Tip.It Times Tip.It Times - 15th July 2012

[tripsis]

Time for a new release of the: >>>Tip.It Times!<<<

 

 

 

WRITE FOR THE TIMES - SUBMIT A GUEST ARTICLE:

Remember, YOU can write an article for the Tip.It Times! You can apply to write full time, or just submit a "one-off" guest article any time you want! Our editors will work with you to ensure that your article is ready for publication. All guest articles can be submitted to @tripsis or any other Editorial Panel member. For more information, including details on how to apply full time, read this forum thread: http://forum.tip.it/topic/209138-how-to-write-for-the-tipit-times/

 

I'd like to remind people of the rules pertaining to Times threads:

 

[hide=Read these rules before posting in this thread]

Rampant flame wars have taken control of virtually every week's times discussion topics. The following guidelines must be followed when posting on this topic. Posts that ignore these guidelines will be removed.

 

1. You are invited and welcome to express like or dislike on articles and a particular author's writing style. It is not acceptable, however, to flame or personally insult an author. Posts that aren't anything but an attack will be removed from the topic.

 

2. Spelling and grammar errors can be reported to tripsis by PMing her and they will be fixed promptly. It is not necessary to post them on the discussion topic.

 

3. Off topic posts that do not discuss the content of that week's articles will be removed. This is not the place to discuss the direction of the times, how much you love or hate the times, etc. Off topic posts will be removed.

 

By keeping within these guidelines, Times discussion topics will mean more for the Panel and Administration than just a place for flame wars. Flame wars do not provide any useful feedback to the Times, which is mainly what we're aiming for with these topics: feedback.

 

This policy is effective as of now, November 17, 2010. Any posts prior to the creation of this policy may or may not be removed according to the new guidelines.

[/hide]

 

When replying please make sure to clarify the article you are replying to! Thanks!

 

If you spot any typos or mistakes in an article then please PM them to @tripsis. :)

 

Enjoy the articles!

[Diomedus]

I agree with the combat article. I think some of the changes are not good for the game. I'm glad they canceled the reduced xp for fighting low level monsters. I don't like the new combat forumila and I don't like the prospect of everything having thousands and thousands of hitpoints. I liked the small numbers, it seemed simpler.

 

I remember thinking that the "bigger numbers are more exciting" reasoning back with the Constitution update was stupid.

 

Also, I enjoyed the God Wars article. I am looking forward to the next installment

[Extragorey]

The "Stumped No More" article was quite interesting. I personally try to be a "nice guy" online, but I find it's often a resolution that requires cooperation. If someone is simply not making an effort to be respectful - ie, being unabashedly rude or just plain trolling - then trying to maintain that nice-guy facade becomes a futile effort.

But a good point was raised about real life parallels - 'anonymous' people in real-life (people on the street or in another public place whom you don't personally know) are frequently just as disrespectful as anonymous Runescape players. And I'm sure those same anonymous real-life people act much more agreeably around people who THEY know. Abuse of anonymity, then, is not just limited to the internet. But granted, it's probably more commonplace on the internet given you can't enact an immediate physical response, such as a violent shove out of the way.

[Fourfoxes]

Too much complaining in the first article. It basically came off as "this obviously targets a group I'm not a part of, therefore it sucks and I hate it," with little focus on legitimate problems. It didn't even explain why leaving Prayer, Summoning, and Constitution out of the combat formula is a bad thing. And personally, I thought multiplying Hitpoints (and Prayer) by 10 was a great update as it allows for more precise hits. And guess what? Hitting a 250 is cooler than hitting a 25. Why is this a problem?

 

As for the second article...I don't really know what to say. I definitely enjoyed it better than the first and think it was pretty good overall, but by the end I feel like it didn't say as much as its length would suggest. Plus I don't think the R$ community in general is as mean as people make them out to be, though the article didn't exactly say "Everyone on R$ is a jerk!" or anything like that. It's really just that a moment when someone wrongs you is more likely to stand out than the opposite. It's like when people think they "hit every red light" while driving. It's more likely they didn't notice all the greens because they just drove through them. But that's beside the point, and the article did contain a lot of truth.

[Ketchup2209]

The second article "Stumped No More" misses that humans have a harder time perceiving others in a text-based environment as other people compared to face-to-face. Those pixels don't generate the same emotions and reponses of a phyiscal interaction. Of course one isn't going to respond as favorably to something 'non-human.'

[Vezon Dash]

The second article "Stumped No More" misses that humans have a harder time perceiving others in a text-based environment as other people compared to face-to-face. Those pixels don't generate the same emotions and reponses of a phyiscal interaction. Of course one isn't going to respond as favorably to something 'non-human.'

 

"Over the internet especially, with no clues such as intonation or body language, something can be misinterpreted. At this point, there is usually a bifurcation."

 

You must have glazed over this part.

[Platinum_Myr]

The combat article didn't really discuss the issues with the system. Yes, the new combat formula is not good, but the old one was horrible. Levels were impossible to calculate by hand, Magic/Ranged didn't give the same bonuses, defense added a huge part to the combat level without being worth it. Prayer and Summoning both added to combat, and yet you couldn't even always use them.

[black momba8]

I liked the first article (perhaps because I like rants =P). The fact constition and prayer got multiplied by 10 was somewhat useless to game mecanics if you want but the prayer one was usefull, hitpoints a bit less.... But multipling by 10 isn't so bad since we are accustomed to that multiplier... (We live in a decimal world) ... But like the article says now we can hit in the thousands, but I don't find it cooler at all, maybe its because im no longer a teen but teen or not when you start hitting in the 4 digits it just becomes confusing... And your max hit will be even harder to find..

 

The idea of bringing a stable combat triangle is long overdo. Though what confuses me the most is how they only take either strength or attack to calculate your melee combat. Does this mean that technically someone with 1 attack and 99 strength is better then someone with 98 attack and 98 strength??? I don't know I haven't played the BETA much but in my opinion I think it's a really hard battle for JAGEX to bring a fair combat triangle when there are two offensive skills for warriors and only one for rangers and mages.

 

So either make attack and strength completely independant or bring in a secondary offensive skill for both mages and rangers or chose from an old one.

 

Ex : Agility for rangers, because in the end wouldn't it be a necessity to be agile if you plan on shooting arrows?

[Platinum_Myr]

My opinion: They should make attack = accuracy and apply like defense to every skill.

[Cheefoo]

My opinion: They should make attack = accuracy and apply like defense to every skill.

That does kinda makes sense. Attack levels are a requirement for some of the higher end magic weapons (staff of light, Ahrim's staff, etc.) already. It's not like anyone can complain about it forcing them to get "extra combat levels" in the new system.

 

This way, all combat styles will require you to train two offensive skills to use effectively. Right now, melee needs attack+strength and magic and range are their own skills, effectively needing to train half as much. Attack themed abilities will have to be tweaked to work with magic and range in addition to melee. That also means more abilities for mage/range; melee has twice as many as they do in the current beta version.

[Vezon Dash]

They will just need to add a controlled option to train attack along with ranged/mage and defense at the same time.

[Platinum_Myr]

Yes, it requires a lot more thought and effort, but it would be far more balanced out, I think.

[Hamtaro]

Too much complaining in the first article. It basically came off as "this obviously targets a group I'm not a part of, therefore it sucks and I hate it," with little focus on legitimate problems.

Yep, since I'm an adult and have been playing the game since my age was a single digit, the sole purpose of the article was "Lol if ur younger then me than i h8 u." True story.

 

On a non-sarcastic note, would you care to elaborate on the "legitimate problems?" I fail to see how what I listed were not legitimate problems. I see most of the rest of the EoC as a massive, long-overdue improvement to the game.

It didn't even explain why leaving Prayer, Summoning, and Constitution out of the combat formula is a bad thing.

Alright, imagine two players with identical attack/strength, defense, magic, and ranged fight. One has turmoil, soul split, a steel titan, and 99 hitpoints. The other has steel skin, a bronze minotaur, and 52 hitpoints. Guess who wins every time? Being able to calculate my combat level in my head is hardly something I need to worry about when, you know, my combat level is displayed for me in game and there are calculators on multiple sites (including this one) that can calculate it for you.

And personally, I thought multiplying Hitpoints (and Prayer) by 10 was a great update as it allows for more precise hits. And guess what? Hitting a 250 is cooler than hitting a 25. Why is this a problem?

As I addressed in the article, yes, your hits are more precise... so are the hits against you (negating any positive effect). 250 and 25 x 10 are identical. Neither is cooler. One is simple and space-saving on an already cluttered interface and the other is an appeal to an audience Jagex claims not to target. As for prayer, multiplying that by 10 only made prayer flashing more difficult. That added no benefits to the player.

[Alg]

As for prayer, multiplying that by 10 only made prayer flashing more difficult. That added no benefits to the player.

It apparently did make prayer renewal potions possible, though, They promised benefits for health as well, but few of those materialized until EoC.

 

Those three skills are quite a bit weaker in the beta now, from "You need this" to "You don't need this, but it doesn't hurt to get it". I may not like the way that combat levels are calculated, but as it is it makes more sense for them to not be included than it does for your other offensive skills. Simple is good, but too simple is just as misleading as too complex, if not more so.

 

Do like the suggestion to make attack affect all combat styles, though.

[Fourfoxes]

Yep, since I'm an adult and have been playing the game since my age was a single digit, the sole purpose of the article was "Lol if ur younger then me than i h8 u." True story.

Hate the update, not the players.

 

On a non-sarcastic note, would you care to elaborate on the "legitimate problems?" I fail to see how what I listed were not legitimate problems. I see most of the rest of the EoC as a massive, long-overdue improvement to the game.

That's your job, not mine. Let's look at your article paragraph by paragraph:

1. Intro, claims "unnecessary and even downright awful features" are present in EoC. As an intro, fine. Intros aren't supposed to explain everything.

 

2. Explains how the new combat calculation works. Notes that prayer, summoning, and hitpoints no longer affect combat level, but doesn't explain why this is a bad thing. Also notes that level 4s can have 99 prayer, summoning, and hitpoints but again, doesn't say anything about it except "that's ridiculous."

 

Look at this way: if you were trying to convince someone who doesn't agree with your stance already (which should be the point of the article, as I would hope you're not just trying to stroke your own ego), you've said a lot but explained nothing. You told us things we probably already know and said they are bad, but not explained why. And you never come back to this point, so the reader who didn't agree with you already is not any more convinced.

 

3. The hitpoints multiplied by 10. Complains that it was done only to cater to "adolescent boys." Otherwise, made no mention of how it was a bad thing (because attracting more people to the game is apparently such a terrible crime?). Made a subtle nod to the added precision, but passed it off since it doesn't actually benefit you (which wasn't the point. Balance was).

 

I know, a lot of people complain about this. But in all honesty, I bet if people actually went back to the old way, most would come to realize that they prefer it how it is now. Nostalgia glasses can be decieving.

 

4. More complaining about catering to children. Doesn't mention how the new combat level maximum could possibly be a bad thing for the game itself. Claims the combat formula is broken, but never explains how or how the previous one was better.

 

5. Pures etc. are destroyed. I've never made a pure nor have I spent much time in the beta, so I don't know how much they're really effected. It could have used a bit more explanation as to how these accounts are unusable, but it is othewise fine as far as I can tell.

 

6. Outro. Doesn't say anything relevant to the rest of the article. Claims there is room for improvement, but doesn't offer any suggestions. Normally this is fine (you don't need a solution to point out a problem), but since you never explained why the apparent "problems" are...problematic, it falls flat.

 

Alright, imagine two players with identical attack/strength, defense, magic, and ranged fight. One has turmoil, soul split, a steel titan, and 99 hitpoints. The other has steel skin, a bronze minotaur, and 52 hitpoints. Guess who wins every time? Being able to calculate my combat level in my head is hardly something I need to worry about when, you know, my combat level is displayed for me in game and there are calculators on multiple sites (including this one) that can calculate it for you.

Aside from wondering how/why someone has identical Atk/Str to another player but 47 more hitpoints levels, put it in the article and you're golden (or perhaps bronze, seeing as there are other things to explain).

 

It's not that I don't agree with you at all on this point; it's just that you said nothing about it. Prayer at the very least I agree should be calculated in somehow. HP is generally going to come with your other levels anyway, so that's not a big deal, and Summoning is just a strange matter to deal with here.

[Vezon Dash]

I think you are just complaining if you don't understand why some of these things are bad. As for HP, Prayer, and Summoning not calculating into combat..... A level 3 could easily wreck the shit out of a level 50 in the wilderness with protection prayers and a steel/iron titan. I don't really call that balanced.

 

The point of the article, from what I gathered when I read it last week was, if it isn't broken don't break it trying to fix nonexistent problems.

[Kimberly]

A level 3 could easily wreck the shit out of a level 50 in the wilderness with protection prayers and a steel/iron titan. I don't really call that balanced.

 

Without armor (which they'd be restricted to iron at best) compared to wearing granite or better, the level 3 would have far higher chances of losing than winning. You'd likely be able to down your opponent in 3 or 4 hits before their titan can do enough damage to worry you. The formula's not perfect, but it's way less of an issue than the author/you make it out to be.

[Vezon Dash]

A level 3 could easily wreck the shit out of a level 50 in the wilderness with protection prayers and a steel/iron titan. I don't really call that balanced.

 

Without armor (which they'd be restricted to iron at best) compared to wearing granite or better (assuming 50 defense), the level 3 would have far higher chances of losing than winning. You'd likely be able to down your opponent in 3 or 4 hits before their titan can do enough damage to worry you. The formula's not perfect, but it's way less of an issue than the author/you seem to make it be.

 

I was moreso referring to rushing and the like, similar to the kyatt pures that we have now.

[Kimberly]

The circumstances that allow rushing to thrive in our current combat environment have changed drastically in the beta. Rushing is by no means dead in the beta, but any type of pure-build rushing is heavily crippled given their new "combat" level and lack of LP & Armor Rating - whether or not that's a good thing is a hot topic. In your example, if the level 50 even got 1-2 attack turns in, the level 3 risks almost certain death.

[Vezon Dash]

You can't compare apples to oranges though. The circumstances that allow rushing to thrive in our current combat environment have changed drastically in the beta. Rushing is by no means dead in the beta, but any type of pure-build rushing is heavily crippled given their new "combat" level and lack of LP & Armor Rating - whether or not that's a good thing is a hot topic.

 

If pure builds still don't pack much defense, they won't be using high level armors. However, that may change. I also could see many SoF/PC/SW prods at level 50 combat and 99 hit points. They would benear impossible to ko.

[Kimberly]

If pure builds still don't pack much defense, they won't be using high level armors. However, that may change. I also could see many SoF/PC/SW prods at level 50 combat and 99 hit points. They would benear impossible to ko.

 

99 HP gives almost nothing to your advantage because LP armor boosts aren't percentage-based off your constitution level. I'd take a person with maxed defense over maxed hitpoints any day of the week as the beta currently stands.

 

To put it simply:

 

 

It doesn't matter how high your dps is; if you can't hit 2000+ at once on your first rush - which you won't be able to without a full adrenaline bar outside of combat, not even pots will help you there - you're likely dead on the next turn or you lose your target. And if you're not rushing, say it's a DM, you're almost certainly dead unless your opponent has no idea on what they're doing.

[Vezon Dash]

1 defense + 99 hp > 1 defense + 60 hp

 

I'm not talking about maxed pures here. PvP will become stupidly hard if you are fighting other people with armor (specifically shields). I have been watching my friend doing armored fighting in the Duelling Arena and in the wilderness, and he usually times out in the Duelling arena before he can kill the opponent or be killed (no food or pots as rules).

 

 

Personally, I would like to see hp requirements tied to higher lp boosting armors.

[Kimberly]

1 defense + 99 hp > 1 defense + 60 hp

 

...well yeah, but that's not what we were talking about o_O

 

How did we go from discussing whether or not the formula made sense in how it currently was implemented, to rushing success rates and pures, to comparing 1 defense accounts that have no utility in the beta >_> You'll have to forgive me, I'm not used to jumping around like that. I thought we were still discussing whether or not author Hamtaro achieved the point he was trying to make successfully, with sound reasoning behind his argument. I'm soooooo confused now @_@

 

FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH. I agree with you on how HP should affect LP boosts from armor. It makes for a more elegant system where every aspect has a purpose.

[Vezon Dash]

1 defense + 99 hp > 1 defense + 60 hp

 

...well yeah, but that's not what we were talking about o_O

 

How did we go from discussing whether or not the formula made sense in how it currently was implemented, to rushing success rates and pures, to comparing 1 defense accounts that have no utility in the beta >_> You'll have to forgive me, I'm not used to jumping around like that. I thought we were still discussing whether or not author Hamtaro achieved the point he was trying to make successfully, with sound reasoning behind his argument. I'm soooooo confused now @_@

 

FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH. I agree with you on how HP should affect LP boosts from armor. It makes for a more elegant system where every aspect has a purpose.

 

I think that what I was originally saying is that removing those skills from the combat calculation was going to make things difficult for some types of players, mainly lower level pures. As for Hamtaro's reasoning, none was explicitly stated because for the general part of RuneScape, it won't matter one bit. However, it will hurt an extreme minority.

[Slayer_Jesse]

As far as the combat beta, im reserving final judgement untill its over. its a beta, things are going to change, and from what ive seen so far, jagex is doing pretty good at listening to feedback. While the new formula is far from perfect, i do like that they are making defense a more intergal part of it, witch is how it should be. as far as the increase in hp goes, i think it might finaly be justified by all armor boosting hp. (Im still not calling it constitution though.)