Extremes in New Wildy

[Bassy]

A j-mod at runefest once explained his view about making "pro-defence" updates. I consider allowing extremes to be a "pro-main account" update, so I'm for it.

 

Gives well-rounded characters a fair advantage for the time they took to raise the money and train.

[Quyneax]

Extremes are no different than other items that require non-combat levels (e.g. handcannon, Korasi's) in how they are obtained. They are different in what they do (e.g. extremes boost levels, handcannon boosts equipment bonus & is more of a risk).

 

The principle of being allowed to use potions is already well-established. In general, people agree that potions should be allowed.

 

The principle of being allowed to use items requiring non-combat levels is already well-established. The argument that herblore is a non-combat stat and should not give items that are an advantage over items obtainable with no herblore has no precedent in Runescape whatsoever.

 

The argument that extremes make the current, bad situation (of having too much damage per second relative to the maximum life points you can have) worse is not unique to extremes. It also applies to Korasi's, handcannon, rigour, claws, void, turmoil, chaotics, torva/pernix/virtus, divine, even piety and super pots, down to the lowly dds. E.g. the argument that extremes make the current situation worse requires a second argument to specify why extremes should be banned and not something else.

 

One such argument is that extremes are currently banned, and that the status quo should be preserved. I don't recall an argument why this should be. In my opinion, the game can be changed.

Another such argument is that extremes were a more recent addition. Since we are returning to the old wilderness, this new update should be left out. This argument is again not unique to extremes. In addition, we are not returning to the old wilderness. To do so would require a massive level/update reset. Certain game mechanics that have been used are returning.

 

So I think there is no fundamental reason not to allowed extremes. There is no principle to base a ban on. This does not mean they should be allowed in itself.

 

Currently the reason I seem to read most, is that the current BH+0 system, without the drop system/targets (e.g. approximately what will be implemented), would be worse off with extreme potions than without. Which may or may not be true, but in my opinion this is not relevant as we are not limited in our options. There is no choice between extremes and no extremes, that is a false dilemma. There are many more things we can introduce to change the dps/max lp balance. I name a few:

 

• 120 constitution
  
• More lp per constitution level.
  
• Constitution-boosting potions including extreme variants.
  
• Cheaper, riskable life-point boosting armours.
  
• Cheaper, riskable damage-reducing armours.
  

And all of these do not have to work outside the wilderness. Some have flaws (for example 120 con is extremely hard to achieve, more lp in general unbalances pvm, and cheap powerful armour could unbalance pvm as well) but I think those can be solved. In the end, the result is a wilderness not where you are limited in what you can use, but instead encouraged to use the full game to your advantage.

[@Dan3HitU]

I don't see why they can't just treat Extremes like the Korasi sword (as an example) they give the potions a certain "money" drop when the player is killed, just like they are planning on doing with the sword.

[Pay_Me]

I'm sorry to say this but you seem rather like the stereotypical Pker that most people try to get rid of. If a part of the game is broken, the solution is not to make it worse. The solution is also not just to go to a different part of the game.

 

 

That is exactly what they are doing for people who want to use extremes....."just go do a pvp minigame"........yeah thats what i spent 200m+ for.....to just go blow massive amounts of gp worth in extremes in castle wars or stupid crap.

 

People who want to use extremes in the wild are acting the same way you would if jagex told you to go to f2p to pk if you dont want to deal with extremes.

 

And if they are gonna make a sword that hits 1500 99% of the time it should most definitely be called the PayMe Sword.....lol

[brunokiller]

Extremes are no different than other items that require non-combat levels (e.g. handcannon, Korasi's) in how they are obtained.

 

Why does everyone fail to see that:

 

Korasi sword, claws, handcannon etc are ITEMS that you BUY and that you RISK if you use them in pvp.

 

Ice barrage, turmoil, soul split are ABILITIES that you BUY and that ARE reflected in your combat level.

 

The ability to use extremes/ovls is an ABILITY that you BUY and one that is NOT risked nor reflected in your combat level.

 

As such, combat abilities and combat items are fundamentally different from extremes/ovls.

 

This also has the consequence that extremes/ovls are the most obvious content to ban in pvp combat (to fight power creep).

 

yeah thats what i spent 200m+ for

You were fully aware that you couldn't use them in pvp. Remember that overloads are still very useful in PvM combat.

[Pay_Me]

So how many people would be upset if they didn't allow dung items or prayers earned thru dung?

 

You earn the ability to boost range and mage thru dung prayers. But you don't risk losing anything...

[brunokiller]

So how many people would be upset if they didn't allow dung items or prayers earned thru dung?

If those were banned from PVP right from the release of dung; not many.

 

Extremes/overloads were banned the day after they were released.

[Pay_Me]

So how many people would be upset if they didn't allow dung items or prayers earned thru dung?

If those were banned from PVP right from the release of dung; not many.

 

Extremes/overloads were banned the day after they were released.

 

 

Jagex had to allow dung items because very few people would want to train dung if they weren't allowed, and Jagex couldn't let their precious new skill go unused.

[brunokiller]

Dungeoneering rewards are still very useful in pvm and safe pvp. Rapier is the best weapon in the game. Crossbow is the most accurate ranging weapon. Staff gives the most damage.

[Pay_Me]

No one has still answered how Dung prayers are risked...they are an invisible reward from dung and shouldn't be allowed.

 

Yes there is a prayer requirement for those prayers, but not everyone with that prayer level has the dung lvl to use those prayers.

[brunokiller]

No one has still answered how Dung prayers are risked...they are an invisible reward from dung and shouldn't be allowed.

 

Yes there is a prayer requirement for those prayers, but not everyone with that prayer level has the dung lvl to use those prayers.

 

Said it a few pages back.

 

But since you're talking about ranging, how about we forbid the use of rigour too? Dungeoneering isn't a combat skill, and rigour is an invisible boost!

Rigour requires 74 prayer so it is, but yes dungeoneering isn't displayed in your combat level. it's also not much better than eagle eye (comparing to range - ext range)

 

Edit: 4k post count lol

[Quyneax]

Extremes are no different than other items that require non-combat levels (e.g. handcannon, Korasi's) in how they are obtained.

 

Why does everyone fail to see that:

 

Korasi sword, claws, handcannon etc are ITEMS that you BUY and that you RISK if you use them in pvp.

 

Ice barrage, turmoil, soul split are ABILITIES that you BUY and that ARE reflected in your combat level.

 

The ability to use extremes/ovls is an ABILITY that you BUY and one that is NOT risked nor reflected in your combat level.

 

As such, combat abilities and combat items are fundamentally different from extremes/ovls.

 

This also has the consequence that extremes/ovls are the most obvious content to ban in pvp combat (to fight power creep).

The ability to use curses (smithing, quest), or handcannons (firemaking, quest), or dds (woodcutting, quest) is not reflected in your combat level (claws/ags, even torva are) and I did mention the risk of items. Please read and take into account my entire post next time. If you do not yet understand that a quest requirement is exactly like a non-combat skill requirement in that neither are combat skill requirements, this argument may as well end here. I have in my post shown that your arguments are ultimately not correct.

[Pay_Me]

No one has still answered how Dung prayers are risked...they are an invisible reward from dung and shouldn't be allowed.

 

Yes there is a prayer requirement for those prayers, but not everyone with that prayer level has the dung lvl to use those prayers.

 

Said it a few pages back.

 

But since you're talking about ranging, how about we forbid the use of rigour too? Dungeoneering isn't a combat skill, and rigour is an invisible boost!

Rigour requires 74 prayer so it is, but yes dungeoneering isn't displayed in your combat level. it's also not much better than eagle eye (comparing to range - ext range)

 

Edit: 4k post count lol

 

 

Eagle eye doesn't boost your defence lvl by 25%...thats basically the same as drinking an extreme def pot.

[DyingSilent]

I can has exts/ovls pls?

 

I'm not going to get caught up in an arguement, but I think high herblore pots should be allowed. At the very minimum, make them allowed on certain worlds, similar to the high risk worlds that were discussed, in which no items are kept on death.

[tintin113]

Excluding Overloads is just as stupid as excluding spirit shields or full Torva's, hell Herblore costs less than them! In Runescape people with better armour beat people with worse armour, end of story. Runescape combat is based on increasing the probability of hitting high and decreasing the probability of getting hit, this is done by having better armour and better stats. If someone only plays on weekends and can't get 99s should they somehow be allowed the same advantages as someone who trains to max combat? No. If someone spends their money and time getting herblore up, should they get the advantage from this just as they do from having good armour and stats? Definitely.

[Pay_Me]

No one has still answered how Dung prayers are risked...they are an invisible reward from dung and shouldn't be allowed.

 

Yes there is a prayer requirement for those prayers, but not everyone with that prayer level has the dung lvl to use those prayers.

 

Said it a few pages back.

 

But since you're talking about ranging, how about we forbid the use of rigour too? Dungeoneering isn't a combat skill, and rigour is an invisible boost!

Rigour requires 74 prayer so it is, but yes dungeoneering isn't displayed in your combat level. it's also not much better than eagle eye (comparing to range - ext range)

 

Edit: 4k post count lol

 

Grats on the post count! Thats a lot of posts.

 

 

Also I agree with tin. :P

[brunokiller]

If you do not yet understand that a quest requirement is exactly like a non-combat skill requirement in that neither are combat skill requirements, this argument may as well end here. I have in my post shown that your arguments are ultimately not correct.

Do you agree with me when I say that 85/96 herblore is not comparable to a few lvl 60 requirements in significantly easier/cheaper skills?

 

 

@DyingSilent: that's at least giving a choice which is good.

[SirIzenhime]

Excluding Overloads is just as stupid as excluding spirit shields or full Torva's, hell Herblore costs less than them! In Runescape people with better armour beat people with worse armour, end of story. Runescape combat is based on increasing the probability of hitting high and decreasing the probability of getting hit, this is done by having better armour and better stats. If someone only plays on weekends and can't get 99s should they somehow be allowed the same advantages as someone who trains to max combat? No. If someone spends their money and time getting herblore up, should they get the advantage from this just as they do from having good armour and stats? Definitely.

 

Playing on weekends does not stop you from getting 99s.

You cannot compare excluding Overloads to excluding Torva.

Overloads are not a risked benefit...ever, once you get the level, overloads are yours forever. Die with an overload, ok, spend 80k and make a new one

If you wear Torva, you are risking 400m+. Loose a piece of torva...you loose 400m....yea, that's so similar to 80k

How can you even logically begin to compare that?

[Pay_Me]

Rigour doesnt risk anything....but yet that is an obvious unfair advantage.

[Cheefoo]

Extremes were never allowed in dangerous PvP. It's not going to change all of a sudden.

[xpx]

The ability to use curses (smithing, quest), or handcannons (firemaking, quest), or dds (woodcutting, quest) is not reflected in your combat level (claws/ags, even torva are) and I did mention the risk of items. Please read and take into account my entire post next time. If you do not yet understand that a quest requirement is exactly like a non-combat skill requirement in that neither are combat skill requirements, this argument may as well end here. I have in my post shown that your arguments are ultimately not correct.

Curses in themselves require prayer level to use, which, evidently, gives you a higher combat level. The boost in combat ability is reflected on your combat level. Hand cannons are risked when you go into the wilderness, thus they are balanced with that. With extremes, you have something that boosts your combat ability, is not reflected in combat level and carries no risk. Now when you know that the wilderness is completely unbalanced in terms of DPS vs. LP, what changes would you make? Realistically, only extremes come up as a great example because they are not balanced and reflect on every combat class near equally.

 

As for 80% of people not wanting extremes not having them...oh please. Even the biased poll doesn't reflect that, and most of my high level friends happy to come back for pking don't want them either. Why? because there is no reason to make the wilderness restricted to 96 herblore and 1 itemers. Banning extremes is very GOOD for those that have extremes, as there will be more people in the wilderness and the fights will reflect on a persons abilities. Allowing them, however, would be only good for pvm in the wilderness. I honestly can't see any other good things about extremes in the wilderness.

[Soma2035]

Extremes were never allowed in dangerous PvP. It's not going to change all of a sudden.

 

Can you stop pulling false information out of nowhere and pretending it's a valid argument? Extremes WERE allowed in dangerous PvP.

 

Also, for some reason, that reminds me a lot of people who said "Slavery's been around forever. It's not going to change all of a sudden." Well, they were right in that it wasn't really sudden, but it eventually changed.

 

We allow Turmoil. We don't allow Extremes. That's inherently unfair, and balance isn't a valid excuse when the system is already completely imbalanced, and proper balance could be achieved many other ways.

 

Curses in themselves require prayer level to use, which, evidently, gives you a higher combat level. The boost in combat ability is reflected on your combat level. Hand cannons are risked when you go into the wilderness, thus they are balanced with that. With extremes, you have something that boosts your combat ability, is not reflected in combat level and carries no risk. Now when you know that the wilderness is completely unbalanced in terms of DPS vs. LP, what changes would you make? Realistically, only extremes come up as a great example because they are not balanced and reflect on every combat class near equally.

 

No.

 

Ancient Curses requires quest completion and various skill requirements to unlock.

Ancient Curses requires prayer levels to benefit from it after it's been unlocked.

It provides more than one benefit, with gradually increasing prayer level requirements, up to 95.

 

Extreme Attack Potions require a non-combat skill to unlock.

Extreme Attack Potions require attack levels to benefit from them after they've been unlocked.

It provides more than one benefit, with gradually increasing attack level requirements, up to 95.

 

If your prayer levels also represent the increase in combat ability due to Curses, the attack levels also represent the increase in combat ability from Extreme Potions, because without 16 Attack, you aren't getting the +1 Attack, just like without 50 prayer, you aren't getting Sap Warrior. This continues up the scale until 95 prayer and 96 attack (Turmoil and +7 Attack).

[Cheefoo]

Extremes were never allowed in dangerous PvP. It's not going to change all of a sudden.

 

Can you stop pulling false information out of nowhere and pretending it's a valid argument? Extremes WERE allowed in dangerous PvP.

 

Oh sorry, they were allowed for two days.

[brunokiller]

We allow Turmoil. We don't allow Extremes. That's inherently unfair

Do you understand what xpx said about them a few posts up? They are fundamentally different.

 

and balance isn't a valid excuse when the system is already completely imbalanced, and proper balance could be achieved many other ways.

You are saying that PVP being inbalanced is a valid reason to introduce even more derailing items?

[xpx]

Extremes were never allowed in dangerous PvP. It's not going to change all of a sudden.

We allow Turmoil. We don't allow Extremes. That's inherently unfair, and balance isn't a valid excuse when the system is already completely imbalanced, and proper balance could be achieved many other ways.

Yeah...extremes were allowed for around a day until people realized they were bad for the wilderness...

 

Turmoil is allowed because you need 96 prayer levels to use it. That in term reflects on your combat level. The same is true for rigor and augury. Is herblore reflected in combat levels? Does using extremes carry higher risk? thank you.