forums.rs

Forums

Wilderness and Free Trade Vote Thread is locked

Quick find code: 254-255-49-62042278

of 2094
MacGriogair
Aug Member 2023

MacGriogair

Posts: 1,293 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Jackolevio
Wilderness, with Free Trade and PVP Worlds are entirely different things.
Are you seriously going to try and justify comparing them?
As well as that, long before the removal of such things as free trade and wilderness almost every world used to have a minimum of 600-900 players on it. Many worlds were maxed out at peak times. Clearly that speaks volumes about the change in times.

06-Jan-2011 20:46:50 - Last edited on 06-Jan-2011 20:48:11 by MacGriogair

Formerly Joy

Formerly Joy

Posts: 2,401 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
jackolevio- how the hell is that not comparing? are you mentally handicapped? thats like saying, go put heinz ketchup and another brand of ketchup in two separate bowls, and give people fries and see which one most people like more. it's obviously ******* comparing! you're attempting to see which is better than the other..

06-Jan-2011 20:57:22

MacGriogair
Aug Member 2023

MacGriogair

Posts: 1,293 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Jackolevio
The wilderness is by the very history of the game supposed to be a dangerous place of evil deeds. The wilderness never caused anyone a problem pre-2007 and was taken away from us without any form of democratic consultation, as was free trade.
To have worlds that do not incorporate it would quite frankly undermine the purpose of the game and continue to spoonfeed the baby community that has been allowed to manifest.
The wilderness in every world would mean that there is a greater risk and better sense of achievement when you are running through attempting to avoid player killers using stealth and cunning to reach a desired area. Further to that it also means that people will have to work (the real issue I believe for many of these no votes) to earn their wealth.
Clue scrolls at the moment are too easy in the Wilderness. The whole reason the Zamorak mage is so low level is because you are (were as the case is now) having to content with pkers at the same time.
The economic benefits of the Wilderness are vast and people will see a great rise in the desire for yew longbows for training mage, as a result flax and bowstring are desired along with logs. Food is required and cooked food begins to have value in an economy that is currently upside down.
Quite frankly I don't see why there should be a compromise of "50-50" worlds when it's clear that 90% (+3% that do not care either way) should accomodate to the losing 7% which is a miniscule amount of people relative to the context of the vote.
In politics if a party wins by such a large result they would not then be at the mercy of a compromise from the losing party. If the votes were anywhere near each other then yes, fair enough - but you're kidding yourself on as things stand.

06-Jan-2011 21:00:00

Quick find code: 254-255-49-62042278 Back to Top