Introduce Rares an unfair Advantage?

[Systemless]

My overall consensus is a no.

 

to which part, or to all? You haven't given any argument why rares do not "introduce an unfair advantage" or why there shouldn't be any shop selling them as outlined above.

 

 

 

What's my part in this whole rares business if I'm not even selling them? I would dead pissed if there was a roll back or they were eliminated, as I haven't done any trading of my rares.

 

I think we agree all that just deleting the rares would be plain stupid. And a roll back to the beginning ... oh well ... :lol:

 

 

 

.: Systemless :.

[WrathMonkey]

I still propose the question of how, if you do get your way, do you think we can make their value decrease? Trades will still be going on in Runescape, and they'll still be paying outrageous amounts of cash.

[shade_bandyt]

I disagree. I wear my Santa Hat around when I'm doing stuff that's not combat related. People ask me how much I bought mine for, and I tell them that I got it for free, which is the truth. (Given to me by a friend on christmas of 2002) I believe that this was the true spirit of the drops.

 

i wear my lederhosen hat for doing non-combat stuff, and in my opinion it looks cooler than any party hat (except yellow) and any mask, and almost as cool looking as a santa hat. the point is that the lederhosen hat is indeed rare, because the random event that gives it out is rare. but i'm very content not to trade it because i just like the look. it doesnt have the statement that i'm super-rich, but it does make a nice conversation piece, and it says that i've been lucky enough to have one of the relatively few in the game.

 

 

 

a lot of quest items are untradeable for the same reason. you've done a task (or in the case of holiday items, been around for a while) so you get to use that item. i love to see people walk around in bunny ears or get wacked with a rubber chicken. the bunny emote and egg ring are two of the coolest things in runescape. it would be unfair for me to hoard magical eggs and sell them to newbies that joined after easter. thats why jagex doesnt let players trade these things anymore

 

 

 

 

 

What's my part in this whole rares business if I'm not even selling them? I would dead pissed if there was a roll back or they were eliminated, as I haven't done any trading of my rares. Or am I part of the problem because I choose to keep my rares and thus making them rarer since they are not on the market?

 

 

 

So why is there a demand for rares? Is it because people really want them to wear? Or because they can just "merchant" them?

 

youre not part of the problem because you use the holiday item as it was intended. i wouldnt want my easter egg ring or lederhosen hat to disappear either, but i'm quite happy that its untradeable because i dont think i should make 100mil just cos the game randomly selected me to give me a very rare item, but not you. if that is the case runescape might as well have a lottery drawing every week.

 

 

 

seriously, the rares market only exist because investing in a rare, regardless of how much it costs, will guarantee you a profit later on. if i buy a santa for 11 million today and sell it for 15 mil by next month, why wouldnt i demand that? and even after it sells for 15 mil, the next person will buy it at that price because they will get 19mil in a month. the demand is there because its ALWAYS a good investment whenever you buy.

 

 

 

if rares were untradeable in the first place then this would not even be an issue today.

[Duke_Freedom]

I have read this definition as well, and I wasn't happy with it. It does not give an answer to the central question in which unit it is measured ("other things" is not very specific). The hint that it is often "measured in money" does not really help.

 

 

 

The reason this is written a bit vague is probably because in economics there is not really a 'central neutral item' that is used for comparison. Economics only considers relative values, not absolut values. However, in general, money (which in the case of RuneScape is gp) is used as a way to make comparisons. Mainly because money is "valued" what it represents to value. 1gp represents 1gp of value. 1 bank note of $10 represents $10 of value.

 

 

 

What I still don't see is how you can argument that a value of 100bil gp is lost. This would mean that the total value of all items in the system does depend on the relativ value the players in the system give for certain items. Lets assume we have a system with 20k rares and 2000bil gp. Now if a player values (relativly) one rare as 100mil, you say we have a total value of 4000bil. But if the player would value one rare as 10mil we would have only a total value of 2200bil. This looks a bit strange to me.

 

 

 

I see what your issues are with this example, but the answer to that lies in a different economic concept (that I had rather not introduced to not make things more complex then they already are :P), namely the utility of item.

 

 

 

The utility of an item is a 'number' that represents how "valued" people find the item. Again, what number it really represents is not too important, because economics only observes relative values between items.

 

 

 

So to be short, the difference in the two situations you named, where people value rares as either 10mil or 100mil is a difference in what they value the utility of the items at. And to answer your (indirect) question: yes the total value of all items in a system depends on what people value the utility at. The utility of an item is a constant however, and never chances no matter what.

 

 

 

Furthermore if we reomve the same value from a system we should have about the same value left in the system. So if we have again a (20k rares and 2000bil gp, 1 rare = 100mil gp) system and remove all the gp or all the rares you say we would have the same value left in the system. I personally doubt that people would value the rares still the same after removing all gp and the same holds for the other case as well.

 

 

 

Well the issue here is that this is one of those cases where it's not useful to take money (gp) as comparison item, because you're basically totally removing it from the "economy".

 

However, using the just-introduced concept of utility it is easier to see that the utility after removing either all gp or all rares should be roughly the same and should be roughly half of what it was before you removed anything at all. Backtracking from utility to the unit of gp, we can say you removed a worth of 2000bil gp if you removed all rares in this example though.

 

 

 

So to conclude, the real "neutral" comparison value you were probably looking for is the utility items have. However, it still gives us the same answer, that removing all rares from the game is the equilavent of removing several hundreds bills of value from the game. I hope it is clear now, because I doubt I can explain it anymore in-depth and clearer then this. :P

 

 

 

it would be unfair for me to hoard magical eggs and sell them to newbies that joined after easter.

 

 

 

Hmm.. Unconsciously you are raising a difficult issue here though. Isn't it much more unfair that newbies don't have any chance to get these magical eggs at all anymore, instead of the situation where they could get them, but had to pay older players a bunch of money to get them? Did you even think about that? ;)

 

 

 

seriously, the rares market only exist because investing in a rare, regardless of how much it costs, will guarantee you a profit later on.

 

 

 

"Only" is a far exageration. There are plenty of people who buy them without the intention to ever resell. They are collectors or skillers who had set a goal to own a rare set - without having the intention to ever resell their rares.

[Duke_Freedom]

I have read this definition as well, and I wasn't happy with it. It does not give an answer to the central question in which unit it is measured ("other things" is not very specific). The hint that it is often "measured in money" does not really help.

 

 

 

The reason this is written a bit vague is probably because in economics there is not really a 'central neutral item' that is used for comparison. Economics only considers relative values, not absolut values. However, in general, money (which in the case of RuneScape is gp) is used as a way to make comparisons. Mainly because money is "valued" what it represents to value. 1gp represents 1gp of value. 1 bank note of $10 represents $10 of value.

 

 

 

What I still don't see is how you can argument that a value of 100bil gp is lost. This would mean that the total value of all items in the system does depend on the relativ value the players in the system give for certain items. Lets assume we have a system with 20k rares and 2000bil gp. Now if a player values (relativly) one rare as 100mil, you say we have a total value of 4000bil. But if the player would value one rare as 10mil we would have only a total value of 2200bil. This looks a bit strange to me.

 

 

 

I see what your issues are with this example, but the answer to that lies in a different economic concept (that I had rather not introduced to not make things more complex then they already are :P), namely the utility of item.

 

 

 

The utility of an item is a 'number' that represents how "valued" people find the item. Again, what number it really represents is not too important, because economics only observes relative values between items.

 

 

 

So to be short, the difference in the two situations you named, where people value rares as either 10mil or 100mil is a difference in what they value the utility of the items at. And to answer your (indirect) question: yes the total value of all items in a system depends on what people value the utility at. The utility of an item is a constant however, and never chances no matter what.

 

 

 

Furthermore if we reomve the same value from a system we should have about the same value left in the system. So if we have again a (20k rares and 2000bil gp, 1 rare = 100mil gp) system and remove all the gp or all the rares you say we would have the same value left in the system. I personally doubt that people would value the rares still the same after removing all gp and the same holds for the other case as well.

 

 

 

Well the issue here is that this is one of those cases where it's not useful to take money (gp) as comparison item, because you're basically totally removing it from the "economy".

 

However, using the just-introduced concept of utility it is easier to see that the utility after removing either all gp or all rares should be roughly the same and should be roughly half of what it was before you removed anything at all. Backtracking from utility to the unit of gp, we can say you removed a worth of 2000bil gp if you removed all rares in this example though.

 

 

 

So to conclude, the real "neutral" comparison value you were probably looking for is the utility items have. However, it still gives us the same answer, that removing all rares from the game is the equilavent of removing several hundreds bills of value from the game. I hope it is clear now, because I doubt I can explain it anymore in-depth and clearer then this. :P

 

 

 

it would be unfair for me to hoard magical eggs and sell them to newbies that joined after easter.

 

 

 

Hmm.. Unconsciously you are raising a difficult issue here though. Isn't it much more unfair that newbies don't have any chance to get these magical eggs at all anymore, instead of the situation where they could get them, but had to pay older players a bunch of money to get them? Did you even think about that? ;)

 

 

 

seriously, the rares market only exist because investing in a rare, regardless of how much it costs, will guarantee you a profit later on.

 

 

 

"Only" is a far exageration. There are plenty of people who buy them without the intention to ever resell. They are collectors or skillers who had set a goal to own a rare set - without having the intention to ever resell their rares.

[Duke_Freedom]

I have read this definition as well, and I wasn't happy with it. It does not give an answer to the central question in which unit it is measured ("other things" is not very specific). The hint that it is often "measured in money" does not really help.

 

 

 

The reason this is written a bit vague is probably because in economics there is not really a 'central neutral item' that is used for comparison. Economics only considers relative values, not absolut values. However, in general, money (which in the case of RuneScape is gp) is used as a way to make comparisons. Mainly because money is "valued" what it represents to value. 1gp represents 1gp of value. 1 bank note of $10 represents $10 of value.

 

 

 

What I still don't see is how you can argument that a value of 100bil gp is lost. This would mean that the total value of all items in the system does depend on the relativ value the players in the system give for certain items. Lets assume we have a system with 20k rares and 2000bil gp. Now if a player values (relativly) one rare as 100mil, you say we have a total value of 4000bil. But if the player would value one rare as 10mil we would have only a total value of 2200bil. This looks a bit strange to me.

 

 

 

I see what your issues are with this example, but the answer to that lies in a different economic concept (that I had rather not introduced to not make things more complex then they already are :P), namely the utility of item.

 

 

 

The utility of an item is a 'number' that represents how "valued" people find the item. Again, what number it really represents is not too important, because economics only observes relative values between items.

 

 

 

So to be short, the difference in the two situations you named, where people value rares as either 10mil or 100mil is a difference in what they value the utility of the items at. And to answer your (indirect) question: yes the total value of all items in a system depends on what people value the utility at. The utility of an item is a constant however, and never chances no matter what.

 

 

 

Furthermore if we reomve the same value from a system we should have about the same value left in the system. So if we have again a (20k rares and 2000bil gp, 1 rare = 100mil gp) system and remove all the gp or all the rares you say we would have the same value left in the system. I personally doubt that people would value the rares still the same after removing all gp and the same holds for the other case as well.

 

 

 

Well the issue here is that this is one of those cases where it's not useful to take money (gp) as comparison item, because you're basically totally removing it from the "economy".

 

However, using the just-introduced concept of utility it is easier to see that the utility after removing either all gp or all rares should be roughly the same and should be roughly half of what it was before you removed anything at all. Backtracking from utility to the unit of gp, we can say you removed a worth of 2000bil gp if you removed all rares in this example though.

 

 

 

So to conclude, the real "neutral" comparison value you were probably looking for is the utility items have. However, it still gives us the same answer, that removing all rares from the game is the equilavent of removing several hundreds bills of value from the game. I hope it is clear now, because I doubt I can explain it anymore in-depth and clearer then this. :P

 

 

 

it would be unfair for me to hoard magical eggs and sell them to newbies that joined after easter.

 

 

 

Hmm.. Unconsciously you are raising a difficult issue here though. Isn't it much more unfair that newbies don't have any chance to get these magical eggs at all anymore, instead of the situation where they could get them, but had to pay older players a bunch of money to get them? Did you even think about that? ;)

 

 

 

seriously, the rares market only exist because investing in a rare, regardless of how much it costs, will guarantee you a profit later on.

 

 

 

"Only" is a far exageration. There are plenty of people who buy them without the intention to ever resell. They are collectors or skillers who had set a goal to own a rare set - without having the intention to ever resell their rares.

[Duke_Freedom]

I have read this definition as well, and I wasn't happy with it. It does not give an answer to the central question in which unit it is measured ("other things" is not very specific). The hint that it is often "measured in money" does not really help.

 

 

 

The reason this is written a bit vague is probably because in economics there is not really a 'central neutral item' that is used for comparison. Economics only considers relative values, not absolut values. However, in general, money (which in the case of RuneScape is gp) is used as a way to make comparisons. Mainly because money is "valued" what it represents to value. 1gp represents 1gp of value. 1 bank note of $10 represents $10 of value.

 

 

 

What I still don't see is how you can argument that a value of 100bil gp is lost. This would mean that the total value of all items in the system does depend on the relativ value the players in the system give for certain items. Lets assume we have a system with 20k rares and 2000bil gp. Now if a player values (relativly) one rare as 100mil, you say we have a total value of 4000bil. But if the player would value one rare as 10mil we would have only a total value of 2200bil. This looks a bit strange to me.

 

 

 

I see what your issues are with this example, but the answer to that lies in a different economic concept (that I had rather not introduced to not make things more complex then they already are :P), namely the utility of item.

 

 

 

The utility of an item is a 'number' that represents how "valued" people find the item. Again, what number it really represents is not too important, because economics only observes relative values between items.

 

 

 

So to be short, the difference in the two situations you named, where people value rares as either 10mil or 100mil is a difference in what they value the utility of the items at. And to answer your (indirect) question: yes the total value of all items in a system depends on what people value the utility at. The utility of an item is a constant however, and never chances no matter what.

 

 

 

Furthermore if we reomve the same value from a system we should have about the same value left in the system. So if we have again a (20k rares and 2000bil gp, 1 rare = 100mil gp) system and remove all the gp or all the rares you say we would have the same value left in the system. I personally doubt that people would value the rares still the same after removing all gp and the same holds for the other case as well.

 

 

 

Well the issue here is that this is one of those cases where it's not useful to take money (gp) as comparison item, because you're basically totally removing it from the "economy".

 

However, using the just-introduced concept of utility it is easier to see that the utility after removing either all gp or all rares should be roughly the same and should be roughly half of what it was before you removed anything at all. Backtracking from utility to the unit of gp, we can say you removed a worth of 2000bil gp if you removed all rares in this example though.

 

 

 

So to conclude, the real "neutral" comparison value you were probably looking for is the utility items have. However, it still gives us the same answer, that removing all rares from the game is the equilavent of removing several hundreds bills of value from the game. I hope it is clear now, because I doubt I can explain it anymore in-depth and clearer then this. :P

 

 

 

it would be unfair for me to hoard magical eggs and sell them to newbies that joined after easter.

 

 

 

Hmm.. Unconsciously you are raising a difficult issue here though. Isn't it much more unfair that newbies don't have any chance to get these magical eggs at all anymore, instead of the situation where they could get them, but had to pay older players a bunch of money to get them? Did you even think about that? ;)

 

 

 

seriously, the rares market only exist because investing in a rare, regardless of how much it costs, will guarantee you a profit later on.

 

 

 

"Only" is a far exageration. There are plenty of people who buy them without the intention to ever resell. They are collectors or skillers who had set a goal to own a rare set - without having the intention to ever resell their rares.

[Duke_Freedom]

I have read this definition as well, and I wasn't happy with it. It does not give an answer to the central question in which unit it is measured ("other things" is not very specific). The hint that it is often "measured in money" does not really help.

 

 

 

The reason this is written a bit vague is probably because in economics there is not really a 'central neutral item' that is used for comparison. Economics only considers relative values, not absolut values. However, in general, money (which in the case of RuneScape is gp) is used as a way to make comparisons. Mainly because money is "valued" what it represents to value. 1gp represents 1gp of value. 1 bank note of $10 represents $10 of value.

 

 

 

What I still don't see is how you can argument that a value of 100bil gp is lost. This would mean that the total value of all items in the system does depend on the relativ value the players in the system give for certain items. Lets assume we have a system with 20k rares and 2000bil gp. Now if a player values (relativly) one rare as 100mil, you say we have a total value of 4000bil. But if the player would value one rare as 10mil we would have only a total value of 2200bil. This looks a bit strange to me.

 

 

 

I see what your issues are with this example, but the answer to that lies in a different economic concept (that I had rather not introduced to not make things more complex then they already are :P), namely the utility of item.

 

 

 

The utility of an item is a 'number' that represents how "valued" people find the item. Again, what number it really represents is not too important, because economics only observes relative values between items.

 

 

 

So to be short, the difference in the two situations you named, where people value rares as either 10mil or 100mil is a difference in what they value the utility of the items at. And to answer your (indirect) question: yes the total value of all items in a system depends on what people value the utility at. The utility of an item is a constant however, and never chances no matter what.

 

 

 

Furthermore if we reomve the same value from a system we should have about the same value left in the system. So if we have again a (20k rares and 2000bil gp, 1 rare = 100mil gp) system and remove all the gp or all the rares you say we would have the same value left in the system. I personally doubt that people would value the rares still the same after removing all gp and the same holds for the other case as well.

 

 

 

Well the issue here is that this is one of those cases where it's not useful to take money (gp) as comparison item, because you're basically totally removing it from the "economy".

 

However, using the just-introduced concept of utility it is easier to see that the utility after removing either all gp or all rares should be roughly the same and should be roughly half of what it was before you removed anything at all. Backtracking from utility to the unit of gp, we can say you removed a worth of 2000bil gp if you removed all rares in this example though.

 

 

 

So to conclude, the real "neutral" comparison value you were probably looking for is the utility items have. However, it still gives us the same answer, that removing all rares from the game is the equilavent of removing several hundreds bills of value from the game. I hope it is clear now, because I doubt I can explain it anymore in-depth and clearer then this. :P

 

 

 

it would be unfair for me to hoard magical eggs and sell them to newbies that joined after easter.

 

 

 

Hmm.. Unconsciously you are raising a difficult issue here though. Isn't it much more unfair that newbies don't have any chance to get these magical eggs at all anymore, instead of the situation where they could get them, but had to pay older players a bunch of money to get them? Did you even think about that? ;)

 

 

 

seriously, the rares market only exist because investing in a rare, regardless of how much it costs, will guarantee you a profit later on.

 

 

 

"Only" is a far exageration. There are plenty of people who buy them without the intention to ever resell. They are collectors or skillers who had set a goal to own a rare set - without having the intention to ever resell their rares.

[Duke_Freedom]

I have read this definition as well, and I wasn't happy with it. It does not give an answer to the central question in which unit it is measured ("other things" is not very specific). The hint that it is often "measured in money" does not really help.

 

 

 

The reason this is written a bit vague is probably because in economics there is not really a 'central neutral item' that is used for comparison. Economics only considers relative values, not absolut values. However, in general, money (which in the case of RuneScape is gp) is used as a way to make comparisons. Mainly because money is "valued" what it represents to value. 1gp represents 1gp of value. 1 bank note of $10 represents $10 of value.

 

 

 

What I still don't see is how you can argument that a value of 100bil gp is lost. This would mean that the total value of all items in the system does depend on the relativ value the players in the system give for certain items. Lets assume we have a system with 20k rares and 2000bil gp. Now if a player values (relativly) one rare as 100mil, you say we have a total value of 4000bil. But if the player would value one rare as 10mil we would have only a total value of 2200bil. This looks a bit strange to me.

 

 

 

I see what your issues are with this example, but the answer to that lies in a different economic concept (that I had rather not introduced to not make things more complex then they already are :P), namely the utility of item.

 

 

 

The utility of an item is a 'number' that represents how "valued" people find the item. Again, what number it really represents is not too important, because economics only observes relative values between items.

 

 

 

So to be short, the difference in the two situations you named, where people value rares as either 10mil or 100mil is a difference in what they value the utility of the items at. And to answer your (indirect) question: yes the total value of all items in a system depends on what people value the utility at. The utility of an item is a constant however, and never chances no matter what.

 

 

 

Furthermore if we reomve the same value from a system we should have about the same value left in the system. So if we have again a (20k rares and 2000bil gp, 1 rare = 100mil gp) system and remove all the gp or all the rares you say we would have the same value left in the system. I personally doubt that people would value the rares still the same after removing all gp and the same holds for the other case as well.

 

 

 

Well the issue here is that this is one of those cases where it's not useful to take money (gp) as comparison item, because you're basically totally removing it from the "economy".

 

However, using the just-introduced concept of utility it is easier to see that the utility after removing either all gp or all rares should be roughly the same and should be roughly half of what it was before you removed anything at all. Backtracking from utility to the unit of gp, we can say you removed a worth of 2000bil gp if you removed all rares in this example though.

 

 

 

So to conclude, the real "neutral" comparison value you were probably looking for is the utility items have. However, it still gives us the same answer, that removing all rares from the game is the equilavent of removing several hundreds bills of value from the game. I hope it is clear now, because I doubt I can explain it anymore in-depth and clearer then this. :P

 

 

 

it would be unfair for me to hoard magical eggs and sell them to newbies that joined after easter.

 

 

 

Hmm.. Unconsciously you are raising a difficult issue here though. Isn't it much more unfair that newbies don't have any chance to get these magical eggs at all anymore, instead of the situation where they could get them, but had to pay older players a bunch of money to get them? Did you even think about that? ;)

 

 

 

seriously, the rares market only exist because investing in a rare, regardless of how much it costs, will guarantee you a profit later on.

 

 

 

"Only" is a far exageration. There are plenty of people who buy them without the intention to ever resell. They are collectors or skillers who had set a goal to own a rare set - without having the intention to ever resell their rares.

[Duke_Freedom]

I have read this definition as well, and I wasn't happy with it. It does not give an answer to the central question in which unit it is measured ("other things" is not very specific). The hint that it is often "measured in money" does not really help.

 

 

 

The reason this is written a bit vague is probably because in economics there is not really a 'central neutral item' that is used for comparison. Economics only considers relative values, not absolut values. However, in general, money (which in the case of RuneScape is gp) is used as a way to make comparisons. Mainly because money is "valued" what it represents to value. 1gp represents 1gp of value. 1 bank note of $10 represents $10 of value.

 

 

 

What I still don't see is how you can argument that a value of 100bil gp is lost. This would mean that the total value of all items in the system does depend on the relativ value the players in the system give for certain items. Lets assume we have a system with 20k rares and 2000bil gp. Now if a player values (relativly) one rare as 100mil, you say we have a total value of 4000bil. But if the player would value one rare as 10mil we would have only a total value of 2200bil. This looks a bit strange to me.

 

 

 

I see what your issues are with this example, but the answer to that lies in a different economic concept (that I had rather not introduced to not make things more complex then they already are :P), namely the utility of item.

 

 

 

The utility of an item is a 'number' that represents how "valued" people find the item. Again, what number it really represents is not too important, because economics only observes relative values between items.

 

 

 

So to be short, the difference in the two situations you named, where people value rares as either 10mil or 100mil is a difference in what they value the utility of the items at. And to answer your (indirect) question: yes the total value of all items in a system depends on what people value the utility at. The utility of an item is a constant however, and never chances no matter what.

 

 

 

Furthermore if we reomve the same value from a system we should have about the same value left in the system. So if we have again a (20k rares and 2000bil gp, 1 rare = 100mil gp) system and remove all the gp or all the rares you say we would have the same value left in the system. I personally doubt that people would value the rares still the same after removing all gp and the same holds for the other case as well.

 

 

 

Well the issue here is that this is one of those cases where it's not useful to take money (gp) as comparison item, because you're basically totally removing it from the "economy".

 

However, using the just-introduced concept of utility it is easier to see that the utility after removing either all gp or all rares should be roughly the same and should be roughly half of what it was before you removed anything at all. Backtracking from utility to the unit of gp, we can say you removed a worth of 2000bil gp if you removed all rares in this example though.

 

 

 

So to conclude, the real "neutral" comparison value you were probably looking for is the utility items have. However, it still gives us the same answer, that removing all rares from the game is the equilavent of removing several hundreds bills of value from the game. I hope it is clear now, because I doubt I can explain it anymore in-depth and clearer then this. :P

 

 

 

it would be unfair for me to hoard magical eggs and sell them to newbies that joined after easter.

 

 

 

Hmm.. Unconsciously you are raising a difficult issue here though. Isn't it much more unfair that newbies don't have any chance to get these magical eggs at all anymore, instead of the situation where they could get them, but had to pay older players a bunch of money to get them? Did you even think about that? ;)

 

 

 

seriously, the rares market only exist because investing in a rare, regardless of how much it costs, will guarantee you a profit later on.

 

 

 

"Only" is a far exageration. There are plenty of people who buy them without the intention to ever resell. They are collectors or skillers who had set a goal to own a rare set - without having the intention to ever resell their rares.

[ib]

You haven't given any argument why rares do not "introduce an unfair advantage" or why there shouldn't be any shop selling them as outlined above.

 

 

 

By the title of the post "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", I was kind of put off by it. I mean, Jagex did not intentionally "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", they just evolved to what you (and probably a few others) perceive now as "an unfair advantage". It's like getting in late to a good stock tip. It just is what it is.

 

 

 

Yes inflation has gone up, but also have the prices for some materials. When I stopped playing for a few months, I remember steel bars going for about 500-550 gp each and now they go for approximately 600 gp each. I wouldn't expect anything different from the rares. It's just that there are no longer rares being produced. The number of people of runescape is going up (like Jagex wanted), naturally there's going to be a bunch more gp floating around.

 

 

 

Here are a few more off the wall options to "solving" the rares problem.

 

1. Make them untradeable. I imagine that this would only requires a few lines of code on Jagex's part. However, I'm pretty sure that members dealing with the exchange of rares would be pretty aggrivated.

 

2. Another dupe. Seriously. I'm sure all the boards would be in for a "omg dupe" fest/conspiracy theories across all of runescape forums/chaos, but it would add to the number of rares in the world.

 

3. Perhaps they could make a party hat as a potential reward for completing some of the more absurd random events with a 1 in (insert huge number rarer than some rare members monster item drop) of getting one.

 

 

 

i dont think i should make 100mil just cos the game randomly selected me to give me a very rare item, but not you.

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you know how they went, but basically on drop days, we'd just sit around doing whatever on the servers. Then magically, red dots would appear on the map. Naturally you'd go check it out what it was and go "OMG SWEET, HAT!!!".

[ib]

You haven't given any argument why rares do not "introduce an unfair advantage" or why there shouldn't be any shop selling them as outlined above.

 

 

 

By the title of the post "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", I was kind of put off by it. I mean, Jagex did not intentionally "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", they just evolved to what you (and probably a few others) perceive now as "an unfair advantage". It's like getting in late to a good stock tip. It just is what it is.

 

 

 

Yes inflation has gone up, but also have the prices for some materials. When I stopped playing for a few months, I remember steel bars going for about 500-550 gp each and now they go for approximately 600 gp each. I wouldn't expect anything different from the rares. It's just that there are no longer rares being produced. The number of people of runescape is going up (like Jagex wanted), naturally there's going to be a bunch more gp floating around.

 

 

 

Here are a few more off the wall options to "solving" the rares problem.

 

1. Make them untradeable. I imagine that this would only requires a few lines of code on Jagex's part. However, I'm pretty sure that members dealing with the exchange of rares would be pretty aggrivated.

 

2. Another dupe. Seriously. I'm sure all the boards would be in for a "omg dupe" fest/conspiracy theories across all of runescape forums/chaos, but it would add to the number of rares in the world.

 

3. Perhaps they could make a party hat as a potential reward for completing some of the more absurd random events with a 1 in (insert huge number rarer than some rare members monster item drop) of getting one.

 

 

 

i dont think i should make 100mil just cos the game randomly selected me to give me a very rare item, but not you.

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you know how they went, but basically on drop days, we'd just sit around doing whatever on the servers. Then magically, red dots would appear on the map. Naturally you'd go check it out what it was and go "OMG SWEET, HAT!!!".

[ib]

You haven't given any argument why rares do not "introduce an unfair advantage" or why there shouldn't be any shop selling them as outlined above.

 

 

 

By the title of the post "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", I was kind of put off by it. I mean, Jagex did not intentionally "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", they just evolved to what you (and probably a few others) perceive now as "an unfair advantage". It's like getting in late to a good stock tip. It just is what it is.

 

 

 

Yes inflation has gone up, but also have the prices for some materials. When I stopped playing for a few months, I remember steel bars going for about 500-550 gp each and now they go for approximately 600 gp each. I wouldn't expect anything different from the rares. It's just that there are no longer rares being produced. The number of people of runescape is going up (like Jagex wanted), naturally there's going to be a bunch more gp floating around.

 

 

 

Here are a few more off the wall options to "solving" the rares problem.

 

1. Make them untradeable. I imagine that this would only requires a few lines of code on Jagex's part. However, I'm pretty sure that members dealing with the exchange of rares would be pretty aggrivated.

 

2. Another dupe. Seriously. I'm sure all the boards would be in for a "omg dupe" fest/conspiracy theories across all of runescape forums/chaos, but it would add to the number of rares in the world.

 

3. Perhaps they could make a party hat as a potential reward for completing some of the more absurd random events with a 1 in (insert huge number rarer than some rare members monster item drop) of getting one.

 

 

 

i dont think i should make 100mil just cos the game randomly selected me to give me a very rare item, but not you.

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you know how they went, but basically on drop days, we'd just sit around doing whatever on the servers. Then magically, red dots would appear on the map. Naturally you'd go check it out what it was and go "OMG SWEET, HAT!!!".

[ib]

You haven't given any argument why rares do not "introduce an unfair advantage" or why there shouldn't be any shop selling them as outlined above.

 

 

 

By the title of the post "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", I was kind of put off by it. I mean, Jagex did not intentionally "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", they just evolved to what you (and probably a few others) perceive now as "an unfair advantage". It's like getting in late to a good stock tip. It just is what it is.

 

 

 

Yes inflation has gone up, but also have the prices for some materials. When I stopped playing for a few months, I remember steel bars going for about 500-550 gp each and now they go for approximately 600 gp each. I wouldn't expect anything different from the rares. It's just that there are no longer rares being produced. The number of people of runescape is going up (like Jagex wanted), naturally there's going to be a bunch more gp floating around.

 

 

 

Here are a few more off the wall options to "solving" the rares problem.

 

1. Make them untradeable. I imagine that this would only requires a few lines of code on Jagex's part. However, I'm pretty sure that members dealing with the exchange of rares would be pretty aggrivated.

 

2. Another dupe. Seriously. I'm sure all the boards would be in for a "omg dupe" fest/conspiracy theories across all of runescape forums/chaos, but it would add to the number of rares in the world.

 

3. Perhaps they could make a party hat as a potential reward for completing some of the more absurd random events with a 1 in (insert huge number rarer than some rare members monster item drop) of getting one.

 

 

 

i dont think i should make 100mil just cos the game randomly selected me to give me a very rare item, but not you.

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you know how they went, but basically on drop days, we'd just sit around doing whatever on the servers. Then magically, red dots would appear on the map. Naturally you'd go check it out what it was and go "OMG SWEET, HAT!!!".

[ib]

You haven't given any argument why rares do not "introduce an unfair advantage" or why there shouldn't be any shop selling them as outlined above.

 

 

 

By the title of the post "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", I was kind of put off by it. I mean, Jagex did not intentionally "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", they just evolved to what you (and probably a few others) perceive now as "an unfair advantage". It's like getting in late to a good stock tip. It just is what it is.

 

 

 

Yes inflation has gone up, but also have the prices for some materials. When I stopped playing for a few months, I remember steel bars going for about 500-550 gp each and now they go for approximately 600 gp each. I wouldn't expect anything different from the rares. It's just that there are no longer rares being produced. The number of people of runescape is going up (like Jagex wanted), naturally there's going to be a bunch more gp floating around.

 

 

 

Here are a few more off the wall options to "solving" the rares problem.

 

1. Make them untradeable. I imagine that this would only requires a few lines of code on Jagex's part. However, I'm pretty sure that members dealing with the exchange of rares would be pretty aggrivated.

 

2. Another dupe. Seriously. I'm sure all the boards would be in for a "omg dupe" fest/conspiracy theories across all of runescape forums/chaos, but it would add to the number of rares in the world.

 

3. Perhaps they could make a party hat as a potential reward for completing some of the more absurd random events with a 1 in (insert huge number rarer than some rare members monster item drop) of getting one.

 

 

 

i dont think i should make 100mil just cos the game randomly selected me to give me a very rare item, but not you.

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you know how they went, but basically on drop days, we'd just sit around doing whatever on the servers. Then magically, red dots would appear on the map. Naturally you'd go check it out what it was and go "OMG SWEET, HAT!!!".

[ib]

You haven't given any argument why rares do not "introduce an unfair advantage" or why there shouldn't be any shop selling them as outlined above.

 

 

 

By the title of the post "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", I was kind of put off by it. I mean, Jagex did not intentionally "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", they just evolved to what you (and probably a few others) perceive now as "an unfair advantage". It's like getting in late to a good stock tip. It just is what it is.

 

 

 

Yes inflation has gone up, but also have the prices for some materials. When I stopped playing for a few months, I remember steel bars going for about 500-550 gp each and now they go for approximately 600 gp each. I wouldn't expect anything different from the rares. It's just that there are no longer rares being produced. The number of people of runescape is going up (like Jagex wanted), naturally there's going to be a bunch more gp floating around.

 

 

 

Here are a few more off the wall options to "solving" the rares problem.

 

1. Make them untradeable. I imagine that this would only requires a few lines of code on Jagex's part. However, I'm pretty sure that members dealing with the exchange of rares would be pretty aggrivated.

 

2. Another dupe. Seriously. I'm sure all the boards would be in for a "omg dupe" fest/conspiracy theories across all of runescape forums/chaos, but it would add to the number of rares in the world.

 

3. Perhaps they could make a party hat as a potential reward for completing some of the more absurd random events with a 1 in (insert huge number rarer than some rare members monster item drop) of getting one.

 

 

 

i dont think i should make 100mil just cos the game randomly selected me to give me a very rare item, but not you.

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you know how they went, but basically on drop days, we'd just sit around doing whatever on the servers. Then magically, red dots would appear on the map. Naturally you'd go check it out what it was and go "OMG SWEET, HAT!!!".

[ib]

You haven't given any argument why rares do not "introduce an unfair advantage" or why there shouldn't be any shop selling them as outlined above.

 

 

 

By the title of the post "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", I was kind of put off by it. I mean, Jagex did not intentionally "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", they just evolved to what you (and probably a few others) perceive now as "an unfair advantage". It's like getting in late to a good stock tip. It just is what it is.

 

 

 

Yes inflation has gone up, but also have the prices for some materials. When I stopped playing for a few months, I remember steel bars going for about 500-550 gp each and now they go for approximately 600 gp each. I wouldn't expect anything different from the rares. It's just that there are no longer rares being produced. The number of people of runescape is going up (like Jagex wanted), naturally there's going to be a bunch more gp floating around.

 

 

 

Here are a few more off the wall options to "solving" the rares problem.

 

1. Make them untradeable. I imagine that this would only requires a few lines of code on Jagex's part. However, I'm pretty sure that members dealing with the exchange of rares would be pretty aggrivated.

 

2. Another dupe. Seriously. I'm sure all the boards would be in for a "omg dupe" fest/conspiracy theories across all of runescape forums/chaos, but it would add to the number of rares in the world.

 

3. Perhaps they could make a party hat as a potential reward for completing some of the more absurd random events with a 1 in (insert huge number rarer than some rare members monster item drop) of getting one.

 

 

 

i dont think i should make 100mil just cos the game randomly selected me to give me a very rare item, but not you.

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you know how they went, but basically on drop days, we'd just sit around doing whatever on the servers. Then magically, red dots would appear on the map. Naturally you'd go check it out what it was and go "OMG SWEET, HAT!!!".

[shade_bandyt]

Hmm.. Unconsciously you are raising a difficult issue here though. Isn't it much more unfair that newbies don't have any chance to get these magical eggs at all anymore, instead of the situation where they could get them, but had to pay older players a bunch of money to get them? Did you even think about that? ;)

 

no it does not, because owning a lederhosen hat, or an easter ring, or a rubber chicken, gives me absolutely NO advantage in the game over a player that doesnt have any of these things. however, if they were tradeable, and i have hoarded them, you must pay me whatever price i ask for it, immediately giving me an unfair advantage over you

 

 

 

"Only" is a far exageration. There are plenty of people who buy them without the intention to ever resell. They are collectors or skillers who had set a goal to own a rare set - without having the intention to ever resell their rares.

 

its not that far an exagerration, but you are right. a small percentage of the rare owners are true collectors. however, the possibility of selling that rare at any time to cash in on a huge income always exists. im sure lots of well intended collectors ended up selling their rares for cash to reinvest or level up a skill as they saw the price quickly go up. but there are those that are true to their own word to not become pressured to sell regardless of how lucrative it becomes. i'm sure you will a gree that this is a very small percentage of rares owners though

[shade_bandyt]

By the title of the post "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", I was kind of put off by it. I mean, Jagex did not intentionally "introduce rares as an unfair advantage", they just evolved to what you (and probably a few others) perceive now as "an unfair advantage". It's like getting in late to a good stock tip. It just is what it is.

 

nobody is saying jagex put rares in the game to give others an unfair advantage. the argument is that the fact that rares are tradeable gives rare owners an unfair advantage. if rares were never tradeable in the first place then this would have not even been a problem. jagex did not see the long term implications of putting a discontinued item in the game and making it tradeable. all other tradeable items in the game can be produced. the ones that are discontinued become investment tools.

 

 

 

look at what happened in the last few years. jagex completely revamped both the way the holiday items were distributed, and the nature of the items themselves. you cant hoard them, and you cant trade them. yet the items are way cooler than party hats or masks. this was obviously for a reason. its clear that jagex regretted the way the first few rounds of holiday items turned out, and made sure that it will never happen again

 

 

 

Yes inflation has gone up, but also have the prices for some materials. When I stopped playing for a few months, I remember steel bars going for about 500-550 gp each and now they go for approximately 600 gp each. I wouldn't expect anything different from the rares. It's just that there are no longer rares being produced. The number of people of runescape is going up (like Jagex wanted), naturally there's going to be a bunch more gp floating around.

 

prices for items are usually very stable. steel only went up recently because the cost of coal went up. yes this is a result of inflation (richer players willing to pay 200 for coal, or 200 for cannon balls) same with bowstrings, they actually doubled, 8 months ago 100 was the going price for bowstrings. and its also because magic bow alchers can afford those prices. most of the other items has remained relatively stable. armor and weapon prices have actually gone down. this is because of demand and supply rather than inflation. you also have to remember that as more people join the game, it absorbs some of the inflation, but not enough because alchers are still adding massive ammounts into the economy

 

 

 

we have to remember that the rising cost of rares is one opf the factors that put pressure on alchers and money makers to produce so much gp. i believe there would be a lot less alching if there were not escalating rare prices to chase. i could be wrong, but i think the pursuit of rares drives the rest of the economy upward more than anything else. nearly every serious merchant sees investing in a party hat set as the ultimate goal. if rares were not tradeable there would be a lot less people feeling driven to become multimillionaires. but thats just my opinion

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you know how they went, but basically on drop days, we'd just sit around doing whatever on the servers. Then magically, red dots would appear on the map. Naturally you'd go check it out what it was and go "OMG SWEET, HAT!!!".

 

i understand that. of course at first the players themselves didnt think that someday a few years from then theyd actually be picking up 100mil gp by picking up the hat. and neither did jagex. i'm not blaming anybody for the way the rares market is now. unfortunately, andrew gower is not omniscient and couldnt see into the future at that time. the fact still remains that for people who were lucky enough to have the lottery winnings fall in their lap, they are clearly advantaged. its not just because they got a hat, but because they could sell the hat for cash, and resell for more cash, and more cash, for ever and ever amen

[Geordiequeen]

 

The thing is, who says life has to be fair? Where the heck do we have to come to an agreement that everythign in the world has to be levelled down for everyone. That once variables come into play that favor someone they have to be removed.

 

 

 

You want fairness? You want everyone to be the same, do the same work, get the same output? Go to communist Russia.

 

 

 

Sorry to be so abrupt, but come on. They were put in the game, they don't need to be taken out. They might be an advantage, but why does an advantage have to make things unfair? Does someone owning a party hat infringe upon you? No, they have their advantage, and you can get your own. It's not like party hats are the only item in the game that has advantages.

 

Is it unfair that a player who has more money can buy a dragon item to have more defense than rune? It's an advantage.

 

But then the word 'fair' comes into play. You would say a party hat is an 'unfair' advantage. I'm not going to even touch that word, because it's so hard to really define, but you can't just tie 'unfair' with 'advantage' so easily.

 

 

 

You might argue that players who played early have an advantage because they were able to get party hats and others weren't. That's true. But why is that wrong?

 

There are plenty occasions where being the early bird gets the worm. Early gold diggers who came to life California probably got the most gold because they were around there first. Does that mean the government should take away their gold because there's no more left for new people to mine themselves? Of course not.

 

 

 

There are variables in life. THere are advantages. There are things that aren't fair in life. You have to deal with these kinds of variables. If life was completely fair in every single way you'd get bored out of your mind.

 

 

 

Like what he said. Life ain't fair. If life was fair then there wouldn't be people starving in the world with nothing to eat and there wouldn't be people like David Beckham who are extremely rich. I dont hear you complaining about the huge divide between the rich and the poor in real life. I think you have forgot runescape is only a game and gp is not realy money. Maybe instead of complaining about how rares introduce a unfair advantage you should talk about something worthwhile because i personally dont care whether someone has a phat or a santa hat because they took advantage of the rising price of rares. I play this game to take a break from school or when im not out with my friends and not to be the best in the game.

[Systemless]

The utility of an item is a constant however, and never chances no matter what.

 

How is it possible then to go from the 10mil value to 100mil value situation? We have gone that way in the past of runescape. I do not know why exactly the utility has to be constant, but it would make sense if it was.

 

 

 

Beside this, if the total value depends on what people value certain items relativ to others, then we can increase the total value in a system, just be having people value rares more and more. Assuming that the amount of cash and the amount of rares is constant, we could increase the total value just due to player claiming one rare is now worth the double in gp (relativ). This looks a bit wrong to me (not sure wheter is really is). One reason for this could be the very special kind of gp we have in Runescape. If the same thing happens in a real system with constant amount of gp and rares, doubling of the value of one rare relativ to the gp does maybe increase the value of the rares, but decrease the value of the gp, leaving the total value constant. In Runescape the value of a gp is fixed (due to the open system thing), whatever happens, giving rise to a way to increase the total value just by changing the relativ one (if not a real world concept is wrongly applied here).

 

 

 

I dont hear you complaining about the huge divide between the rich and the poor in real life. I think you have forgot runescape is only a game and gp is not realy money.

 

I haven't forgotten that runescape is only a game. I complain about those difference in real world as well, but not here ;) And just a general thing: The presence of other problems doesn't make thinking about certain problems obsolet.

 

 

 

Maybe instead of complaining about how rares introduce a unfair advantage you should talk about something worthwhile because i personally dont care whether someone has a phat or a santa hat because they took advantage of the rising price of rares. I play this game to take a break from school or when im not out with my friends and not to be the best in the game.

 

When I play a game, fairness is very important to me. Maybe not to you, but to most players it IS important. Look at the Runescape rules, how many of those just deal with "unfair advantages".

 

 

 

.: Systemless :.

[shade_bandyt]

The utility of an item is a constant however, and never chances no matter what.

 

How is it possible then to go from the 10mil value to 100mil value situation? We have gone that way in the past of runescape. I do not know why exactly the utility has to be constant, but it would make sense if it was.

 

 

 

Beside this, if the total value depends on what people value certain items relativ to others, then we can increase the total value in a system, just be having people value rares more and more. Assuming that the amount of cash and the amount of rares is constant, we could increase the total value just due to player claiming one rare is now worth the double in gp (relativ). This looks a bit wrong to me (not sure wheter is really is). One reason for this could be the very special kind of gp we have in Runescape. If the same thing happens in a real system with constant amount of gp and rares, doubling of the value of one rare relativ to the gp does maybe increase the value of the rares, but decrease the value of the gp, leaving the total value constant. In Runescape the value of a gp is fixed (due to the open system thing), whatever happens, giving rise to a way to increase the total value just by changing the relativ one (if not a real world concept is wrongly applied here).

 

the idea of utility value goes like this: say we use feathers as currency. everything in the trade is counted in terms the amount of feathers for it. 1 feather has a value, and if an item increases in price you get more feathers per item. however, feathers itself has a utility, it can be used for fletching arrows, darts and for fly fishing. so the feathers would be an example of utility currency. feathers are still as useful even if their trade value decreases relative to another item, so its UTILITY is constant

 

 

 

this is similar to the days when gold was currency. gold could also be used to make jewelry, tooth fillings, pipe fixtures and electrical conductors. but people used to trade items by measures of gold or number of gold coins

 

 

 

gp has no utility, they are just tokens that can be traded and has no other use. because of that, gp can ONLY be valued relative to the items its traded for. for example, 7 months ago you could get coal for 100gp. today you will very rarely get coal for less than 200 each. so relative to coal (which has the same utility it had 7 months ago) the value of gp had been reduced by half. thats why token currency (aka fiat currency) is only measured in relative terms, and is determined by the current market conditions.

[eyehawk78]

wow. Are you an ecomnomist?

[Systemless]

so relative to coal (which has the same utility it had 7 months ago) the value of gp had been reduced by half. thats why token currency (aka fiat currency) is only measured in relative terms, and is determined by the current market conditions.

 

 

 

There is one problem with the runescape money "gp". There are shops that will always give you the same item (lets say a d scimmy) for a certain amount of gp, no matter how "devalued" the gp is. This gives the gp some kind of "utility" as well. So I guess the gp is no "fiat currency".

 

 

 

To me it looks like the whole problem comes from the fact that the npc shops (and alching) acts "dumb" according to common "market laws". No matter how devalued the gp is with respect to items not influenced by shops (for example rares), they still give you the same item for a certain amount of gp. As mentioned above this has its positives aspects as well, as it doesn't allow for a devalueing of gp with respect to certain items. But together with non-buyable (or producable) items, it leads to problems. And with the presence of these "unnatural" shops I would be carefull with applying real world economy concepts.

 

 

 

.: Systemless :.

[koddo]

Give me a Santa and I'll agree with you.