RuneScape Forum Archive | Clue Scroll Changes

St Zaf

Posts: 1 Bronze Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

This second proposal isn't bad, but I feel the first proposal is better.
Limiting clues to be regionally locked doesn't only benefit the Unnatural Selection players, but BOTH sides. The people who chose the Treasure Trails relic are obviously after the rare rewards, so region locking on top of the minimal amount of steps required to complete a clue can only serve benefit them. Unnatural Selection players have access to slayer monsters at their choosing, but these monsters are still at the disposal of the TT relic players as well, whereas the clue rewards are astronomically harder to obtain if you chose slayer relic. Overall, either option would benefit both parties, but I think that the first option would benefit both parties even more. And besides, given the insane drop rates of the rare stuff (3rd age etc), you'd want to complete as many Clue Scrolls as possible lol.

13-Nov-2020 20:02:26

FlaxOnEm

Posts: 8 Bronze Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Anyone in charge of this change needs to step back and consider:

What was the motivation of players picking TS prior to this change?
What will the motivation be to pick TS after this change?

The only motivation I personally had to pick TS prior to these changes being on the table was that I knew how hard clues would be to complete without it.

If this revised change goes through, there's no reason for me to have picked TS. I can't see why anyone would pick the relic, its essentially useless. Clue stacking only becomes useful as a means of increasing the number of clues you can get before having to complete/drop a step. That's nothing - that's just allowing someone to decide if they want to finish what they were doing before they complete a clue or not, no time saved, just a small bit of QoL.

Our other benefit is that we receive clues more regularly - but so do US! I don't have the statistics on how many we stand to receive in comparison to how a clever US player could pick tasks for high clue rates. But the time investment of clues isn't really in getting them, its running around completing them.

Whereas on the other hand, US presents a massive time save that has already been realized by most serious players, to combat training efficiency, midgame item grinds and slayer training efficiency. TS players will still get none of that, they will have essentially wasted a relic choice, even if only this revised change goes through.

And yes, the whole design of this part of the league does suck from a completionist standpoint because it essentially means I'm having to argue against other players being able to complete clues reliably - but that was the design of the league when it launched. That was what we signed up for. We all had access to the same information in terms of relics and tasks. I'd really like to be able to go to the Wilderness, or Godwars - it'd make things more fun for me - but I didn't choose those areas, that's the spirit of the league.

13-Nov-2020 20:11:57

Jun

2015

David964

Posts: 502 Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

I greatly prefer the original proposition and am genuninely confused on how it doesn't help the people who went either of the Tier 4 relics. If anything, I see it as helping those who went treasure seeker MORE SO than those that went unnatural selection. In the original proposition, you'd have a stack of 20 hard clue cases become 20 hard caskets. You can do your clues whenever you want and not have to end up with only a tiny fraction of what should have been.

The people who are so adamantly against these changes are the same people who vote no on PVP updates but have never done any PVP and never will. They want the game to stay exactly how unfun it is for everyone because change is bad. It saddens me a lot that the small number of people who don't want to see this improvement have gotten through to the dev team. This is a video game and changes should be made on a case by case basis to increase the fun that everyone has with it, as was said in the QA on Thursday.

Please go with the original proposal of clues region locking themselves to your selected regions.

13-Nov-2020 20:13:46

Nov

2022

Lemako

Posts: 14 Bronze Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

First of all, thank you Jagex for having the integrity to listen to further feedback for putting the first proposal through.

I think the second proposal is much better and likely to keep the majority of players happy. TSers still get a distinct advantage doing clues (and a reason to actually pick the relic), where as USers are now able to complete clues. It's a shame for TSers who chose areas such as the wilderness in order to increase clue completion but no solution will be perfect.

Given the three options I would rank them:

1.) Second Proposal
2.) No change.
3.) First Proposal

13-Nov-2020 20:16:02

FlaxOnEm

Posts: 8 Bronze Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

I agree that T4 relics and the current state of clue scrolls present bad design from a completionist standpoint.

But the gamemode was released in a state where it was infeasible to do an activity, and we were offered a relic to make that activity feasible. Now you want to change the game to make the activity feasible to everyone. By doing this, you invalidate that relic.

13-Nov-2020 20:29:38

Nov

2023

Kikobob

Posts: 2 Bronze Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

This doesn't address the issue of creating a MASSIVE buff to Unnatural Selection over Treasure Seeker.

The point of picking TS is so that you can juggle clues much more easily with a bonus of completing them in fewer steps and stacking them. I.e making clues viable to complete.

By letting US effectively auto juggle clues indefinitely with zero effort gives them the main perk of TS for free while giving TS only a VERY minor buff.

If you really want to make such a big change mid-league you should allow players to rethink their relics as tactics will change with a completely different environment.

13-Nov-2020 20:33:31

Mar

2023

Mephobia

Posts: 8 Bronze Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

This sounds awesome! Great compromise for both sides!

raise_emoji: Discord : PapaPositiveYT#0001

13-Nov-2020 20:45:05

Weenaru

Posts: 9 Bronze Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Although the second proposal is less outrageous than the first one, I still think it favors Unnatural Selection pretty much in terms of balance.

I picked Treasure Seeker and just recently I learned about clue juggling, which I find pretty fun, although not everyone might agree with me. How would this proposal affect me? I would not need to juggle clues anymore, which doesn't really matter. Otherwise there is no change.

So let's say I picked Unnatural Selection instead. In addition to the already existing perks (Which most people agree are better than Treasure Seeker perks), I would now even be able to complete clues reliably.

The only reason I (and many others) picked Treasure Seeker was so that we would have a realistic chance of completing hard+ clues. If you take that away from us, what reason do we have left for picking Treasure Seeker? Sure, we complete clues at a faster rate, but the time saved from Treasure Seeker is nowhere near the time saved if we had picked Unnatural Selection instead. If I want a trident, I have to go through god knows how many tasks until I finally get a kraken task. And if the RNG gods hates me, that one kraken task will not be enough. And I haven't even mentioned farming slayer points and getting a herb sack and rune pouch.
Meanwhile, even if someone with Unnatural Selection gets a clue outside of their region, they can just drop it and go back to slaying while keeping their clue progress.

So no, I don't support the second proposal either. It offers little to no benifit for those with Treasure Seeker, while it opens up a lot of possibilities for those with Unnatural Selection.

My suggestion is: If the clue system absolutely has to be changed in some way so that those with the Slayer relic are able to do them consistently, give the Clue relic people some kind of slayer-related buff too.

Making the second proposal a part of the Treasure Seeker perks is okay though, as it barely has any impact on the balance between the relics.

13-Nov-2020 20:50:36

Weenaru

Posts: 9 Bronze Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

I just had another idea on how to make clues doable for Unnatural Selection while still not leaving Treasure Seeker in the dust.

Treasure Seeker changes:
- Region locked clues, they are always completable
- The second proposal, no need for clue juggling

Unnatural Selection changes:
- Every superior slayer creature you kill gives you 1 clue point (Don't reward clue points on task completed, since people will only spam spider tasks if that's the case)
- These clue points can along with a clue, be exchanged at a slayer master for another clue of the same difficulty, but with a completable step and with the same amount of previously completed steps
Beginner clue = Free
Easy clue = 1 clue point
Medium clue = 2 clue points
Hard clue = 3 clue points
Elite clue = 4 clue points
Master clue = 5 clue points

This provides a big boost to Treasure Seeker (More of what they already have) and a similiarly big boost to Unnatural Selection (Little of what they do not have), and it makes clues completable for everyone. This also makes it so that if someone with Unnatural Seeker wants to complete an elite clue, they would have to spend a similiar amount of time as someone with Treasure Seeker who is trying to get a specific slayer task. If someone with Unnatural Seeker gets a completable clue as a drop all the way from the beginning to the casket, then that is just pure luck, just as if someone with Treasure Seeker got the slayer task they wanted on the first assignment.

13-Nov-2020 21:39:45

Bawnty

Posts: 1 Bronze Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

The crux of the issue appears to be that one of the incentives for picking treasure seeker - one buff is lost when all clues move to being limited to your unlocked areas, said buff being the trivialisation of clue juggling.

The second proposal retains said buff, but the first is ultimately better for gameplay in the league. Simply, a new buff needs to be added to treasure seeker to retain the original reason for its consideration and selection. I suggest this takes one of two flavours:

- An increase in the rate (5%~?) of rarer items from clues, or...
- An additional loot roll when opening a casket

Which means that the relic holds its original incentive, doesn't punish treasure seekers for picking it in retrospect and both parties get to enjoy the full suite of potential upgrades, but with one retaining a clear advantage in the clue department.

13-Nov-2020 21:45:08

Forums

Clue Scroll Changes