Jump to content
Mirror

Tip.it Times 21 March 2010

Recommended Posts

Re: Second article

 

"different complementary roles should be the foundation of most activities"

 

No. Fun should be the foundation of most activities, forcing people to not do things because their friends aren't on or their friends aren't interested in that right now or their friends are too busy with something else isn't fun.

 

"All bosses should be most effectively killed with at least one mage, one ranger and one mêléer."

 

No. To borrow a word you use repeatedly, there should be diversity. There should be bosses that can be defeated solo by mid-level people of each side of the triangle, there should be bosses that can only be soloed by high-level users of each side, there should be bosses that require combinations of mid-level players, etc.

 

" Quests involving cooperation with players who make different choices is a niche Jagex explored early on in the game, but moved away from. That was a mistake."

 

No, it wasn't. I've seen people standing in the GE begging someone to help them with Heroes' Quest for 10 minutes before they gave up and went to do something else, why would you want to make that more common? Quests that are easier to do with a group but still possible to do on your own (like Blood Runs Deep) or that offer other incentives for teamwork (like for instance if raiding Movario's base in WGS required a friend to help) are OK, but requiring multiple members is a bad idea. If Jagex starts doing that very often, well, there's plenty of other things I should be doing with my time, and that $6 a month could probably be going somewhere better too.

 

"These free spirits need to be integrated into the community only if they wish it"

 

So as long as we don't want a quest cape at all we'll be just fine, good to know.

 

"That is how Runescape remains relevant for the future, and players spend longer with the game before growing bored and moving on."

 

I doubt this, cutting people off from things their friends don't want to do isn't going to help keep people interested in the game, it effectively puts you at the mercy of the whims of your friends. You love that new skill? Better hope like hell that your friends like it too or else you're screwed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the thing about the second article is this. We all miss those days a lot, many aspects of the game were more community based, specialization made the game less monotonous. However, it would certainly be a pain in the rear to go back. I doubt anyone would. What would be interesting is if higher level items were released that could not be traded over the GE, just person to person. Maybe this would bring back the specialized skill feeling to an extent. The only problem would be trade limits and I don't know how putting this into place would work. The point about the bosses is right on. Perhaps they could implement something where the first melee person on a team does 100% damage, the second 90%, the third 80% and so on with the same for range and mage so that it would be preferable to have for example two melee, two range and a mage at a Bandos trip over simply five melee.

 

Great articles :D Thanks guys!


PM me in game anytime

 

It's a lot easier then that for an idiot to sound smart on the internet.

 

That's exactly what you're doing right now... just saying.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Second article

 

"different complementary roles should be the foundation of most activities"

 

No. Fun should be the foundation of most activities, forcing people to not do things because their friends aren't on or their friends aren't interested in that right now or their friends are too busy with something else isn't fun.

 

"All bosses should be most effectively killed with at least one mage, one ranger and one mêléer."

 

No. To borrow a word you use repeatedly, there should be diversity. There should be bosses that can be defeated solo by mid-level people of each side of the triangle, there should be bosses that can only be soloed by high-level users of each side, there should be bosses that require combinations of mid-level players, etc.

 

" Quests involving cooperation with players who make different choices is a niche Jagex explored early on in the game, but moved away from. That was a mistake."

 

No, it wasn't. I've seen people standing in the GE begging someone to help them with Heroes' Quest for 10 minutes before they gave up and went to do something else, why would you want to make that more common? Quests that are easier to do with a group but still possible to do on your own (like Blood Runs Deep) or that offer other incentives for teamwork (like for instance if raiding Movario's base in WGS required a friend to help) are OK, but requiring multiple members is a bad idea. If Jagex starts doing that very often, well, there's plenty of other things I should be doing with my time, and that $6 a month could probably be going somewhere better too.

 

"These free spirits need to be integrated into the community only if they wish it"

 

So as long as we don't want a quest cape at all we'll be just fine, good to know.

 

"That is how Runescape remains relevant for the future, and players spend longer with the game before growing bored and moving on."

 

I doubt this, cutting people off from things their friends don't want to do isn't going to help keep people interested in the game, it effectively puts you at the mercy of the whims of your friends. You love that new skill? Better hope like hell that your friends like it too or else you're screwed

 

 

Your post is one helluva joke. What you really need is an offline version of RuneScape. Throw in some NPC with the AI to train and compete with you on the highscore table.

 

Edit:

 

Before I get accused of just skimming through your post, I better post some additional information.

 

Sure, fun should be the foundation of games, but first off, everyone's definition of 'fun' is different. In the context of MMORPGs, if teamwork and cooperation isn't your cup of tea, why are you even playing? Lots of RPGs out there have good storylines and even discussion forums. In the context of RuneScape specifically, if soloing is your idea of fun, you'll be glad to find that being an absolute loner still allows you to proceed through the game (perhaps slower), except for TWO quests and some minigame rewards. However, if team-based boss and group quests are released more and more often, there will be people who enjoy it. I won't mind if another whole chunk of such content, as large as the current solo-able content that we have, gets added to the game.

 

 

And to Kalafai. Oh, it's the "I don't want to have to do it" argument? Keep your demands for the real world. If you need 13.034mil to get level 99 in a skill, you have to do it, like it or not. The community fails sometimes, when people question the issue of solo versus teamplay FIRST when say, a new un-soloable boss gets added to the game, rather than discussing about team work and tactics and how good the drops are. In fact, the better the drop, the more likely people would whine. "OMG RuneScape is a MMO, team-based activities are a total basphemy! It's a consipracy by Jagex to changed all previous content to team-based gameplay!"


Zepheras.png

 

"Do you really want to go back to the time when Falador was grey, lesser demon look like goats, dragons look like cows, hellhound look like cats and your character stands as stiff as a statue?"

 

-F1775

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your post is one helluva joke. What you really need is an offline version of RuneScape. Throw in some NPC with the AI to train and compete with you on the highscore table.

 

*facepalm*

 

Really?

 

Is someone going around encouraging people to see in monochromatic tones?

 

I for one like playing with people, but don't want to have to play with people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Second article

 

"different complementary roles should be the foundation of most activities"

 

No. Fun should be the foundation of most activities, forcing people to not do things because their friends aren't on or their friends aren't interested in that right now or their friends are too busy with something else isn't fun.

 

"All bosses should be most effectively killed with at least one mage, one ranger and one mêléer."

 

No. To borrow a word you use repeatedly, there should be diversity. There should be bosses that can be defeated solo by mid-level people of each side of the triangle, there should be bosses that can only be soloed by high-level users of each side, there should be bosses that require combinations of mid-level players, etc.

 

 

"Fun" requires variation and diversity. I stand by that point. complementary roles ensure many different ways of playing the exact same content. that's the beauty of it: being a ranger, a mage and a meleer in the same situation are all different things. I may like the intense clicking of "catching" a boss and tanking it, bosses may have varying weaknesses, requiring extra clicking for a mage etc. There would be many different things to choose from: thus, more of us find fun in every new piece of content: it's utilitarian to have variation.

 

There are so many ways in which the three roles may be incorporated that needing at least 3 people to fight any boss, of different roles does not limit the veriety in the bosses, the other mechanics of the bosses do. If you can't find 2 people to perform an activity with on the RSOF, in clan chats, or on your own friendslist within 10 minutes, you're obviously not an active member of the community, and don't really care either way because "it requires a tad of effort to find out where i can consistently find teams of likeminded, likable gamers"

I agree that other elements also have to be incorporated, making every boss unique, not like the KQ and KBD for instance, where the only thing that seperates them is their combat level, and minor details in what gear you bring. there should indeed be different mechanics for different bosses, making them "fun". That would lead to more complex roles within teams as well, and the mages /rangers /magers / vengancer / skiller elements or whatever also become more varied, and not just another "tank job" or "range from a distance".

 

 

Any boss that can be killed solo at a lower level will be camped to death by high leveled players. They are obsolete, and the current bosses are mid-level bosses. I'm pretty sure almost anyone can solo the KBD with combat stats of 80, if they range mage or melee. The current bosses require combinations of mid-level players. People complain of the need for "instanced bosses" as high leveled teams are taking all the lootshare worlds for these bosses, evidence in point that your situation will not, and cannot work.

 

Soloable bosses are like the metal dragons (here, especially mithril) and the chaos elemental: they are normal creatures, but a little stronger. They are not real bosses.

 

The rest of your post concerns a gaming style where you do not interact with the players around you, only "friends" you have from before. That is exactly the attitude that hurts runescape in so many ways. That's the selfishness, "crashing", stealing spawns for killing and hunting, half-killing for slayer xp. That's the spamming, the begging, the "can i borrow", the bug abuse, the manipulation clans, the pre-agreed rules dm cheaters while pking. That is where flaming originates, hostility, and conversations that almost never progress beyond question: answer, even though there are 20 players woodcutting the same ivy.

 

Relations between players in the gaming environment, not on their friendslist determines how the community acts almost all of the time. That is where the general enjoyment of a game is completely ruined by "noobs" or maturity, positivism and enjoyment emnate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

specialisation:

 

"Runescape doomsday 2009", an old RSOF topic run by Kaiser Alan and myself was a look into economic inflation / price depreciation. At least it started that way, when I got involved I put a twist on it with the concept of value depreciation regardless of gold inflation or deflation, and to that added the points of intangible values. What is a 99 worth now? You see a lvl 99 cook and think "even a legends cape is harder to get". that 99 fletcher just used it to trim his str cape. 99 combats is virtually the norm and as far as items go, what sort of loser doesnt have barrow armour? (the best non pvp armour for defence).

 

Remember when Guthans was 15m? When bowstrings were 200 ea? How you'd be impressed by people with a whip? The value of these things is now next to nowt to image. The GE only made it worse for tradable items as they are only more and more heavily harvested....

 

but people never pay attention to skills again...

 

The only solution after this 7000 post thread (had to be remade 3 times) was to cut off the level cap. Keep 99 capes, but allow it to go past it. I've not yet found a proper formula for the exp per level (and I did a big analysis as practice for maths at uni), but we can estimate a few things: anyone with 200m exp probably wont even reach lvl 110. To get to lvl 120 you are probably into multiple billions for exp, dont ask about lvl 130.....So what good is that?

 

Imagine someone who gives up on all other skills except cooking. Trains cooking 24/7, is a few hundred million exp ahead of second place. Now when the first lvl 110 fisher stands proud in the game and gets a message that they can harpoon Shenfish (and it's not in the manual, it's a complete surprise hidden waiting in the game until enough have discovered it to be common knowledge) they find out only one person in the game can cook it and while the competition is zero these two form a partnership of the elite.

 

Imagine being the only person in the game who can mine a new level 110 ore, having 4-5 smithers in a price battle begging to be able to smelt it. You know you'll never have time to get the smith level yourself' you are a miner and nothing else!. What about when they find out no one yet has the defence level to wear it, and people are racing to be the first person to wear this new insanely strong armour and stand temporarily immortal compared to others. You see before you the only person in the game with some new 3 handed, 10 bladed, mace-swordhammer and you just run, you don't even bother trying to fight because you know they have 125 attack and will never miss you, but if you can get a chance to range them with your 115 ranged knowing what their def is like...

 

What we are missing is the ability to truely be the top. hiscores are just numbers when they could be status, ability, uniqueness. Who seriously cares who has the highest total level, it's the true masters we want to see, not the jack of alls. Once people get to a majority of 99s they'll have to start thinking: what is the skill I want to devote my character to? What is it I want more than everything else combined? And there will not be enough time in the world to master more than one...


Creater of QuestRanker

 

"I hate it when my target's die laughing, makes me think my fly is open or something"

-Me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am an older player of Runescape, most of the other players i call friends are older players as well. we have families, jobs, and many other real life activities that tend to make playing Runescape activities that require teamwork darn near impossible.

 

sure, i could try to find other players to attmpt to accomplish tasks that require teamwork, but would they be understanding that i may not be able to finish the task in the time that they have available? i play on dial up, are they going to die if i lose connection, will they be willing to try it again after they die? will they understand that i lag? that i may not be as "smart" as they are (capable of making the right decision at the right time)?

 

i could go on and on.

 

as it is, i tend to shy away from other players. i have been burned over and over by players who go out of their way to cause problems for whatever reason they have. players begging (i admit, that seems to have improved a lot) not willing to research anything (i was just at a star with a level 110 who didnt know what it is), unwilling to earn the levels and beg for assist or loan.

 

as it is, there are many activities that require teams, castle wars, BA, great orb, stealing creation, pest control as well as bosses that can be taken as teams if teams so choose to do it.

 

i remember looking for help with the shield of avrov (whatever it was called) i ended up paying 10k (quite a bit of gold for a newb like i was at the time), just to see the guy laugh call me a noob and dissapear with my cash (just what i deserved for being trusting). woot that was fun.

 

anyway, i am all for teams for activities, just dont make activities that are "required" to finish a task (ex. quests) "require" a team,

 

being dependant on others is not what i consider fun.

 

ravian said:

 

"And to Kalafai. Oh, it's the "I don't want to have to do it" argument? Keep your demands for the real world. If you need 13.034mil to get level 99 in a skill, you have to do it, like it or not."

*snip*

 

if i had to depend on a partner to get that 13.034mil xp points to get a 99 in a skill, i would not like it and would not do it.

 

i agree with what Kalafai said :

 

"I for one like playing with people, but don't want to have to play with people."

 

DITTO!!!


No matter where you go, there you are.

 

StarTrekEnterprise1701A_freedesktopwallpaper_p-1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both articles were very enjoyable reads!

 

=)

 

I consider myself to be a skiller, through and through, so like Racheya, I am very much enjoying Shattered Hearts! :thumbsup: While I don't think I will complete the statue even relatively close to 30 weeks from now (there are skills I simply avoid :P) it is nice to have SOME sort of reward for my effort, other than EXP. :P

 

There are certain aspects of the second article that I agree with, and certain aspects that I disagree with or simply don't care about (bosses? I don't really care how easy or difficult they are, as I don't engage in combat really) -- but overall, it was great to reflect on how RS used to be, what RS is, and what RS can be like in the future. :thumbup:


glut.gif
2tchvHp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure, fun should be the foundation of games, but first off, everyone's definition of 'fun' is different.

 

Find me someone who finds standing in the GE spamming "LFG" is fun, please. Some people like PKing, some people like playing SC for 6 hours every day, very few people are going to find standing around waiting for other people all the time fun, and the people that do are playing Progress Quest.

 

In the context of MMORPGs, if teamwork and cooperation isn't your cup of tea, why are you even playing?

 

Achieving personal milestones, 50+, 60+, 70+ in every skill, 100, 110, 120 combat, enough cash to get full Bandos, level 75 rc for the Ardougne diary, need I go on? There's an enormous amount of content for single-players in RS.

 

if soloing is your idea of fun, you'll be glad to find that being an absolute loner still allows you to proceed through the game (perhaps slower), except for TWO quests and some minigame rewards.

 

And the entire point of this thread is about an article claiming that such should be expanded, I have no real problem with the game as it is now, I recognize that some content is pretty much team-only and that's not a real issue, the idea that ALL the good content MUST be team-only is an issue.

 

The rest of your post concerns a gaming style where you do not interact with the players around you, only "friends" you have from before. That is exactly the attitude that hurts runescape in so many ways. That's the selfishness, "crashing", stealing spawns for killing and hunting, half-killing for slayer xp. That's the spamming, the begging, the "can i borrow", the bug abuse, the manipulation clans, the pre-agreed rules dm cheaters while pking. That is where flaming originates, hostility, and conversations that almost never progress beyond question: answer, even though there are 20 players woodcutting the same ivy.

 

Notably, I almost never engage in any of those activities and despise those who do. Perhaps you need to reconsider your position on those of us who don't care for constant teamplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure, fun should be the foundation of games, but first off, everyone's definition of 'fun' is different.

 

Find me someone who finds standing in the GE spamming "LFG" is fun, please. Some people like PKing, some people like playing SC for 6 hours every day, very few people are going to find standing around waiting for other people all the time fun, and the people that do are playing Progress Quest.

 

And some people like group content. You're telling me that you'll be biting Jagex's head off if they try to release some teamwork based content tomorrow. Gimme a break.

 

In the context of MMORPGs, if teamwork and cooperation isn't your cup of tea, why are you even playing?

 

Achieving personal milestones, 50+, 60+, 70+ in every skill, 100, 110, 120 combat, enough cash to get full Bandos, level 75 rc for the Ardougne diary, need I go on? There's an enormous amount of content for single-players in RS.

 

In the context of MMORPGs? Your example of milestones are found in offline RPGs, not just MMOs (Get eight bages, beat Elite Four...). It is clear that if RuneScape suddenly becomes a offline Java game for one day you won't even notice the difference.

 

 

if soloing is your idea of fun, you'll be glad to find that being an absolute loner still allows you to proceed through the game (perhaps slower), except for TWO quests and some minigame rewards.

 

And the entire point of this thread is about an article claiming that such should be expanded, I have no real problem with the game as it is now, I recognize that some content is pretty much team-only and that's not a real issue, the idea that ALL the good content MUST be team-only is an issue.

 

 

I don't think the author is specifically talking about promoting teamwork in every aspect of the game, but rather how specification in a certain role and playing your part for the community can be a rewarding gaming experience. It used to be the case with skill specification, but that obviously can't last long when the game advocates being an all-rounder instead of a class system like smithers and woodcutters. He raised the example of boss fights because that's the prime example where people have to select a role and do well in it in order to benefit the team. If you read the article describing RS classic and thought, "Wow, the good old days of teamwork and cooperation and community", then I don't see why you would flinch at the thought of working together.

 

 

The rest of your post concerns a gaming style where you do not interact with the players around you, only "friends" you have from before. That is exactly the attitude that hurts runescape in so many ways. That's the selfishness, "crashing", stealing spawns for killing and hunting, half-killing for slayer xp. That's the spamming, the begging, the "can i borrow", the bug abuse, the manipulation clans, the pre-agreed rules dm cheaters while pking. That is where flaming originates, hostility, and conversations that almost never progress beyond question: answer, even though there are 20 players woodcutting the same ivy.

 

Notably, I almost never engage in any of those activities and despise those who do. Perhaps you need to reconsider your position on those of us who don't care for constant teamplay.

 

No comments on this.


Zepheras.png

 

"Do you really want to go back to the time when Falador was grey, lesser demon look like goats, dragons look like cows, hellhound look like cats and your character stands as stiff as a statue?"

 

-F1775

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

The only solution after this 7000 post thread (had to be remade 3 times) was to cut off the level cap. Keep 99 capes, but allow it to go past it. I've not yet found a proper formula for the exp per level (and I did a big analysis as practice for maths at uni), but we can estimate a few things: anyone with 200m exp probably wont even reach lvl 110. To get to lvl 120 you are probably into multiple billions for exp, dont ask about lvl 130.....So what good is that?

 

...

 

I've seen the formula online somewhere (a long time ago) and put it in my omnibus spreadsheet.

I put it on Rapidshare if you want to look at it (MD5: CB979BDEA574A8CA91BE18C318318122).


PvP is not for me

In the 3rd Year of the Boycott
Real-world money saved since FT/W: Hundreds of Dollars
Real-world time saved since FT/W: Thousands of Hours

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could not disagree harder with the second article.

The first was okay, but didn't really get me thinking. Quite a shame.

 

Still, the second article... No, just utterly and totally no.


Unknown_Warrior.jpegIgGCP.png

Dragon Drops : 5 Dragon Medium Helmets, 3 Dragon Claws, 3 Dragon platelegs, 2 Dragon plateskirts, 2 Dragon Hatchets, 2 Dragon Spears, 7 pairs of Dragon Boots, 1 Dragon pickaxe, 10 Dragon defenders, 3 Dragon 2h swords, 1 Dragon armour Slice, 1 Dragon armour Lump, 1 Dragon chainbody, 1 Dragon kiteshield, 1 Dragon hasta, 1 Dragon ward, 25 Dragon knives pairs
The Warrior's Blog , Herblore Habitat - Efficient and profitable

[hide=Stats and logs]






The_Warrior.png
.:Adventurer's Log:.

[/hide]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not gonna lie, I'm appalled at the intolerance being shown on these forums this week.

 

Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean that they are wrong, their opinions are invalid, or that you must therefore ignore the real reasons for their comments and, instead, get your kicks trying to smash their argument to the ground.

 

The articles were fine, the responses to them should embarrass those who have indulged their peculiar fetish for directing deprecating comments at complete strangers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for you Waheehra1

 

The first article was amateur, and terrible as all it did is say this is great, oh sure there are one or two minor flaws but this is GREAT content. I like rainbows and Jagex.

Terrible effort. To write so much and say so little. Especially nothing that was said in that article was new.

 

 

 

 

The second article is much better as it has an opinion and is generating discussion.

Some fresh ideas were presented, although overall I don't agree with the second articles author.

It seems like they want RS to turn into WOW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have nothing to say about article #1 that I haven't already said in the Shattered Heart thread here.

 

I couldn't disagree more vehemently with article #2.

 

It was Beowulf who killed Grendel - not Beowulf & Eye1HitU in a team effort.

It was Hercules who cleaned the Augean stables - not Hercules, Sparkles129 & FumbDuck.

 

I could throw out other literary examples... but the point is it's a singular hero that takes on the task & gets the glory. That's what we remember & glorify. That's what I expect from my MMO.

 

More quests where you have to work in pairs or trios or more would drive me to canceling my subscription.

 

I agree with you on article #2 . I love playing RS and have been playing four years. I became a member after 2 weeks of free play. I talk to my friends, but I do most of my activities on my own. Not everyone plays just to kill a boss or to be in a clan. Playing RS is a way I like to relax instead of watching TV, etc. If Jagex started making the quests where I had to depend on another person to complete it then I would have no sense of individual accomplishment. ATM you have a choice to do things as a group or as an individual. That to me is the best of both worlds. They offer mini games that are group ways of training skills such as the Blast Furnace, Stealing Creation, Barbarian Assault, and Trouble Brewing. To counter balance those they have mini games that can be done as an individual such as Beacon Network, Jade Vine, Phoenix Lair, and more. If Jagex starts making the majority of their updates to cater to only those who think we must do things in groups and that "single players should be less effective than their cooperating counterparts" isn't that like saying unless we play as a group we are not as important. People who would rather not do the group thing work just as hard to achieve their levels and accomplishments and are just as important to this game as those who play in groups.


mistress_glo.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have nothing to say about article #1 that I haven't already said in the Shattered Heart thread here.

 

I couldn't disagree more vehemently with article #2.

 

It was Beowulf who killed Grendel - not Beowulf & Eye1HitU in a team effort.

It was Hercules who cleaned the Augean stables - not Hercules, Sparkles129 & FumbDuck.

 

I could throw out other literary examples... but the point is it's a singular hero that takes on the task & gets the glory. That's what we remember & glorify. That's what I expect from my MMO.

 

More quests where you have to work in pairs or trios or more would drive me to canceling my subscription.

 

I agree with you on article #2 . I love playing RS and have been playing four years. I became a member after 2 weeks of free play. I talk to my friends, but I do most of my activities on my own. Not everyone plays just to kill a boss or to be in a clan. Playing RS is a way I like to relax instead of watching TV, etc. If Jagex started making the quests where I had to depend on another person to complete it then I would have no sense of individual accomplishment. ATM you have a choice to do things as a group or as an individual. That to me is the best of both worlds. They offer mini games that are group ways of training skills such as the Blast Furnace, Stealing Creation, Barbarian Assault, and Trouble Brewing. To counter balance those they have mini games that can be done as an individual such as Beacon Network, Jade Vine, Phoenix Lair, and more. If Jagex starts making the majority of their updates to cater to only those who think we must do things in groups and that "single players should be less effective than their cooperating counterparts" isn't that like saying unless we play as a group we are not as important. People who would rather not do the group thing work just as hard to achieve their levels and accomplishments and are just as important to this game as those who play in groups.

 

I want to add that I am not so great at combat skills ... I get nervous, don't always make a good decision, have slower reflexes than alot of people so I like the fact that people who are good at combat skills can get armour/weapon drops and they are tradable which allows me to buy them. I use other skills not combat skills to earn my cash. Players that use their combat skills to make cash by selling good armour/weapons drops they get are glad probably very glad those items are tradable.


mistress_glo.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not gonna lie, I'm appalled at the intolerance being shown on these forums this week.

 

Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean that they are wrong, their opinions are invalid, or that you must therefore ignore the real reasons for their comments and, instead, get your kicks trying to smash their argument to the ground.

 

The articles were fine, the responses to them should embarrass those who have indulged their peculiar fetish for directing deprecating comments at complete strangers.

 

Sweeping generalizations like this are far more intolerant than thoughtful dissent.

 

I stand behind every comment I made.


PvP is not for me

In the 3rd Year of the Boycott
Real-world money saved since FT/W: Hundreds of Dollars
Real-world time saved since FT/W: Thousands of Hours

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

The only solution after this 7000 post thread (had to be remade 3 times) was to cut off the level cap. Keep 99 capes, but allow it to go past it. I've not yet found a proper formula for the exp per level (and I did a big analysis as practice for maths at uni), but we can estimate a few things: anyone with 200m exp probably wont even reach lvl 110. To get to lvl 120 you are probably into multiple billions for exp, dont ask about lvl 130.....So what good is that?

 

...

 

I've seen the formula online somewhere (a long time ago) and put it in my omnibus spreadsheet.

I put it on Rapidshare if you want to look at it (MD5: CB979BDEA574A8CA91BE18C318318122).

 

 

While I appreciate the effort, you are quite a long chunk off. I can guarantee it is not a polynomial less than order 98 as the langrangian method i used will get a guaranteed perfect formula for any power less then the number of items. I did try various exponentials and iterative formulae too but cannot make as bold a statement as to guarantee it's not one, just that it's not a simple one. as we are looking to extrapolate values, we have to be very careful with formulae to be accurate. One thing we can say is the levels past 99 require huge exp! You have your lvl 149-150 needing 200m exp, can you imagine the thrill of being the first to get lvl 150 and discover a new item to be made, or a new ore to mine (which takes about a day per ore ;))


Creater of QuestRanker

 

"I hate it when my target's die laughing, makes me think my fly is open or something"

-Me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I appreciate the effort, you are quite a long chunk off. I can guarantee it is not a polynomial less than order 98 as the langrangian method i used will get a guaranteed perfect formula for any power less then the number of items. I did try various exponentials and iterative formulae too but cannot make as bold a statement as to guarantee it's not one, just that it's not a simple one. as we are looking to extrapolate values, we have to be very careful with formulae to be accurate. One thing we can say is the levels past 99 require huge exp! You have your lvl 149-150 needing 200m exp, can you imagine the thrill of being the first to get lvl 150 and discover a new item to be made, or a new ore to mine (which takes about a day per ore ;))

 

If you look again you will clearly see the 200,000,000 mark is just before level 126 (the column labeled Intermediate), not level 149-150. You are misplacing your commas. I admit I could have formatted that a little better.

 

The Level label is a bit misleading; as the XP matches to the points for the next level (i.e., 83 gets you to 2, 13034431 gets you to 99)

 

I didn't come up with the formula, but it matches every level from 1-99; I have no reason to believe it's different above 99.


PvP is not for me

In the 3rd Year of the Boycott
Real-world money saved since FT/W: Hundreds of Dollars
Real-world time saved since FT/W: Thousands of Hours

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First article was fine. Second article....

 

I played a long time ago, back when Clan Chats were released. (If I remember correctly, I quit a week after that due to having an account scammed(I was really stupid back then.)) I remember trying to find a partner for Shield of Arrav - if it weren't for an IRL friend, doing that quest on my first account would have been sheer hell. Even trying to start it on my second account, which was created and promptly forgotten for a year and a half after the first had been lost, was hell. So, if they release more content that requires people to work together, I'm going to be altogether angry. Now, I'm all for specialization. But for a team of specialists to be necessary to do something.... I would prefer to avoid. Because getting together a team of specialists to do so is, well, as mentioned before - sheer hell. Good example - BA. You can do it with a group of friends, which turns out fine. But if your BA friends aren't online, you get to go to W6 and pray you find a group who actually knows what they're doing.

 

Tl;dr: Specialization is fine, but needing group specialization isn't, because friends aren't always there and when they aren't, you'd have to fight through a wave of idiots to find someone who knows what they're doing.


a70c7.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not gonna lie, I'm appalled at the intolerance being shown on these forums this week.

 

Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean that they are wrong, their opinions are invalid, or that you must therefore ignore the real reasons for their comments and, instead, get your kicks trying to smash their argument to the ground.

 

The articles were fine, the responses to them should embarrass those who have indulged their peculiar fetish for directing deprecating comments at complete strangers.

 

Sweeping generalizations like this are far more intolerant than thoughtful dissent.

 

I stand behind every comment I made.

 

Well in fairness I haven't insulted anyone... I'm not suggesting we must all agree with the articles, because frankly I don't either. I'm also not making a sweeping generalization about every person who has replied to this thread, which I thought would have been obvious since certain people clearly haven't written rude or intolerant comments. What disappointed me in reading the forum posts on this topic this week is that several people have taken an aggressive tone with others whose opinions they disagree with.

 

To Canadiansmurf: You've misunderstood me (understandably so) - I'm not saying I particularly liked either of the articles this week, but they were at least innocuous and not insulting. Coming to read the forum feedback it seems there are a select few who would rather force their own opinion and style of gameplay on others, irrespective of that person's own opinion. That was what irritated me and led me to post my previous comment.

 

If you are not the kind of person to whom the first comment I posted applies, then there is no need to take offence at it. Simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I appreciate the effort, you are quite a long chunk off. I can guarantee it is not a polynomial less than order 98 as the langrangian method i used will get a guaranteed perfect formula for any power less then the number of items. I did try various exponentials and iterative formulae too but cannot make as bold a statement as to guarantee it's not one, just that it's not a simple one. as we are looking to extrapolate values, we have to be very careful with formulae to be accurate. One thing we can say is the levels past 99 require huge exp! You have your lvl 149-150 needing 200m exp, can you imagine the thrill of being the first to get lvl 150 and discover a new item to be made, or a new ore to mine (which takes about a day per ore ;))

 

If you look again you will clearly see the 200,000,000 mark is just before level 126 (the column labeled Intermediate), not level 149-150. You are misplacing your commas. I admit I could have formatted that a little better.

 

The Level label is a bit misleading; as the XP matches to the points for the next level (i.e., 83 gets you to 2, 13034431 gets you to 99)

 

I didn't come up with the formula, but it matches every level from 1-99; I have no reason to believe it's different above 99.

 

Ah, so it's offset by a level, meaning the true formula XP(L)=XP(L-1)+FLOOR(X-1+6.1224*(x-1)^2)/4, or rather that the xp difference is FLOOR(X-1+6.1224*(x-1)^2)/4. being a function of X-1 rather an X definately would break the lagrangian formula. Kudos to the one who developed it

 

For the record, i meant that from 149-150 there is a 200m exp difference. 149 = 2,033,749,558 ; 150 = 2,245,441,392


Creater of QuestRanker

 

"I hate it when my target's die laughing, makes me think my fly is open or something"

-Me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a nice review of Shattered Hearts. I was personally really frustrated that such a thing took so long to achieve the PoH statue. It is, after all, a distraction/diversion. With how long it takes to obtain that and how hard some of the pieces are to obtain, it becomes less a pleasant little 'distraction' and more like a very heavy effort-based activity, like that of a minigame. I still have the same opinion--that it's not really an adequate D&D--but seeing it from a different opinion helps understand why people think that way :P

 

Second article was very lovely, but I disagree with something: Just as one person might want to work together, others may not. That's why I think that if Jagex does decide to move forward with diversification, that the older structures (bosses and activities) should remain untouched. If I wanted to hybrid DKs for example, I would. I don't. I interact with my clan and within my clan I "specialize" as you mention. Quite a bit, actually. But I don't want to do things like boss hunting with other people ALL the time. And I shouldn't be at a disadvantage for that unless it's clearly an activity that shouldn't be done alone, such as Corp.

 

Everything else, I think was spot on.


hzvjpwS.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what others have said, but these are my personal opinions on the article complaining about all of the changes to RS (the ge one).

 

Firstly, I think the diversity stuff is true and perfect.

 

However, I have some points I would like to bring up related to the opinions stated on the grand exchange.

 

1.I am a very even skiller and prefer questing to skilling. (combat 81, total 1325. My skills range from 43 runecrafting to 66 cooking. I have 259 quest points).

 

2.I don't buy equipment off the GE.

 

3.I believe a strong point of the GE is to sell off useless stuff I have.

 

4. I hate it when people make a ton of money & buy high skill levels (especially herblore, one of my personal favorite skills).

 

As a skiller, I believe the GE rewards those who can't actually work for the stuff they use.

However, as a quester, the GE is my salvation. Jagex creates high level item requisites for their quests. I, being a moderate level skiller but resourceful enough to handle myself during hard quests, don't want to get stuck on a quest just because I can't get ahold of a high level item (magic logs are a common one). The GE has actually made it possible for a moderate level skiller to get ahold of resources that it can take extremely high level skills to obtain, and I wouldn't have completed nearly as many quests without it.


Ummmmmm.....................

Not much to say.

 

If you want to find me in Runescape, my name is not applyapple. It is vetoscadiva.

 

Complain as you like about Jagex, but think about what they've done. How many MMORPG designers go around to creating as complex an in-game world as Jagex? They do need to get around to making a equipable knife, though.

 

With everyone's complaining about updates, it's amzing that there isn't a forum topic on the fact that the chat box says "You can't reach that" (as opposed to "I can't reach that!").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second article

 

I think you should remember how hard it was being a free player trying to finish Shield of Arrov... no forum access, no clanchat to ask on... I'd hardly call standing in varrok square shouting your intentions to be socializing.

then socialize first and AFTER that do the quest?

 

 

This wasn't really a problem at all when the quests came out, people were way less goal focussed back then..


First they came to fishing

and I didn't speak out because I wasn't fishing

 

Then they came to the yews

and I didn't speak out because I didn't cut yews

 

Then they came for the ores

and I didn't speak out because I didn't collect ores

 

Then they came for me

and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.