Just a thought about the state of the economy on east. ifr

[kathras]

Just a thought about the state of the economy on east.

Was just wondering if anyone else would agree that excessive duping on east is simply a reaction to the ruststorm. Dupers need to create more dupes in order to compensate for all the poofing. I just recently came back to d2 after a break since v1.09. Its almost a different game. Dupes were an issue back then but not nearly as bad as they are now. My question is, has ruststorm actually done more harm than good?

 

[MysticDragon]

I don't know... Without ruststorm, it would be like D1...

 

[Quietus]

I don't know... Without ruststorm, it would be like D1...

Agreed. Dupers will dupe until no one buys any more dupes. As long as the general public has want for more runewords (and they always will, regardless of whether or not those duped runes disappear), dupers will exist. Running RustStorm on a regular basis, however, will be a deterrent because of the frequency people will lose runes at.

 

[Dystopianday]

The passive ruststorm as it is now doesn't really encourage or discourage duping. HRs are the basis of the economy, and it's easy to get around the ruststorm by duping an even number of HRs and the gem needed to cube them up. Bam, legit runes.

Even an active ruststorm would do little about this.

 

[MysticDragon]

The passive ruststorm as it is now doesn't really encourage or discourage duping. HRs are the basis of the economy, and it's easy to get around the ruststorm by duping an even number of HRs and the gem needed to cube them up. Bam, legit runes.

Even an active ruststorm would do little about this.

I'm pretty sure cubing has no effect. The runes will still poof.

 

[templecrasher]

<snip>it's easy to get around the ruststorm by duping an even number of HRs and the gem needed to cube them up. Bam, legit runes.

Even an active ruststorm would do little about this.

There is no proof of that at all. Many people have brought up this exact issue before and none have ever proved that they won't poof. if it starts with a dupe, it stays a dupe.

 

[Grymlok]

There is no proof of that at all. Many people have brought up this exact issue before and none have ever proved that they won't poof. if it starts with a dupe, it stays a dupe.

There is also no proof that the runes are not legit, either. I've always been curious about this. It seems reasonable, in terms of implementation, for either to be true. I just haven't seen any proof/evidence.

 

[templecrasher]

In the arguments I've seen, people have brought up the theory that the ID of the beginning rune stays with it as it is transmuted up. If that is the case then you can kiss it goodbye. I don't know enough about programming to know if this is true, but some great minds on this board have all backed this idea. I can't accurately remember whether someone has said they lost one or not, and I can't find most of those old threads now, but my opinion (and many other people's who know more than me), is that it will poof.

 

[xrance]

has anyone seen runewords disappear? I mean i know runes, sojs. uniques and such poof, but is there any proof that runewords poof? cause if they do. Then wouldnt like all runewords poof mostly?

 

[conor rocks]

Not in 1.11, but iv'e heard of trade scams where it looks like they are trading something but not.