Duel arena suggestion - pleasing both parties

I've been reading over many rants, as well as many suggestions lately. Piling all these together, I think I may have come up with a solution to the duel arena update, which has displeased many players. This solution will hopefully please both parties; jagex and the players.

Here is the suggestion; when two players enter a 1 vs 1 stake(non friendly), they may stake anything as long as both the items, according to the soon-to-come GE prices, stay within a 10% price value of each other.

For example, one player may stake a dragon 2 hander(I believe this is around 1.2M). The other player can only stake something that is in the price range of 1.08-1.32M; 10% below, as well as above.

Another example: If a player puts up 10M cash, the stake can only be valid if the other player puts up an item(s) or cash within a 9M-11M range.

Another useful feature; each player would see how much their item(s) are worth in gp value. If someone puts up 200 flax, they'll have "36,000gp total," if they put up an additional dragon longsword, it will read "136,000gp total," and so on. Both players can put up whatever items they want, check if it is in the 10% range by hitting 'accept,' and duel. If it is not 10%, a message will tell both players that their values do not match the 10% range.

How would this benefit the players? Good, old staking. It would be like nothing was changed by the update. Stakers can stake as high as they want, as long as the stakes are fair, which they should be in the first place!

How would this benefit jagex? Jagex' original goal was to eliminate multiple account sharers who used the duel arena to quickly, and sneakily get away with trading between two accounts. In this new way of staking, both accounts would have to offer very similar amounts. Because nearly all account sharing involves sharing between a wealthy high level main, and a poor low level, the low level could not offer the high amount of cash, and therefore, not even be able to duel!

A quote from the update page:

This limit will make it harder for real-world traders to unfairly use the Duel Arena as a covert way of transferring items.

If their main goal was to eliminate duel arena account sharers, then this is a benificial solution. However, I am aware that account sharers will most likely adapt, similar to autoers; but at least, overall, account sharers will take a big blow if this is implemented.

Nice idea - cant really see any problems with it.

yeah, seems like a good solution overall... i've read some of the rants also and this covers the problems well

count me in :)

Very good idea, you should post this in runescape forums and send it to jagex. =D>

Only problem I see is that it is a common thing for a lvl 90 to 2X a lvl 80, i.e. the lvl 90 stakes 10M and the 80 stakes 5M.

Or even 3... 4... 5... 6 times as much as the other person in some cases.

Only problem I see is that it is a common thing for a lvl 90 to 2X a lvl 80, i.e. the lvl 90 stakes 10M and the 80 stakes 5M.

 

 

 

Or even 3... 4... 5... 6 times as much as the other person in some cases.

2x wouldn't be possible; the staking relies on a 10% price range.

Support! When I used to randomly stake 100k sometimes the other dude always put 80-120k range.

Nice idea. Even though I'm f2p and couldn't really care less it's a good suggestion that I guess alot of members would like.

but that wouldnt stop rwt...

imagine player A wants to buy 5m from player B but only got 100k on his/her account, stake 100 against 110, then 210 against 231, then 441 against.. until have all, wouldnt be to hard, unless it would have time limitation as well, but still wouldnt stop it.

now stakers will just have to adjust do tournments and then will be less luck based since you got to win 6 in a row, the stats and skills will be more determinant than a lucky spec for ex., althoug a lucky spec could eleminate you..

i think they just should rase the cap for something like 250k per 15min, or something like that, but cant be to much higher or wont stop rwt..

It'd be good except for a few flaws.

Say someone is buying 10m gold. Well, the person buying doesn't have anything 10m in worth and only has a rune scimitar. Here's what they'd do.

The seller would offer 25k for the stake, the buyer would offer his scimitar.

The seller loses and the buyer now has 50k worth in items.

The next duel the seller stakes 50k, the buyer stakes his scimitar and 25k.

Then they'd just double-up the stakes until all 10m had been transferred.

Keep Jagex's original idea of stopping real world trading? I think not. I myself think that the cap did very, very little to help with RWT.

EDIT: Dang, Ho3fel beat me to it.

I think this is a good idea. It will stop people trading cash/items from their mains to a noob account. It probably won't stop RWIT though. But then, the 3k limit won't help either. Stopping macroers and RWIT is next to impossible. They'll always find a way around updates.

BTW I'm F2P :wink:

To solve the RWT problem, why don't we implement another feature?

Let say, the god Gritux wanna balance all the stakes so that the game is fair for every guy

Let say, (opp. cb lvl)/(your cb lvl) = (opp. stake)/(your stake) (this is a simplified version. Of course, I don't wanna make it like this. It is simply too simple)

Since most macroers are below lvl10, they find it HARD for them to transfer $$ to the cheater. What they need is to deliberately lose multiple times to the gold buyer.

But "multiple losing" is easy to track. Just similar to the existing random system - if you constantly alch yew longs, sooner or later, a random will pop up. Similarly, if a gold farmer constantly loses to a buyer, both of them will be flagged by the system, and a special task force is gonna investigate whether they're bleached the rules. (similar to "report abuse" feature)

Someone may say, macroer CAN have a high lvl manager or boss - what they need to do is to transfer these items to the boss, and let the boss finish the job. But again, how do the macroing accounts transfer the items to the boss? drop trade? lost deliberately in Wildy (very unlikely as it's deadly risky - esp in member world since high wildy is involved )? these actions are easily traceable, and it also shows relationship between different accounts in a sweetshop. So again, employing a high lvl boss to transfer item is UNLIKELY

To solve the RWT problem, why don't we implement another feature?

 

 

 

Let say, the god Gritux wanna balance all the stakes so that the game is fair for every guy

 

 

 

Let say, (opp. cb lvl)/(your cb lvl) = (opp. stake)/(your stake) (this is a simplified version. Of course, I don't wanna make it like this. It is simply too simple)

 

 

 

Since most macroers are below lvl10, they find it HARD for them to transfer $$ to the cheater. What they need is to deliberately lose multiple times to the gold buyer.

 

 

 

But "multiple losing" is easy to track. Just similar to the existing random system - if you constantly alch yew longs, sooner or later, a random will pop up. Similarly, if a gold farmer constantly loses to a buyer, both of them will be flagged by the system, and a special task force is gonna investigate whether they're bleached the rules. (similar to "report abuse" feature)

 

 

 

Someone may say, macroer CAN have a high lvl manager or boss - what they need to do is to transfer these items to the boss, and let the boss finish the job. But again, how do the macroing accounts transfer the items to the boss? drop trade? lost deliberately in Wildy (very unlikely as it's deadly risky - esp in member world since high wildy is involved )? these actions are easily traceable, and it also shows relationship between different accounts in a sweetshop. So again, employing a high lvl boss to transfer item is UNLIKELY

Yeah, implementing the combat level would be much more effective. How about:

(Lower combat level/2)% difference between the stakes.

So, say if you had a legitimate duel, an example would be a level 76 vs a level 80.

The lower level, divided by 2 (76/2 = 38) is 38, so a 38% difference would be allowed.

With a RWTer, it would be a level 3 'slave' vs a level 80 'boss'.

Again, the lower level is divided by 2, and 3/2 = 1.5. There is then a 1.5% difference allowed. This generates an excruciatingly slow transaction.

Also, it doesn't matter if it's a level 3 'slave' vs a level 3 'boss', the 1.5% still applies!

Limit this again by having only 10 duels between any two accounts per day, and then RWTing is almost eliminated, whilst the rule abiding stakers can stake, and also higher levels are given more privileges as they go along.

I can't think of any situation where a duelling level 3 would not be a RWTer, or why accounts would duel each other more than 10 times a day would not be a RWTer.

Great idea, I support. I also think that making the amount of money you can stake proportionate to your level as well as adding a max limit to the amount of times you could duel someone in a day would make this idea almost completely foolproof.

Great idea, I support. I also think that making the amount of money you can stake proportionate to your level as well as adding a max limit to the amount of times you could duel someone in a day would make this idea almost completely foolproof.

Heh, thanks. I kinda blurted it out all at once without fully thinking about it.

Tell me, is there a more effective formula out there? There probably is, but I think that my idea is certainly better than the 3K constant limit.

The only problem I think I can see is that if a RWT 'slave' account manages to become high level combat. But then again, it's highly unlikely, and the time to train the accounts would certainly not be cost effective.

:-s

\

I think a mixture of some of these ideas would work decent;

--having to stake within 10% of opponent

----or having limited staking difference dependent on level difference

--limit to staking the same person x times in y hours

--can't stake the same person for more than 50% more than original stake within 30 minutes

Yeah, Blossom's idea is best. With Mario's, there is the ability to double-up the stakes to transfer the money. With Blossom's you can't double up.

Then again, I still stick with my original opinion that any stake cap does extremely little to help stop rwt.

Very good solution. Make sure you post a regularly updated thread supporting your idea on the RSOF to get acknowledgement of your idea from Jmods.

=)

Thanks for supporting me (my idea at 12th post. PLZ check it in advance so that you know what's going on.)

Now, I include some calculations

Let say, the macroing account is lvl5 and the gold buyer is lvl60. The sweetshop also have a boss of lvl80

By my formula

==========

(opp. cb lvl)/(your cb lvl) = (opp. stake)/(your stake)

opp. cb lvl / your cb lvl = 60 / 5 = 12

So, you must stake 12 times of the opponent's stake. If you buy 1Mil, you must stake 12 Mil. However, those who buy these golds usually don't have that much $$. (that's why they buy $$)

However, 1-time transaction is still possible. That's why my formula, I must admit, it way too simple. Let's have a look at the another proposed formula - it is MUCH better than mine... :cry:

By another formula suggested by will_holmes

=============================

How about:

 

 

 

(Lower combat level/2)% difference between the stakes.

According to this formula, it takes 40 duels to transfer all the golds (2.5% at a time) Clearly, this is EXTREME suspicious to lose 40 times. A task force, will be sent =;

If they use the boss, of course, this is more efficient, transfering 30% at a time, 4 times will finish the job. However, the drop trade.... yes, DANGEROUS and very easy to track :lol:

The problem of employing a boss

=====================

Losing in wildy? NO! impossible :shame: . Wildy has 56 lvls only! the lvl difference between boss and macroer accounts = 75 >>> max lvl of wildy. If they make it like losing to a lvl40 at the first time and the lvl40 losing to a lvl80 "pjer" at the same time, yes, it works. BUT lvl40 wildy is involved. Sooner or later, there will be clans roaming around in wildy, searching for these rule breakers, as the profit after killing them (at least 1Mil) is high. ESP in f2p worlds where these trades is likely to take place. p2p worlds is impossible for them - A clan consisting of a ice barrager and teleblocker will spell doom to that million gp.

More loses = more hidden relationship shown = easy for Jagex to ban all of them. BTW, it takes days for a lvl3 account to evolve to lvl80. the cost is simply too high should one is lost!

To complicate the transfering process, another feature may be added

After 5 consecutive duel to a single player, you can't challenge him (and he can't challenge you) again for the next 24 hours, i.e. you can only win the same person 5 times within a 24 hour period =;

A message "You feels that (insert name here) is invulnerable to your attacks, you decide to stop challenging him in the fear of losing any more duels" for the loser :(

"You feels that the opponent doesn't poses any challenge to you. You decide to fight another person instead" for the winner :o

This hinders the possibility for macroer to duel multiple times and loses multiple times to the buyer. The sweetshop may again, use multiple accounts to transfer all the golds. BUT AGAIN - it makes more macroing account vulnerable to Jagex investigation, and banning

BTW, this can also prevents gambling and chasing lost items in the previous stakings

see http://www.truthscape.com/html/ts_GamblingAddiction.htm

To complicate the transfering process, another feature may be added

 

 

 

After 5 consecutive duel to a single player, you can't challenge him (and he can't challenge you) again for the next 24 hours, i.e. you can only win the same person 5 times within a 24 hour period =;

 

 

 

A message "You feels that (insert name here) is invulnerable to your attacks, you decide to stop challenging him in the fear of losing any more duels" for the loser :(

 

 

 

"You feels that the opponent doesn't poses any challenge to you. You decide to fight another person instead" for the winner :o

 

 

 

This hinders the possibility for macroer to duel multiple times and loses multiple times to the buyer. The sweetshop may again, use multiple accounts to transfer all the golds. BUT AGAIN - it makes more macroing account vulnerable to Jagex investigation, and banning

 

 

 

BTW, this can also prevents gambling and chasing lost items in the previous stakings

 

see http://www.truthscape.com/html/ts_GamblingAddiction.htm

Good ideas there. Plus, it would make more sense. You got my support.

Liking it! Real nice idea

Yay. Too bad it'll never happen.

You're right... Jagex's only aim is to remove those innocent "stakers"...

Perhaps Andrew and Gower is jealous concerning this light's speed in making $$

LOL :D