[Jake]

Everyone relax. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, as they are suggestions.

I don't think that this should be added though dug. It'd be classed as unfair and they would gain an unfair advantage, Such as donating for items/status in game.

[Dug]

Everyone relax. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, as they are suggestions.

I don't think that this should be added though dug. It'd be classed as unfair and they would gain an unfair advantage, Such as donating for items/status in game.

I'm not saying that I agree to some monetary requirement to gain access to p2p aspects, i was just wondering what the community was thinking about the subject. Alright, well thanks for your thoughts guys and girls.

[Brodie]

Something will have to be done, otherwise they would have wasted their time seperating non-members and members worlds. I know, no one wants to pay money for membership, nor does anyone really want to pay ingame currency. However I do feel there should be a certain total level that you need to achieve before playing on a P2P world since that is basically what we all are doing currently in the Alpha stage.

[Jake]

Something will have to be done, otherwise they would have wasted their time seperating non-members and members worlds. I know, no one wants to pay money for membership, nor does anyone really want to pay ingame currency. However I do feel there should be a certain total level that you need to achieve before playing on a P2P world since that is basically what we all are doing currently in the Alpha stage.

How would it be a waste of time? F2P worlds and P2P worlds will be separate, I know for a fact some people prefer F2P over P2P and the same the other way. Having a requirement to be able to play a P2P world is really really dumb. What's going to happen to new players who join? We crave a player base and they're all waiting for P2P and they'll be rushing in. Now they wouldn't really want to play if they came to play P2P but they weren't able to because they don't have the requirements due to not playing Alpha.

We want players to join, We don't want to drive them away.

[Brodie]

How would it be a waste of time? F2P worlds and P2P worlds will be separate, I know for a fact some people prefer F2P over P2P and the same the other way. Having a requirement to be able to play a P2P world is really really dumb. What's going to happen to new players who join? We crave a player base and they're all waiting for P2P and they'll be rushing in. Now they wouldn't really want to play if they came to play P2P but they weren't able to because they don't have the requirements due to not playing Alpha.

We want players to join, We don't want to drive them away.
[/quote]

Basically what I'm saying is most players would prefer P2P over F2P and the F2P worlds would be rather empty, unless the P2P worlds are full and waiting on spots to be free. I just don't want to see the developers put in so much effort to seperate the worlds and have everyone playing P2P and no one F2P. Also the total level was a suggestion, not really a MUST.

[Oxycontin]

100% support, 500k in my opinion or 5$ for lifetime.

[99]

There's a few pros and cons for this.

The pros are that members areas likely won't be as filled as F2P, and if there ends up being bots, there will be extremely few of them in members areas. On another remake, one problem is that there's a lot of flax bots in Seers' Village, and that would be pretty much impossible to do with this. Also, fletching won't be the way most people make money when they first join, which makes it hard to wc because every training spot is crowded.

The cons are that it would be a bit annoying, and people who make pures would have to train other skills. And some people would probably leave, if they think that they have to pay for members.

[Ovos]

The total level idea is pretty good, but we really need a f2p world (at least the wilderness) for pking. My fondest memories from 2006 were castle and giants pking with my lvl 40 friends.

[godpwnage]

Perhaps some limit should be applied but what that limit is, i am unsure

[Jake]

Basically what I'm saying is most players would prefer P2P over F2P and the F2P worlds would be rather empty,

I can't stress how false that is. So many people didn't have membership back in 2006. People come to these 06 remakes to relive memories, F2P worlds will have much use.

Everyone, You're missing the point. It's going to be the most unapealing thing to new players. If you need a requirement/payment to be able to play a P2P world then they're going to go back to wherever they came from. Did you ever need a requirement to gain access to P2P worlds back in 06? No. Besides the fact that you needed to pay, Runerebels is not a money hungry server/organisation. They're doing this out of pure enjoyment of doing it. Not for money at all.

[Brodie]

I will take your word for it. I honestly dont mind, but having more players would definitely make this server a lot better.

[Grizx]

The only thing I ever did in f2p was PK with low level to mid level pures the more people we can keep in the f2p world the better for me. 

[Stuart]

I think this is a good idea. Money is pretty easy to make if you have the time. If you want to go further in game, you have to pay for passage.

[Brad]

This is a cool idea. It shouldn't have to be gold though, it can be ores, logs, bones, ect. Many ways of doing it. I would love to see this.

[HappyguyForum]

eh its a good idea.. but not for a remake