Please dont add mentions of DDoS.
Many RS players experience genuine lag and call it a DDoS attack, without even realising what such an attack entails.
DoS means Denial of Service. Likewise, DDoS is a distributed denial of service attack. DoS attacks are completely useless due to current high speed internet connections - it's impossible for someone to spam out a connection using their own - we are not in the days of dialup.
A DDoS attack involves having many (usually thousands) of connections repeatedly spam a single target's connection. This involves either mass coordinated effort of thousands of volunteers, or, more commonly, the use of a botnet - that is, a large group of computers infected with some form of trojan that lets the botnet owner control them without the knowledge of the computer owner.
Ontop of this, one must actually have a target to attack - that being their IP address. Players cannot obtain the IP address of another player through Runescape gameplay. Unless they had previously gained access to the player's account, there's no way they would have a target to attack.
DDoS attacks would more likely be targeted at an entire runescape server. Botnet usage has a large black market involved around it - cost of hiring a botnet one to target a single Runescape player wouldn't result in any kind of profit.
If someone claims they DDoSed you, they're lying and are trying to wind you up. Nuff said. 126.96.36.199 22:35, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
Flower game odds Edit
- In all variations of the Flower Game, the gambler will trade the host any number of coins and bet on a certain outcome, depending on which game is played. If the flower matches the bet, the host will award the gambler with a prize (usually 3 or 4 times higher than the original bet). This is advertised in the following format, as an example: "Flower Game 4x", meaning the payout is 4 times the bet.
It also says:
- A typical rule is that the bet is multiplied by 3 and returned to the gambler. The gambler has overall about 40% chance of winning, while the host's chance is the rest – 60%.
I think the mistake is the "multiplied by 3", for the hot and cold game at least. The host will only pay back double the original bet, which puts the odds in his/her favour by 60% vs 40%. I'll change the article. Bronzedagger (talk) 01:17, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
"Legality" of Gambling over the yearsEdit
If I may: Original Jagex Rule 2 pre-defined Jagex' idea of what is and what isn't a "scam".
"Trust trades" (Where, in one trade, one person is given an extremely unbalanced amount of value for the mere promise of repayment in the immediate future [as opposed to gifting, lending, or friendly-overpaying, where it's between two people assumed to be friends, as opposed to two random people who only just ran into each other], similar trust trade examples are similar rule-breaking actions/claims: "Trimming" and "Doubling"). They were at one point reportable and at one point in the distant past actually had action taken. Gambling in-and-of-itself relies on a trust trade to start off, regardless whether or not the host repays in the future. When Toy Horses sparked the very first idea to create a gambling game, there were people who had their acccounts temporarily banned, and I even had a friend who was permanently banned due to it.
Over the years, Jagex has merely decreased the quantity and severity of the action that they would take, due to the increasing number of people using it as a method of "fast cash" either by stealing gamblers' money or [during a legitimate game] winning/losing. What further exacerbated the issue was the "Updated" rules' decrease in description on all rules with multiple facets.
I believe that Jagex' viewed trust trades as a globally-identified "scam", and decided that as such, it wasn't worth reminding people of. Prior to the RWT banning a while back, which removed a number of hosters from the game, I'd heard of a few griefed hosters (some of which turned to RWT to recoup their losses) who were banned /specifically/ for hosting, which tells me that Jagex still believed it as against the rules, just not as heavy a priority (back-burnered partially due to an increase in botting). Furthermore, their change of Toy Horses and removal of Dicing (Which upset /me/ greatly. I hosted in-game Dungeons and Dragons games with a few friends because of the dice) just adds to my belief that it was /always/ viewed as against the ToS.
That having been said, I'm not going to get into an edit war just to fix this article, as a number of hosters in-game have gotten in arguments with me regarding the ToS-status of gambling, and I'd rather make my point in the Talk page instead of dealing with fixing a not-so-common-knowledge wikia error.
- Hey, I was the one who recently rewrote the player-run section of this page. It was in response to Jagex finally formalising their position on gambling, i.e. making it completely illegal and nullifying the most common games of chance out there. That said, I'm not sure what you're trying to say here; are you for or against the recent rule change, and what do you think needs fixing about the page-as-it-is? 22:45, March 23, 2013 (UTC)
- I'm neither for nor against the rule change, because it /isn't/ a change. I'm pointing out that it instead was a reminder [for myself and other 10+ year players] and a clarification [for anyone who arrived after the rules were truncated and de-numerated]. Their past speaks for their position on gambling, and it has /always/ been that gambling is against the terms of service... "Illegal", as you put it. As I pointed out for subsequent evidence to that: they changed Toy Horses and removed Dicing as ways to /stop/ gambling, and only now that their main distractor [bots] is a lesser issue, they can stand up and essentially say: "We're going to resume enforcing this rule"...
- Therefore, the things I think that need changing are:
- "technically, there was no rule in RuneScape against gambling at the time, and an official response from Jagex had yet to be heard." <~ Should be removed because of Rule 2's direct statement about Trust Trading being classified as a scam in Jagex' eyes. That solidifies Jagex' stance and opinion/response.
- "Until the March 2013 update, players could not be reported for gambling, although players that witness a scam could always do so." <~ Because Trust Trading was classified as a scam through Rule 2, players /could/ be reported for gambling, but Jagex for a long time was focused on the botting problem above anything else, and rarely took action for most other big issues [but /not/ never. They've banned people for it prior to the RWT ban sessions], hence their quick-fix/do-little change [Horses/Dice]Trunkuza (talk) 01:27, March 24, 2013 (UTC)