Economy Reset

[Palidino]

obviously aiming for a skill/pvm server ddnt work now did it, its 2017 no one wants to skill

I can agree with that to an extent, although easy servers that managed to get a lot of hype before releasing have always thrived, even way back when. Economy servers have always had their place too, but as I mentioned somewhere recently, about half the top servers are PK/spawn servers and that isn't entirely something "new" that has become popular only recently.

Anyway we can't be a successful economy server if we do resets, it kind of goes against the point. A spawn server can easily be reset because at the end of the day it's a spawn server and there are no major losses; resetting an economy based server actually screws long term players over in a way that they don't just recover from in a few days. Especially when you consider the point that you want a reset is because there are too many items or whatever you think is bad, to avoid a repeat would mean making it harder which just hurts long standing players even further.

A more ideal solution is the proposed balanced of the hard mode/group ironman, where everything would be harder and the economy of those accounts would be limited to others in that mode, allowing the normal mode to stay the same or even become easier to further separate the two. This way the people who WANT to game to be challenging and items costing money out the ass can have that, while others who are looking for a more casual play compared to OSRS still have that and without resetting anyone.

[stronq quy]

I can agree with that to an extent, although easy servers that managed to get a lot of hype before releasing have always thrived, even way back when. Economy servers have always had their place too, but as I mentioned somewhere recently, about half the top servers are PK/spawn servers and that isn't entirely something "new" that has become popular only recently.

Anyway we can't be a successful economy server if we do resets, it kind of goes against the point. A spawn server can easily be reset because at the end of the day it's a spawn server and there are no major losses; resetting an economy based server actually screws long term players over in a way that they don't just recover from in a few days. Especially when you consider the point that you want a reset is because there are too many items or whatever you think is bad, to avoid a repeat would mean making it harder which just hurts long standing players even further.

A more ideal solution is the proposed balanced of the hard mode/group ironman, where everything would be harder and the economy of those accounts would be limited to others in that mode, allowing the normal mode to stay the same or even become easier to further separate the two. This way the people who WANT to game to be challenging and items costing money out the ass can have that, while others who are looking for a more casual play compared to OSRS still have that and without resetting anyone.

can't be a successful server if you do resets but also can't be successful if the eco is less balanced than gang rape, the difference between these last versions of battlescape and the bs1-bs4 versions is you had loads of players at launch, most teams played bs and they were there from the start, you don't have that now. You launched this server with a low quantity of players, it stayed that way (don't know what server peaked at but yea, everyone quit anyways.) The playerbases of every server always depends on pkers, and you know this, no playerbase is BASED off of skillers and whatnot, therefore you have to reach out to the MAJORITY of the playerbase, then again you released loads of unfinished projects and that was a bad choice too. To the point,i dont think an eco reset would fix the problem entirely, in my own opinion (what i think would work) is that you would get a hold of known pkers on rs,have them advertise your server coming out as brand new (in this case, a reset is neccessary.) other than that i don't see this game growing

[Palidino]

can't be a successful server if you do resets but also can't be successful if the eco is less balanced than gang rape, the difference between these last versions of battlescape and the bs1-bs4 versions is you had loads of players at launch, most teams played bs and they were there from the start, you don't have that now. You launched this server with a low quantity of players, it stayed that way (don't know what server peaked at but yea, everyone quit anyways.) The playerbases of every server always depends on pkers, and you know this, no playerbase is BASED off of skillers and whatnot, therefore you have to reach out to the MAJORITY of the playerbase, then again you released loads of unfinished projects and that was a bad choice too. To the point,i dont think an eco reset would fix the problem entirely, in my own opinion (what i think would work) is that you would get a hold of known pkers on rs,have them advertise your server coming out as brand new (in this case, a reset is neccessary.) other than that i don't see this game growing

I still don't see how a reset benefits anything. Resetting means all combat stats lost, including PKers who might return if there were more people playing, and also would mean all items become rare for awhile and shoot back up in price (which is negative when directing a reset at attracting PKers). If anything it seems more likely a reset would attract skillers and pvmers who would see a reset as a way to compete for firsts, but then at the cost of potentially losing more players than would ultimately be gained.

[stronq quy]

I still don't see how a reset benefits anything. Resetting means all combat stats lost, including PKers who might return if there were more people playing, and also would mean all items become rare for awhile and shoot back up in price (which is negative when directing a reset at attracting PKers). If anything it seems more likely a reset would attract skillers and pvmers who would see a reset as a way to compete for firsts, but then at the cost of potentially losing more players than would ultimately be gained.

risk vs reward thing, i don't know, at the end of the day it's up to you,

[Palidino]

risk vs reward thing, i don't know, at the end of the day it's up to you,

We might not be doing great but we're sure beating the 742 days that really weren't that long ago. For now, I don't think the risk is worth possibly ending up back that low.

[stronq quy]

We might not be doing great but we're sure beating the 742 days that really weren't that long ago. For now, I don't think the risk is worth possibly ending up back that low.

Ight