forums.rs

Forums

Wildy/Free Trade referendum... Thread is locked

Quick find code: 254-255-50-62065672

of 160
Real Poop
May Member 2021

Real Poop

Posts: 591 Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
@carlobrand
The dove system you suggest is plainly stupid. The point of the wilderness is to be a dangerous place, its a part of the game, to have a blanton way of getting around makes no sence. However your idea of limiting vulnerable people into the wilderness is very intelligent.
VOTE YES EVERYONE =O
(First post on page 100 =p)

29-Dec-2010 04:40:04 - Last edited on 29-Dec-2010 04:40:32 by Real Poop

hedge fun
Aug Member 2023

hedge fun

Posts: 723 Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I don't understand. Its been one week. I've lost more than 30mil. What's going on? Ever since this vote everything I own is crashing. I don't know what to do. Im losing like 10mil a day. This is outrageous.
- izakt

29-Dec-2010 05:09:07

[#49XZ1I4UN]

[#49XZ1I4UN]

Posts: 254 Silver Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
@carlobrand:
Nice idea's. A few problems/improvements though:
1) limiting free trade to mems-only isn't possible without removing the GE, unless they manually set each mebers item to have no min/max, which would allow a large margin for human error.
2) Low level players are already protected by the wildy's level limitations. When you're mining in lv7 wildy, that means the only people/revs that can attack you are those whose combat levels are +/- 7 levels of your own.
3) I like the dove idea, but the wildy has to be dangerous. Doved players would need to have the risk of revs, while PKs would have to be immune to revs - else the game will be unfairly favoured to the non-PKs.
Personally, I like the idea of eaither removing multi-combat areas, or keeping the revs. Revs appear more often arround large numbers of people, so single PKs will be at the same risk as non-PKs. PK clans will be at less risk of PKs because the're in a clan, but will also be at greater risk of revs because they're in a clan.
Keeping the revs, and maybe even increasing how often they appear and/or allowing revs to appear in groups, should make the wildy balanced and fair.
BTW, I'm against a PK wildy at all, but since 90% of voters want it I'm happy for them to have it so long as no player type has an advantage over another.
4) If muted players become PvP blocked, I can see many people swearing to try to get reported and muted just so they can go into the wildy safely. lol.
P.S.
I can also see the "total level 1500+" world being used a lot for clues etc, as there would be far less PKs there :P .

29-Dec-2010 05:24:04

Carlobrand
Jan Member 2022

Carlobrand

Posts: 1,243 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Ah, I see, poop. So, it's vote yes for no choices then? Interesting ethical stand. I'm curious: how exactly do you justify forcing everyone to play the way you want?
The Wild IS dangerous, always has been, always will be. Revenants, remember? They were introduced when the player threat was removed. They might not be much for someone of your caliber, but they're quite the excitement for 90% of the player population. Now, if Jagex takes those out, I might agree with you - but I'm hoping they don't. I like the beasties.
Mind you, I'm not wedded to the dove idea. When I go into the Wild for a pengie or a clue scroll or some such, I do it in the buff, so to speak - exciting for me, but nothing there for a player to profit from. I can live with it either way. However, I don't see the logic in forcing things on the handful of people that don't want it.
The community is eager for wildy back. It SHOULD be back - but why force PvP on some poor noob who's barely managing to survive the revenants in pursuit of some quest or a penguin or something.
Still, I'm glad you like the idea of limiting vulnerable players. I'm more concerned with the young'uns than the rest of us - Jagex decided to let that class play, it's going to have to give them some thought. Sure, I'd like to see choice just on fairness grounds, but most of us could live without it. It's not like somebody's going to be showing up in Lumbridge trying to kill me, after all - Wildy's a defined region with a very clear boundary. So long as the risks are clearly understood, we're most of us mature to make our own decisions and take our own chances.
I'm first and foremost concerned that the young'uns, the ones most likely to become disillusioned and disenchanted with the game if they find themselves lured or ganged up on, should be given some protection. However, they STILL may have to go into the wild every now and again - chasing down a quest, for example. Perhaps we should only apply the dove thing to them.

29-Dec-2010 05:49:16 - Last edited on 29-Dec-2010 05:49:49 by Carlobrand

Matt Man8

Matt Man8

Posts: 394 Silver Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Seems like the people voting "No" are also trying to take the moral high ground here by insinuating that those of us that PK are sociopathic, future serial-killers. Thanks guys! Get off your high horses and get used to the fact that in the real world you won't have someone (in this case, a simplified, safer game) to hold your hand all the time. I don't know how many different ways we can tell you that if you stay out of the wild, you won't get killed. It's clear that you're trying to make yourselves sound more intelligent than you are but you're obviously not because when you are presented with reason you ignore it and find a new way of telling us how scared you are of an optional area in a video game. I'd be willing to bet that you were the kid that rats on someone in preschool because you weren't invited to their birthday. Like someone else said you guys are soft.

29-Dec-2010 05:50:34

Real Poop
May Member 2021

Real Poop

Posts: 591 Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
They second I disagree with you you seem to think like im going at your throat. I just dont think that giving people safe passage through the wilderness just beacause they clicked a button before logging in. Also I am not immune to revanents and I think they are dangerous but nothing like the cunning of a hiding mage. Im sorry I seemed so arragont and disagreed with you but I think it is just a bad idea.

29-Dec-2010 06:03:54

Carlobrand
Jan Member 2022

Carlobrand

Posts: 1,243 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
@bedtime:
1) limiting free trade to mems-only: I've no idea about the technical limitations, if there are any. If it's not feasible, Jagex won't try it and the idea is moot. If it is, well ... still might not be a good idea, but I thought I'd toss it out there and see what happens.
2) The wildy's level limitations: you know, it's been so long that I'd plumb forgotten about that. Not much help to the young kiddies (who don't tend to pay enough attention to such details) but surely a factor for the rest of us.
3) "Doved players would need to have the risk of revs, while PKs would have to be immune to revs": I don't like the idea of rev-immunity; I think revs SHOULD be a factor in PvP, makes things a bit more challenging. I DO like the idea of doved players experiencing some compensating disadvantage. What if having a dove made you more likely to attract rev attacks than normal? That would make for some interesting decision-making.
4) "If muted players become PvP blocked, I can see many people swearing to try to get reported and muted just so they can go into the wildy safely": Uh, I don't think I was meaning that. The young players - kids below about 13, I think - can only use quick chat. It's not a mute - they can't see other people's conversations either, they only see quick chat. It's a mechanism to keep them from being exposed to cussing, older players being quite clever about finding ways around the censor. I suspect there may be some legal reason behind it, some legal requirement to protect children below a certain age from inappropriate language. Not sure. However, the PvP block would only apply to young players - not to anyone who managed to get themselves muted.
I don't think letting young kids into the game was wise, but since Jagex does allow it, Jagex is going to have to think about that group.

29-Dec-2010 06:19:47

Carlobrand
Jan Member 2022

Carlobrand

Posts: 1,243 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Poop, I neither think you're "at (my) throat" nor that you're arrogant. You're advocating for what you want, as you should. I just think you're wrong not to allow for other people to have choices.
There IS no "safe passage through the wilderness;" they still have to deal with revs. As I discussed with Bedtime, if the rev danger isn't acute enough, we could perhaps ratchet up the danger level a bit for those sheltering under doves, make them seriously weigh the option of taking their chances with other players.
Jagex has made some effort to lure people up to the wild since the original PK update. Those additions need to be considered. It would be tragic if, for example, wildy penguins became untrackable because PKers were camping them out waiting to pick off penguin-hunters as they showed up. Or for that matter, if PKers started camping out around the farm ruins waiting to ambush questers running Spirit of Summer. There needs to be some thought given to how this change will impact on the new things that have been introduced in the Wild since the original PK-squashing update.
I voted already: I voted "yes". I would just like Jagex to put some careful thought into this so we can avoid unexpected consequences down the road.

29-Dec-2010 06:43:29

Quick find code: 254-255-50-62065672 Back to Top