Behind the Scenes - November

[Zaaps1]

I personally think moving DG away from being fundamentally a team-based skill is an unfortunate step in the wrong direction.

 

This is how I feel. DG was meant to be team-based, for better or worse. To remove that part kills the integrity of the skill.

 

And leeching doesn't..? (This isn't necessarily aimed at anyone.)

 

Right. Leeching doesn't.

 

You're paying other players for skills you yourself do not have. In other words, you're substituting other benefits for you lack of teamwork.

 

So yes, DG is meant to be team-based and rewards those with the necessary skills.

[stan18]

 

Two words: me gusta.

 

None of it is especially game changing or anything but I have a feeling that (Except for the SoF and SGS) updates I'll be actually utiizing and going back to those updates more than once, and that's my bar for a good update.

 

It's a nice mix of new stuff and quality of life updates. Looks like a good month

[Veiva]

I personally think moving DG away from being fundamentally a team-based skill is an unfortunate step in the wrong direction.

 

This is how I feel. DG was meant to be team-based, for better or worse. To remove that part kills the integrity of the skill.

 

And leeching doesn't..? (This isn't necessarily aimed at anyone.)

 

Right. Leeching doesn't.

 

You're paying other players for skills you yourself do not have. In other words, you're substituting other benefits for you lack of teamwork.

 

So yes, DG is meant to be team-based and rewards those with the necessary skills.

 

I just have to disagree. I feel that if you don't train the skill in some form, you don't deserve the levels. Hence why I have a low dungeoneering level, etc. To pay someone then do nothing for 15 minutes or less then get more xp than I would in hours is just not fair, regardless of the "team aspect." If I were to go to a dungeoneering world, as I have in the past, chances are it's going to be extremely difficult to find a genuine team amongst all the leech teams.

 

To clarify, dungeoneering is team-based, yes. However, to reason that solo experience getting better is worse for the skill is hypocritical if all you base it on is the intent of the skill. Dungoneering was not meant to be a buyable skill, regardless of how you try and rationalize. You can claim it is "emergent gameplay" or whatever, but you are still being hypocritical of the intent of the skill, regardless.

[xSxqPowerx]

Ha. I'm curious how they came up with the 350k figure. Good chance it'll actually end up being a lot higher for competent dgers.

Alternately, they may be extrapolating that based on the experience rate you get from soloing the highest few floors, and it'll be way lower. You never know with Jagex and math.

 

 

Regardless, it probably won't affect team dungeoneering too much since it'll still be the best.

[Zaaps1]

I personally think moving DG away from being fundamentally a team-based skill is an unfortunate step in the wrong direction.

 

This is how I feel. DG was meant to be team-based, for better or worse. To remove that part kills the integrity of the skill.

 

And leeching doesn't..? (This isn't necessarily aimed at anyone.)

 

Right. Leeching doesn't.

 

You're paying other players for skills you yourself do not have. In other words, you're substituting other benefits for you lack of teamwork.

 

So yes, DG is meant to be team-based and rewards those with the necessary skills.

 

I just have to disagree. I feel that if you don't train the skill in some form, you don't deserve the levels. Hence why I have a low dungeoneering level, etc. To pay someone then do nothing for 15 minutes or less then get more xp than I would in hours is just not fair, regardless of the "team aspect." If I were to go to a dungeoneering world, as I have in the past, chances are it's going to be extremely difficult to find a genuine team amongst all the leech teams.

 

To clarify, dungeoneering is team-based, yes. However, to reason that solo experience getting better is worse for the skill is hypocritical if all you base it on is the intent of the skill. Dungoneering was not meant to be a buyable skill, regardless of how you try and rationalize. You can claim it is "emergent gameplay" or whatever, but you are still being hypocritical of the intent of the skill, regardless.

 

But is any skill intended to be a buyable skill? The buyability of any skill is a direct result of player institutions that develop.

 

Take Smithing. I don't think Jagex's intention was for players to buy bars, smith them into stuff, then sell them. More likely it was meant for players to make sure of the ores they mined to produce combat equipment they require. Would you say that being able to "buy" smithing is against the intend of the skill?

[Steph]

Great month in my opinion. Even the SOF/Solomon's looks interesting.

 

Was hoping for PoP this month, but guess not, will be looking forward to December then.

 

PoP?

[Kaida23]

Was hoping for PoP this month, but guess not, will be looking forward to December then.

 

PoP?

Player Owned Ports. They said it was being released in 2012.

[Veiva]

I personally think moving DG away from being fundamentally a team-based skill is an unfortunate step in the wrong direction.

 

This is how I feel. DG was meant to be team-based, for better or worse. To remove that part kills the integrity of the skill.

 

And leeching doesn't..? (This isn't necessarily aimed at anyone.)

 

Right. Leeching doesn't.

 

You're paying other players for skills you yourself do not have. In other words, you're substituting other benefits for you lack of teamwork.

 

So yes, DG is meant to be team-based and rewards those with the necessary skills.

 

I just have to disagree. I feel that if you don't train the skill in some form, you don't deserve the levels. Hence why I have a low dungeoneering level, etc. To pay someone then do nothing for 15 minutes or less then get more xp than I would in hours is just not fair, regardless of the "team aspect." If I were to go to a dungeoneering world, as I have in the past, chances are it's going to be extremely difficult to find a genuine team amongst all the leech teams.

 

To clarify, dungeoneering is team-based, yes. However, to reason that solo experience getting better is worse for the skill is hypocritical if all you base it on is the intent of the skill. Dungoneering was not meant to be a buyable skill, regardless of how you try and rationalize. You can claim it is "emergent gameplay" or whatever, but you are still being hypocritical of the intent of the skill, regardless.

 

But is any skill intended to be a buyable skill? The buyability of any skill is a direct result of player institutions that develop.

 

Take Smithing. I don't think Jagex's intention was for players to buy bars, smith them into stuff, then sell them. More likely it was meant for players to make sure of the ores they mined to produce combat equipment they require. Would you say that being able to "buy" smithing is against the intend of the skill?

 

Fair point. Regardless, evolutions of skills over time is fine by my book. I honestly don't care too much (actually, at all) that someone can buy 120 dungeoneering. It's an evolution induced by players. But I don't feel that an evolution introduced by Jagex that has no affect on the best experience rates (besides make them even better, perhaps) should be thought of as damaging the integrity of the skill, because it's just that: an evolution of a skill. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Platinum_Myr]

There's still december! :)

 

 

But is any skill intended to be a buyable skill? The buyability of any skill is a direct result of player institutions that develop.

 

Construction would like to have a word with you 8-)

[Leik]

Regardless, it probably won't affect team dungeoneering too much since it'll still be the best.

 

Eh, I think it will eventually. There'll be a lot less people coming up from DGing who would be able to qualify for today's 5:5 standards, as they can just take the easy way out and solo and not have to deal with "shit teams in bad worlds" (And therefore can't be lured to come and try proper dging with proper teams).

 

Quality has already dropped immensely over the past few months in DG. This certainly won't help.

[Platinum_Myr]

Eh, I think it will eventually. There'll be a lot less people coming up from DGing who would be able to qualify for today's 5:5 standards, as they can just take the easy way out and solo and not have to deal with "shit teams in bad worlds" (And therefore can't be lured to come and try proper dging with proper teams).

 

Quality has already dropped immensely over the past few months in DG. This certainly won't help.

 

Quality has dropped as leeching increased, and as the top dg teams require higher and higher levels. There is no longer a good progression to get from the low 70s to 100+ at least in my experience... Most people who are 70 or less haven't had opportunity to learn because they aren't exposed to proper teams.

 

This causes frustration because the player can't find teams of their level, and can't easily fit into a team of higher skill because they get lost (it's not gradual). Leeching seems to be the only effective way...

 

I feel that an increase in solo but still worse than 5man should allow for fewer people to want to leech, (since the cost/benefit ratio is lower) meaning fewer people selling leach, leading to more good teams being visible. It also should enable more people to gradually learn the skill.

 

I would *much* rather team with someone who's solo'd than team with someone who's only leeched (not that they would ever actually team ofcourse...) If someone is interested in dg and has done lots of solo, they are at least likely to be trainable (maybe not but can always try).

 

Besides dungeoneering could change drastically depending on how they fit EoC into it (bind system changes etc)

[xSxqPowerx]

Regardless, it probably won't affect team dungeoneering too much since it'll still be the best.

 

Eh, I think it will eventually. There'll be a lot less people coming up from DGing who would be able to qualify for today's 5:5 standards, as they can just take the easy way out and solo and not have to deal with "shit teams in bad worlds" (And therefore can't be lured to come and try proper dging with proper teams).

 

Quality has already dropped immensely over the past few months in DG. This certainly won't help.

I suppose that's true. If it's close enough to team exp and doesn't come with the hassle of finding teams then it could end up being the preferred method of a lot of players.

Personally I think solo dg is boring no matter what the exp rate is haha .

[RSBDavid]

I look forward to the DG experience boost. II think this would help destroy floor leaching (They should add an activity bar for "team" groups). This results in people who know what they are doing (or are more willing to learn) as well as less "<insert clan chat here> sell floors cheap" spammers which occupy 90% of the chat.

 

Edit: Inb4CraftingSupsRise.

[jayc3399]

The problem that arose with dungeoneering is it was the first openly available activity in the game that actually requires skill and thought. For the most part rs is a skillless game, in terms of player ability affecting results. Because of this the people with video game skill excelled and shot up in levels while those without the skill got left behind and are left to complain. There are exceptions like those who just didn't try to level the skill but I think those are in the minority.

[Robert_R]

I think you're all overlooking the fact that xp in a team of 5 will still be better than solo so in reality it's not killing the team aspect at all.

[Nico Robin]

One of the best months for a haul of updates.

[Gwasha]

I think you're all overlooking the fact that xp in a team of 5 will still be better than solo so in reality it's not killing the team aspect at all.

 

Regardless, it probably won't affect team dungeoneering too much since it'll still be the best.

 

Eh, I think it will eventually. There'll be a lot less people coming up from DGing who would be able to qualify for today's 5:5 standards, as they can just take the easy way out and solo and not have to deal with "shit teams in bad worlds" (And therefore can't be lured to come and try proper dging with proper teams).

 

Quality has already dropped immensely over the past few months in DG. This certainly won't help.

 

That^

[ilovecuttingyews]

Make x improvement looks good. Saves me a trip to Google docs to find prices and experiences. Haven't dunged in a year plus but it was all solo in f2p so part of me doesn't want exp rates to go up out of spite.

[Maximusa]

With the dung update this is the best update in the year for me.

 

I was happy at the daily task reward 0_0 But doubling the xp rate has been necessary since the beginning. I have managed 62m on my own, so the other 42m will have an extremely satisfying xp rate compared to what I have already done atm. It wont feel overpowered at all but something thats necessary.

 

I can say that when its double xp weekend, the xp rates seem about right. It doesnt seem like a double xp weekend, it seems like a 'this is what it should of always been' weekend. Unlike rc xp rates in older times, solo dung just seemed too slow to train considering there was 104m for the top level. (99 aint so bad though.) Team xp seemed about right but not the solo side of it. Sometimes its less enjoyable when an xp rate seems like it isnt calculated properly, asin when its being underpowered, ditto for when its overpowered.

 

No offence to the jmods but I expect I can get better xp rates considering the amount of time I have put into that skill lol. So although I think doubling the xp rates is necessary, (While also more than I ever hoped for.) I be interested in seeing what actually comes out of this.

 

I like bunch of the other updates too but I donno what to think until I see them. I still manage to do tears of guthix out of nostalgia more than anything so that is nice that we getting a bigger bowl... (Keeps up with the revamped xp rates I guess.)

[Alg]

-snip-

That^

That might have more to do with how high 5:5 standards are these days and how few people are really willing to teach others. The fact that a lot of the 'experts' have 120/200m isn't helping in that regard.

 

That skill is quite inaccessible if you're not already good at it. This is a bonus for those of us that play at our own pace.

[999134]

bots solo dg'ers rejoice!

 

Seriously >.>, removing randoms now this, do they even care anymore?

[aerendil]

>jagex introduces free trade, sgs and squeel

>wonders if they care anymore

 

logic says they stopped caring a lonnnggg time ago, and various bot stopping stuff is just PR waffle

[Alg]

Wait, randoms actually did stuff to bots?

[aspeeder]

I personally think moving DG away from being fundamentally a team-based skill is an unfortunate step in the wrong direction.

 

This is how I feel. DG was meant to be team-based, for better or worse. To remove that part kills the integrity of the skill.

 

And leeching doesn't..? (This isn't necessarily aimed at anyone.)

 

Right. Leeching doesn't.

 

You're paying other players for skills you yourself do not have. In other words, you're substituting other benefits for you lack of teamwork.

 

So yes, DG is meant to be team-based and rewards those with the necessary skills.

 

I just have to disagree. I feel that if you don't train the skill in some form, you don't deserve the levels. Hence why I have a low dungeoneering level, etc. To pay someone then do nothing for 15 minutes or less then get more xp than I would in hours is just not fair, regardless of the "team aspect." If I were to go to a dungeoneering world, as I have in the past, chances are it's going to be extremely difficult to find a genuine team amongst all the leech teams.

 

To clarify, dungeoneering is team-based, yes. However, to reason that solo experience getting better is worse for the skill is hypocritical if all you base it on is the intent of the skill. Dungoneering was not meant to be a buyable skill, regardless of how you try and rationalize. You can claim it is "emergent gameplay" or whatever, but you are still being hypocritical of the intent of the skill, regardless.

 

But is any skill intended to be a buyable skill? The buyability of any skill is a direct result of player institutions that develop.

 

Take Smithing. I don't think Jagex's intention was for players to buy bars, smith them into stuff, then sell them. More likely it was meant for players to make sure of the ores they mined to produce combat equipment they require. Would you say that being able to "buy" smithing is against the intend of the skill?

 

I have to disagree with this point. DG and smith are fundamentally different because smith follows in a long line of "production" skills like fletch, fm, craft, cook, etc; DG on the other hand is not a production skill and indeed doesn't follow the trends of any other skill to date. To me it's fairly clear that JaGeX's attempts to make the skill as non-afkable as possible until leeching came along is one of its trademark quirks that sets it apart from most other skills, but I suppose all of this depends on whether or not you put much stock in authorial intent.

[Nobody]

Or it will be like when Clan Wars was introduced. It got more people "hooked" and interested in serious clanning. The same thing could happen with DG where people solo and enjoy the high exp rates and want to do more 5:5 floors for the even higher exp rate.