

 

 

QQ due to not bring OP.

 

Don't YOUR 10s-20s eat away at the lvl 90s' health too?

 

I can't trade hits in a fight like that. Even if its damage under 10, which is usually the case, if I have 10-20 people doing that my Health will fall before I can kill them fast enough.

Before, they would all miss, except maybe 1-2 people. Now, its constant damage.

 

Granted I do "eat away" at their health, but at the rate I'm losing health, I'll only have killed maybe 2-3 before I die.

[quelmotz]

Can you guys all stop flaming each other? It looks idiotic when its just a long post full of quoting something that is irrelevant.

 

OT:

 

The reason I dislike this update is that its not as simple as multiplying by 10.

 

Before this update(and when I was a member), I can easily kill 10-20 lvl ~90s.

Now, the constant 10s-20s slowly eat away at my health.

 

 

QQ due to not bring OP.

 

Don't YOUR 10s-20s eat away at the lvl 90s' health too?

 

I can't trade hits in a fight like that. Even if its damage under 10, which is usually the case, if I have 10-20 people doing that my Health will fall before I can kill them fast enough.

Before, they would all miss, except maybe 1-2 people. Now, its constant damage.

 

Granted I do "eat away" at their health, but at the rate I'm losing health, I'll only have killed maybe 2-3 before I die.

 

True, but you've got to look at the other side of the equation. Won't you be the one laughing (ok maybe you're not sadistic but you get the point) at the person getting piled in Clan Wars or whatever when your small damage splats eat away at his health too? Looking at your stats, you probably don't come into such situations too often though...

[Owned_Nex]

THATS EXACTLY MY POINT.

Whereas before, you don't get hit as much;now, health slowly disappears

 

I'm not complaining I die when I get piled.

[quelmotz]

THATS EXACTLY MY POINT.

Whereas before, you don't get hit as much;now, health slowly disappears

 

I'm not complaining I die when I get piled.

 

So? That's both a benefit and a disadvantage, although it's more beneficial for the lower levelled people than the higher levelled ones.