Rares in 2007scape- A necessity?

[Artemis1330]

voted no to rares on 3 accs. Was already at 85% approval though so gf

[999134]

Question: What impact would the introduction of tradable, discontinued rares have upon the gameplay of those players who don't have any interest in collecting rares?

999 has explained this to death mostly: rich people would switch to buying rares and keep off other items like prestige gear (robin, infinity, whip etc) or resources, which would make them cheaper for the average player.

That doesn't even make sense. One player buys a blue partyhat for 2 billion coins. That player can now go spend that 2 billion coins on anything he'd like. Maybe some robins, infinity, whips, guthans, berserker rings, whatever. Check mate.

think before you type.

No one cares what the guy who sells his one hat does with that cash. If people with the cash to buy 20+ hats say suddenly spent that all on robins etc then that has a massive impact. Rares store up wealth in basically useless items, rather than people buying out all the high end useful gear people actually need to use.

 

 

Rares have only a positive impact on the game, there are literally no reasons to not want them other than crying about them not fulfilling their original purpose (a pointless argument, they should fulfill their 2007, and most useful purpose ), or just plain mad that you don't have access to them.

[lash]

It ain't RS without rares, plain and simple.

[Bubs]

It ain't RS without rares, plain and simple.

 

No it still is.

[Saradomin_Mage]

Damn you mean I haven't been playing Runescape for the last 6 weeks????? JAGEX HOW COULD YOU SCAM ME LIKE THIS

[Vinyl DjPon3]

Rares have only a positive impact on the game, there are literally no reasons to not want them other than crying about them not fulfilling their original purpose (a pointless argument, they should fulfill their 2007, and most useful purpose ), or just plain mad that you don't have access to them.

 

Getting a bit pretentious are we?

They don't HAVE A PURPOSE

What actual difference does it make to the game itself, if you're able to have an item that's worth 2bil.....vs just having 2bil in coins? Or 2bil in whips...robins...ranger boots...infinity sets....

It won't impact me, it won't impact that bot in the mining guild, it won't impact that guy who's trying to kill the KQ. It really impacts NOTHING as far as gameplay goes.

When it comes to economic use....Since when is a useless item being on top a good thing? In what economy does that make sense in?

 

I have no quarry with it's original 'use'....which there was NONE

And I'm most definitely not mad about being able to have one, they never appealed to me.

 

But I don't want a useless item to be the top of the market. I want items that deserve to be on the top...to be on the top. Items that are useful, hard to obtain physically yourself....not some paper hat a few people kept for 10 years because you couldn't get them again later.

[999134]

There are no useful items rare enough or hard enough to get to be worth anything.

 

The most expensive "useful" item is currently a DFS at 13m.

Maybe if dfs had 1/100 of its drop rate, or they added like a 1 in 1 million chance to get torva from a monster then you could have useful items filling the elite items slots, rares are needed as a high end item goal.

No rares also encourages RWT, someone with a 2147m cash stack and nothing to spend it on is much more likely to want to RWT some of that, than someone with 300m and several phats.

[Vinyl DjPon3]

That's probably because not many people have a lot of money yet, so they can't expect much more.

Despite how fast money enters the game...the really wealth players are a pretty small group, and they already have the big items.

So for now, 13m is the best people can pay, so it's all that can asked of.

 

Given time (and assuming enough people are still playing) the "big" items will start to raise in price when people are able to realistically offer more for it.

Pre-GE, 30m was cheap for a DFS

 

Phats were worth more on the Real World market than a cash stack of the same In-Game value

I know there were a few well known stakers who staked items like Partyhats....so they could sell them for Cash.

[Saradomin_Mage]

No rares also encourages RWT, someone with a 2147m cash stack and nothing to spend it on is much more likely to want to RWT some of that, than someone with 300m and several phats.

Wouldn't the problem be with the person if they choose to RWT rather than the system?

[crazycdcm]

[since when is a useless item being on top a good thing?] In what economy does that make sense in?

Like say art in real life. Large jewels, fancy old cars, etc etc. Ok they may not be strictly useless, but you are paying the hefty premium for rarity. I don't particurlarly see the problem in this.

 

Anyway, everytime the rarest item in RS has also been the most useful item in RS, things have been very bad for the person who would actually use the item.

[Powerfrog]

If we lost party hats, we'd want the new extremely expensive item to be something you CAN'T grind, something you can't go out of your way to get more of.

 

Treasure Trial rewards and rare drop table items don't work perfectly but they're the best thing I can think of. DFS is rare and somewhat useful, and should remain pricey at 10-40M, but it can never be 500M otherwise everyone would just camp metal dragons forever. Same with whips and onyx's and dragon chains.

 

You can farm clues pretty efficiently over typical getting a few during slayer etc, but there are so many items to choose from and the best ones are so rare, the few hyper expensive ones chosen would be able to sustain a bloated value without making farming clues an unbalanced way to make cash.

 

The tradable/untradable is currently sitting at 74/26... Interesting. I never wish to own a rare but still voted tradable because I appreciate the economy does rely on much of the cash to be sitting in useless items rather than (inadvertently) manipulating prices of useful items, and it's just the simplest solution.

[Mon]

No rares also encourages RWT, someone with a 2147m cash stack and nothing to spend it on is much more likely to want to RWT some of that, than someone with 300m and several phats.

 

What makes you say that? Anyone who wants to make money off Runescape in real life are going to do it regardless of whether or not they have something to spend their cash on in game.

 

I agree with the other part of your post though.

[Ammako]

The "Do you want rares to be tradeable or not?" question should have been in the last poll IMO.

Because I wouldn't mind rares being tradeable if they weren't discontinued and were obtainable from Treasure Trails, monster drops and other things like that.

[Omali]

I'm sure they'll do a second poll after this one ends asking people how they want rares implemented if they do pass. I like the idea of having them as treasure trail rewards.

[Wkw]

I would also be in favor of them as TT rewards. Kind of how like rangers and robins are. Put them on lower lvl clues, but make them more common on lvl 1s and 2s than on lvl3s

[Saradomin_Mage]

Yes votes for question 2 are being displayed at 75%, rounded from the actual figure of 74.62%. Wonder if this will affect the outcome lol.

[Wkw]

Jagex likes to round. They traditionally round down, though.

 

I hope they round down. Or they don't round at all.

[999134]

It won't effect the outcome as 75% is not needed.

 

The one with the bigger % will win, 75% was needed to introduce rares.

 

If anything tradable would be the default and would need 75% untradable to make them untradeable.

[Vinyl DjPon3]

It won't effect the outcome as 75% is not needed.

 

The one with the bigger % will win, 75% was needed to introduce rares.

 

If anything tradable would be the default and would need 75% untradable to make them untradeable.

 

Where did jagex say this?

The second poll option should have been done differently, but it would be a very bad idea for them to NOT do what they said they would in the polls.

They said all polls need a 75% yes to happen. Since the poll asks if people want them to be tradable, if it doesn't reach 75%, then they shouldn't be made tradable.

 

At this point, the best case scenario is they run a re-worded poll like they did with the F2P pking worlds.

[Saradomin_Mage]

What the second question tells me (that we ned a 75% vote for tradeables to remain tradeable) is that Jagex still remembers how they changed holiday items from tradeable to untradeable in the first place, which is why they're going for this to try to avoid the same scenario happening again.

[Powerfrog]

They haven't stated how they're going to introduce rares yet have they? Or if they'll even be discontinued?

[Saradomin_Mage]

Beats me, that's up to next week's poll. But I was just trying to come up with a line of reasoning as to why Jagex made question 2 the way it is.

[Licert]

They're useless pieces of shit that for some reason cost a whole lot, mate, a dark cavalier looks better and it's not a whole [bleep]load.

[Omali]

They're useless pieces of shit that for some reason cost a whole lot, mate, a dark cavalier looks better and it's not a whole [bleep]load.

 

They're discontinued, which makes them more desirable by people because their quantity can only go down and compared to other items there isn't a whole lot of them. People are naturally attracted to acquiring rare and exotic things because there is a certain prestige around being one of the few who can afford them.

 

Pretty basic economics.