The return of staking??

[strilmus]

Wait, so basically staking was like flipping a coin?

 

Why do people find that so exciting?

[I_am_Not]

The only form of staking that ever required much more than an iq above 50 was mage obstacle staking.

Certain places in the arena would allow for 1-way combat, meaning you can hit your opponent but they can't hit you, and vice versa.

This, however is now nerfed.

For melee staking getting first hit was the only affect on the duel really, everything other than that was like flipping a coin, yes.

Also, trapping around the exit to "re get" first hit in hopes of turning the duel around

Those are the only things I can remember.

@above, staking is a rush essentially, similar to getting a good drop at any godwars boss, or anywhere really.

You may not spam omfg for 20 minutes but inside you're generally excited you just made a fair bit of money, same goes for staking.

[Vex]

Wait, so basically staking was like flipping a coin?

 

Why do people find that so exciting?

 

Why do people find roulette fun?

[Pay_Me]

Wait, so basically staking was like flipping a coin?

 

Why do people find that so exciting?

 

Why do people find roulette fun?

 

lawl....so true....so when staking comes back i wana find someone willing to throw up a phat....lol

[masterdez]

It's definitely exciting. A lot of it is also about picking your fights, and knowing when to stake big.

 

For example, you could stake someone, where the items/money staked are doubled in value each time.

 

100k, 200k, 400k, 800k, 1600k, 3600k, 7200k, etc

 

You would only have to win one duel - the last duel, to actually profit from the encounter.

[xpx]

Wait, so basically staking was like flipping a coin?

 

Why do people find that so exciting?

Maybe because it...isn't?

 

Yes, while a single fight might a tossup under perfect conditions, there is still skill in quite a few things that make a great staker. Not everyone has the guts. Not everyone has the feel. Not everyone has the knowledge. Not everyone knows when to quit, when to up the stakes. Poker, under perfect conditions, is like flipping a coin. Wonder why people enjoy that. People should never discount for intangible qualities.

[Naraku893]

Mage boxing was NOT like flipping a coin. I saw level 80's and 90's destroy 126's doing that. Those were good times. I believe mage staking is going to be the only method of staking that hasn't been changed much over the years.

[INLINER]

Mage boxing was NOT like flipping a coin. I saw level 80's and 90's destroy 126's doing that. Those were good times. I believe mage staking is going to be the only method of staking that hasn't been changed much over the years.

 

False. All the traps and much of the obstacle boxing methods have been messed with by the new game engine and combat codes.

 

It'll be back to move/no move reg arena for mage boxing most likely.

 

Anyone else found anything different?

[I_am_Not]

Mage boxing was NOT like flipping a coin. I saw level 80's and 90's destroy 126's doing that. Those were good times. I believe mage staking is going to be the only method of staking that hasn't been changed much over the years.

The reason you saw that is because the only thing ever needed for mage staking was 99 hp/magic/possibly some defence lol.

A 1-1-99 with 99 hp and magic is the same exact thing as a maxed main when it comes to mage staking.

[JeremyM]

Range staking in obstacles also took some skill.

[Xensure]

Mage boxing was NOT like flipping a coin. I saw level 80's and 90's destroy 126's doing that. Those were good times. I believe mage staking is going to be the only method of staking that hasn't been changed much over the years.

The reason you saw that is because the only thing ever needed for mage staking was 99 hp/magic/possibly some defence lol.

A 1-1-99 with 99 hp and magic is the same exact thing as a maxed main when it comes to mage staking.

 

Not true at all. I was 108 cmb with 99 hp, mage, and defense. I staked a lot of level 80s who thought the same thing that defense didn't matter. I won like 99% of those. And I was a relatively "bad" staker. I sucked at the obstacle trick so I always staked just regular boxing with wands and movement. I had plenty of people to stake though these were usually for 1-10m, the phat stakes were no movement. Even with out the obstacles having movement on add a lot of strategy to the game, there was very little "gambling" involved. If you screwed up you knew it and you usually lost because of it.

[muggiwhplar]

Mage boxing was NOT like flipping a coin. I saw level 80's and 90's destroy 126's doing that. Those were good times. I believe mage staking is going to be the only method of staking that hasn't been changed much over the years.

The reason you saw that is because the only thing ever needed for mage staking was 99 hp/magic/possibly some defence lol.

A 1-1-99 with 99 hp and magic is the same exact thing as a maxed main when it comes to mage staking.

 

Not true at all. I was 108 cmb with 99 hp, mage, and defense. I staked a lot of level 80s who thought the same thing that defense didn't matter. I won like 99% of those. And I was a relatively "bad" staker. I sucked at the obstacle trick so I always staked just regular boxing with wands and movement. I had plenty of people to stake though these were usually for 1-10m, the phat stakes were no movement. Even with out the obstacles having movement on add a lot of strategy to the game, there was very little "gambling" involved. If you screwed up you knew it and you usually lost because of it.

 

Defense doesn't matter... I was a maxed mage as well and fought several 1 def pures whom I splashed against quite frequently.

[Toad]

Mage boxing was NOT like flipping a coin. I saw level 80's and 90's destroy 126's doing that. Those were good times. I believe mage staking is going to be the only method of staking that hasn't been changed much over the years.

The reason you saw that is because the only thing ever needed for mage staking was 99 hp/magic/possibly some defence lol.

A 1-1-99 with 99 hp and magic is the same exact thing as a maxed main when it comes to mage staking.

 

Not true at all. I was 108 cmb with 99 hp, mage, and defense. I staked a lot of level 80s who thought the same thing that defense didn't matter. I won like 99% of those. And I was a relatively "bad" staker. I sucked at the obstacle trick so I always staked just regular boxing with wands and movement. I had plenty of people to stake though these were usually for 1-10m, the phat stakes were no movement. Even with out the obstacles having movement on add a lot of strategy to the game, there was very little "gambling" involved. If you screwed up you knew it and you usually lost because of it.

 

Defense doesn't matter... I was a maxed mage as well and fought several 1 def pures whom I splashed against quite frequently.

 

What affects my magic defence?

 

Magic defence depends on your Magic skill level, Defence level and equipment you are wearing.

 

The higher your skill levels and Magic bonus, the less likely you are to get hit. You will also receive less damage from a spell.

 

http://www.runescape.com/kbase/guid/magic_faq - The Knowledge base can still be inaccurate but I think it's mainly your Magic level that dictates the defence and not the defence skill, but that's just my assumption :unsure:

 

Staking options should be like a trade window though where you both select options, if your options clash it needs to match exactly before you start (you can see what opponents options and it'd be a side by side window of the equiptment and rules) then certain stakers dont turn on plates, or other things to try and cheat their way in ;)

[SirIzenhime]

I think it's along the lines of 70% of your magic defense is from your magic level, and the rest is from defense levels. Meh

[muggiwhplar]

Mage boxing was NOT like flipping a coin. I saw level 80's and 90's destroy 126's doing that. Those were good times. I believe mage staking is going to be the only method of staking that hasn't been changed much over the years.

The reason you saw that is because the only thing ever needed for mage staking was 99 hp/magic/possibly some defence lol.

A 1-1-99 with 99 hp and magic is the same exact thing as a maxed main when it comes to mage staking.

 

Not true at all. I was 108 cmb with 99 hp, mage, and defense. I staked a lot of level 80s who thought the same thing that defense didn't matter. I won like 99% of those. And I was a relatively "bad" staker. I sucked at the obstacle trick so I always staked just regular boxing with wands and movement. I had plenty of people to stake though these were usually for 1-10m, the phat stakes were no movement. Even with out the obstacles having movement on add a lot of strategy to the game, there was very little "gambling" involved. If you screwed up you knew it and you usually lost because of it.

 

Defense doesn't matter... I was a maxed mage as well and fought several 1 def pures whom I splashed against quite frequently.

 

What affects my magic defence?

 

Magic defence depends on your Magic skill level, Defence level and equipment you are wearing.

 

The higher your skill levels and Magic bonus, the less likely you are to get hit. You will also receive less damage from a spell.

 

http://www.runescape.com/kbase/guid/magic_faq - The Knowledge base can still be inaccurate but I think it's mainly your Magic level that dictates the defence and not the defence skill, but that's just my assumption :unsure:

 

Staking options should be like a trade window though where you both select options, if your options clash it needs to match exactly before you start (you can see what opponents options and it'd be a side by side window of the equiptment and rules) then certain stakers dont turn on plates, or other things to try and cheat their way in ;)

 

Yeah I've read that before but I still disagree with it from my experience. The fact that from the thousands of 1-def pures I fought, I splashed just as much as they did while I was 99 defense, makes me believe that defense doesn't matter at all.

[Dark_Yeng]

When I get super rich, I might host my own Boxing/MMA match. Winner gets to be the Champ and go on to face other players. Winner gets a prize or 500k-1M or maybe more. :P

Only bare kick and punch allow.

[Toad]

Mage boxing was NOT like flipping a coin. I saw level 80's and 90's destroy 126's doing that. Those were good times. I believe mage staking is going to be the only method of staking that hasn't been changed much over the years.

The reason you saw that is because the only thing ever needed for mage staking was 99 hp/magic/possibly some defence lol.

A 1-1-99 with 99 hp and magic is the same exact thing as a maxed main when it comes to mage staking.

 

Not true at all. I was 108 cmb with 99 hp, mage, and defense. I staked a lot of level 80s who thought the same thing that defense didn't matter. I won like 99% of those. And I was a relatively "bad" staker. I sucked at the obstacle trick so I always staked just regular boxing with wands and movement. I had plenty of people to stake though these were usually for 1-10m, the phat stakes were no movement. Even with out the obstacles having movement on add a lot of strategy to the game, there was very little "gambling" involved. If you screwed up you knew it and you usually lost because of it.

 

Defense doesn't matter... I was a maxed mage as well and fought several 1 def pures whom I splashed against quite frequently.

 

What affects my magic defence?

 

Magic defence depends on your Magic skill level, Defence level and equipment you are wearing.

 

The higher your skill levels and Magic bonus, the less likely you are to get hit. You will also receive less damage from a spell.

 

http://www.runescape.com/kbase/guid/magic_faq - The Knowledge base can still be inaccurate but I think it's mainly your Magic level that dictates the defence and not the defence skill, but that's just my assumption :unsure:

 

Staking options should be like a trade window though where you both select options, if your options clash it needs to match exactly before you start (you can see what opponents options and it'd be a side by side window of the equiptment and rules) then certain stakers dont turn on plates, or other things to try and cheat their way in ;)

 

Yeah I've read that before but I still disagree with it from my experience. The fact that from the thousands of 1-def pures I fought, I splashed just as much as they did while I was 99 defense, makes me believe that defense doesn't matter at all.

 

Perhaps jagex mean the gear you can wear at higher melee defence levels then, meaning on stakes where you have no armour it makes zero difference

[la la la]

It's definitely exciting. A lot of it is also about picking your fights, and knowing when to stake big.

 

For example, you could stake someone, where the items/money staked are doubled in value each time.

 

100k, 200k, 400k, 800k, 1600k, 3600k, 7200k, etc

 

You would only have to win one duel - the last duel, to actually profit from the encounter.

It's a gambling fallacy that this style of betting (called the "Martingale" system) is actually profitable.

 

Basically, if you have 1.5m to play with, you will get to play 4 games until you lose all of your money. So that gives you a 15/16 chance of making 100k and a 1/16 chance (LLLL, all at 1/2) of losing 1.5m. So, on average, you will win 15 times (1.5m total) and lose once (-1.5m).

[bedman]

It's definitely exciting. A lot of it is also about picking your fights, and knowing when to stake big.

 

For example, you could stake someone, where the items/money staked are doubled in value each time.

 

100k, 200k, 400k, 800k, 1600k, 3600k, 7200k, etc

 

You would only have to win one duel - the last duel, to actually profit from the encounter.

It's a gambling fallacy that this style of betting (called the "Martingale" system) is actually profitable.

 

Basically, if you have 1.5m to play with, you will get to play 4 games until you lose all of your money. So that gives you a 15/16 chance of making 100k and a 1/16 chance (LLLL, all at 1/2) of losing 1.5m. So, on average, you will win 15 times (1.5m total) and lose once (-1.5m).

Interesting.

 

Though, say you've got 10 billion gp. If you restrict yourself from using only 100m, this could work. In the rare case that you happen to lose the 100m, just keep doubling it, and after a few more games, you should have gained it back.

[la la la]

It's definitely exciting. A lot of it is also about picking your fights, and knowing when to stake big.

 

For example, you could stake someone, where the items/money staked are doubled in value each time.

 

100k, 200k, 400k, 800k, 1600k, 3600k, 7200k, etc

 

You would only have to win one duel - the last duel, to actually profit from the encounter.

It's a gambling fallacy that this style of betting (called the "Martingale" system) is actually profitable.

 

Basically, if you have 1.5m to play with, you will get to play 4 games until you lose all of your money. So that gives you a 15/16 chance of making 100k and a 1/16 chance (LLLL, all at 1/2) of losing 1.5m. So, on average, you will win 15 times (1.5m total) and lose once (-1.5m).

Interesting.

 

Though, say you've got 10 billion gp. If you restrict yourself from using only 100m, this could work. In the rare case that you happen to lose the 100m, just keep doubling it, and after a few more games, you should have gained it back.

Nope, same thing. You always have a chance of losing ALL of your money that is exactly proportionate to the expected payoff for all of the small wins you will make.

 

No matter how you try to break it up, the only way to make money in a 1/2 chance game is to get above-average luck.

[masterdez]

Nope, same thing. You always have a chance of losing ALL of your money that is exactly proportionate to the expected payoff for all of the small wins you will make.

 

No matter how you try to break it up, the only way to make money in a 1/2 chance game is to get above-average luck.

 

As the amount of money you have tends to infinity, the number of times you can double "re-bet" tends to infinity. This leads to a probability of profit, assuming 50-50, of something like:

 

P(Profit after number of bets X) = 1 - 1/2^X

 

As the number of bets gets large, the probability of a profit tends to 1, until at a high number of bets, profit becomes a certainty.

[Xensure]

No matter how you try to break it up, the only way to make money in a 1/2 chance game is to get above-average luck.

 

Truth.

 

Where the trickery comes in is luring people in to thinking they are going to keep winning. You stake some one low amounts but keep doubling, but losing on purpose, then for a big stake you win and end up profiting. There are still risks in this though. The opponent can decide to stop staking you after they have won several, or you could always still lose the last stake and lose everything.

 

There are only two ways that a player can get a statistical advantage over an opponent.

 

The "tricks" that can give a player an advantage such as using instant spells correctly, having better internet allowing you to get first hit, using the trap door properly, obstacle skills, and many more.

 

The other way is to stake players with out equal stats, which involves betting more or less than your opponent based on the stat discrepancies. Where the advantage comes in is being able to properly quantify the value of the discrepancies and bet less than you "should" this will ultimately raise the expected value of your winnings. For example if you are staking someone of equal stats and you are betting the same amount then your expected winnings is always 0. However if you are staking someone with lower stats you have to properly evaluate how much lower they are, say x% worse. This means that you should increase your bet by x% as well. This will keep your expected winnings at 0, but say you bet y% more where y<x then your expected winnings will go positive. The process of evaluating the stats difference to find the "x%" is what makes pro stakers rich since the "x%" can never accurately be quantified numerically. Then you make bets like this over and over and the large the sample gets the more your winnings will trend towards the positive expected value. This is just like Vegas odds. For all sports, casino, and lottery betting the probability of winning is < 50% Therefore you are always expected to lose and the casino or bookie is always expected to win.

[Golvellius]

Staking and the duel arena never left.

The only thing that left were the clowns who needed to manipulate the system to win. (movement off, dragon spear spec, dhally win).

RIP duel tournaments, RIP fair fights...

[Cheefoo]

Staking and the duel arena never left.

The only thing that left were the clowns who needed to manipulate the system to win. (movement off, dragon spear spec, dhally win).

RIP duel tournaments, RIP fair fights...

 

The system isn't going to be any more manipulatable now. You're just able to stake more than a few thousand gp at once. You know, trolling is a lot less effective when you tell everyone you're trolling in your sig.

[masterdez]

No matter how you try to break it up, the only way to make money in a 1/2 chance game is to get above-average luck.

 

Truth.

 

Where the trickery comes in is luring people in to thinking they are going to keep winning. You stake some one low amounts but keep doubling, but losing on purpose, then for a big stake you win and end up profiting. There are still risks in this though. The opponent can decide to stop staking you after they have won several, or you could always still lose the last stake and lose everything.

 

There are only two ways that a player can get a statistical advantage over an opponent.

 

The "tricks" that can give a player an advantage such as using instant spells correctly, having better internet allowing you to get first hit, using the trap door properly, obstacle skills, and many more.

 

The other way is to stake players with out equal stats, which involves betting more or less than your opponent based on the stat discrepancies. Where the advantage comes in is being able to properly quantify the value of the discrepancies and bet less than you "should" this will ultimately raise the expected value of your winnings. For example if you are staking someone of equal stats and you are betting the same amount then your expected winnings is always 0. However if you are staking someone with lower stats you have to properly evaluate how much lower they are, say x% worse. This means that you should increase your bet by x% as well. This will keep your expected winnings at 0, but say you bet y% more where y<x then your expected winnings will go positive. The process of evaluating the stats difference to find the "x%" is what makes pro stakers rich since the "x%" can never accurately be quantified numerically. Then you make bets like this over and over and the large the sample gets the more your winnings will trend towards the positive expected value. This is just like Vegas odds. For all sports, casino, and lottery betting the probability of winning is < 50% Therefore you are always expected to lose and the casino or bookie is always expected to win.

 

Without meaning to sound like a troll, you're both wrong. To correct Rocked, No matter how you try to break it up, the only way to make money in a single 1/2 chance game is to get above-average luck.

 

Now to our situation, where we have an undetermined number of stakes, and goal is to make a profit, and leave when a profit is made (as may be the goal of a staker). As i demonstrated in my previous post, I proved with a large cash pile, a profit is almost guaranteed.

 

Xensure - staking with the aim to lose, is a tactic, but a risky one at that, as your opponent can quit at any time. My hypothesis was assuming each stake was played with the intent to win, as is normally the case.

 

A better internet connectivity doesn't determine who get's the first hit. Most obstacle skills are obsolete now, and most players will, at least for the first few weeks, use movement off, simply due to the masses of people that will be staking.

 

Betting on discrepancies is, as you said, a matter of opinion. However your statement about Vegas odds is complete rubbish. The only reason bookies/casinos make money is because they take the odds and reduce them slightly (not because odds are below 50%). For example, in roulette, there are red numbers, black numbers and the 0 green. The odds you get of putting money on red is 50%, and on black 50%. This doesn't include the 0, and is an example of the small margins that casinos use to profit.