RUBIUM NERFED AGAIN (OSRS)


Date	2026-05-26
Type	news-opinion
Video	youtu.be/Fo-0k8WROo4

Summary

Gnomonkey reacts to Jagex's revised Rubium proposal, which reverts the XP cut but keeps tick manipulation removed, cancels the AFK increase and lowers guaranteed splinters, plus a smithing XP change for incendiary and chain shot cannonballs. He argues the revision is a double nerf, that the smithing method was not broken, and proposes a geode-based alternative.

Outline

0:00 Introduction: Jagex revises its Rubium proposal after Reddit feedback
0:31 Jagex's revised mining changes: 30 XP kept, no tick manipulation, AFK time unchanged, splinters capped at two
1:35 Why Jagex nerfed Rubium: comparison to Granite
2:34 Gnomonkey's alternative: higher mining requirement for Rubium
4:06 Revised smithing changes for incendiary and chain shot cannonballs
5:03 Smithing method rates and why he thinks it was not broken
6:35 Rubium mining and smithing supply are tied together
7:36 Criticism of Rubium becoming a Motherlode Mine style AFK method
8:29 Geode idea to serve both tick manipulators and AFK players
10:07 Sailing's general design vibe and closing thoughts on tick manipulation

Topics covered

Update: Rubium and smithing nerfs

(0:00) After Reddit feedback that the first proposed Rubium nerfs went too far, Jagex published a revised proposal; Gnomonkey considers the revision effectively a second nerf.
(0:31) In the revised proposal Jagex reverted the planned Rubium mining XP cut, so Rubium keeps granting 30 XP per successful mining interaction instead of the proposed 24 XP, but tick manipulation at Rubium rocks is still removed.
(1:02) Jagex dropped its plan to raise the guaranteed number of successful Rubium mining attempts before the rock depletes from two to three, so AFK time is unchanged.
(1:02) Following concerns that more splinters would reduce their value, Jagex changed the guaranteed Rubium splinters based on mining level to cap at two instead of three.
(1:35) Gnomonkey summarises the revision as the same XP as before, no tick manipulation, no AFK increase and fewer splinters, which he sarcastically calls a very based change in response to Reddit wanting more XP.
(4:06) Jagex said that its original smithing proposal of 2 to 5 XP would be replaced with meaningful but lower smithing XP from incendiary and chain shot cannonballs, positioning the activity as a viable lower-intensity smithing training method.
(4:34) Jagex said it wants smithing XP per bar to be in a much healthier spot, which Gnomonkey considers an odd argument because Giants' Foundry already gives XP twice for a bar.

Rubium

(1:35) Rubium initially gave basically the same mining XP per hour as Granite and had almost the same Mining requirement, which Gnomonkey says is 47 for Rubium versus 45 for Granite.
(1:35) Mining Rubium requires 60 Sailing, which makes it a bit harder to access than Granite.
(2:05) Unlike Granite, Rubium is a useful resource used to make incendiary cannonballs, while Granite is basically worthless even if banked; Gnomonkey says Jagex nerfed Rubium because it was better than Granite in every way.
(2:05) Rubium is not stackable when mined, so it clogs the inventory like Granite.
(6:35) Making incendiary cannonballs requires Rubium, so reducing the Rubium obtained means fewer cannonballs: slower collection on Ironman and higher prices on a main account.

Opinion: Rubium mining design

(2:34) Gnomonkey considers it okay for Sailing to unlock a method better than Granite as long as the requirements are reasonable; he suggests 60 Sailing and between 70 and 80 Mining, which would make Rubium just a more relaxed Granite.
(3:04) Gnomonkey says that at the original requirements players would never do Granite, and it would be healthier to use Granite until about 70 to 80 Mining and move to Rubium later after doing some Sailing.
(3:36) Gnomonkey thinks requiring higher Mining for a useful resource like Rubium makes sense in game logic, and does not see why Jagex turns Rubium into a Motherlode Mine style AFK method with worse XP and barely any of the useful resource.
(7:36) Gnomonkey says turning Rubium into a roughly five-second-AFK method like Motherlode Mine adds nothing, since methods like that exist for Mining everywhere and Motherlode Mine already exists.
(7:36) Gnomonkey says it was an opportunity to add a mining method more interesting than Granite, with higher requirements or a slightly more intensive method, to justify the same XP.
(8:29) Gnomonkey proposes that each Rubium mine also yield a Rubium geode alongside the splinters; players could drop the geodes for raw XP or take them to an anvil elsewhere in the cave to break them down for a big chunk of splinters.
(9:02) Gnomonkey says the geode idea would keep tick manipulation, which then requires dropping items and raises actions per minute, while still letting AFK players break geodes down, so both play styles could be served.
(9:33) Gnomonkey says Jagex chose to please neither group, since AFK players and tick manipulators are both unhappy, and that supporting both would only need more effort.

Rubium

(5:03) Gnomonkey says the original incendiary cannonball smithing method gave about a full minute of AFK time and roughly 250k Smithing XP per hour, as an extremely expensive method; he does not remember the exact cost per XP.
(5:03) Gnomonkey notes that gold bar smithing gives about 350k XP per hour for a reasonable player, around 500k with trading, and he says gold bars are cheap, usually only one to five GP per XP by his recollection.
(5:37) Gnomonkey says he is partly going back on his first video: he does not think the Rubium smithing method, at 250k XP per hour, was broken, since it is AFK but costs a lot, or on Ironman takes hours of collecting to do one hour of training.
(6:07) Gnomonkey thinks Jagex should have waited a few weeks to see where Rubium prices and the meta settle before nerfing the smithing, since it was not actually broken at release.
(6:35) Gnomonkey says a worse Rubium mining method means fewer miners and a lower supply, which raises the price of Rubium and cannonballs.
(7:07) Gnomonkey does not understand the claim that smithing XP per bar needs to be in a much healthier spot, and thinks the smithing should have been left alone for a month to see if it was a problem.

Tick manipulation

(8:03) Gnomonkey disagrees with the common take that tick manipulation had to be removed to safeguard Granite, and says Jagex has not really been saying that, only trying to flesh out Mining with a new method.
(10:39) Gnomonkey, a former tick manipulation hater, says trying it showed it is engaging and gets you into a flow, and he wishes more people would be open to it.

Opinion: Sailing training methods are nerfed

(9:33) Gnomonkey feels that with every Sailing training method, nothing is allowed to be good, everything has to be more intensive yet yield lots of resources, citing trawling.
(10:07) Gnomonkey says Jagex is trying to make Sailing a money skill, but it is not working.
(10:07) Gnomonkey thinks it is okay for Sailing to give access to better methods, as long as it makes sense, for example a method that is Granite but better with a significant Sailing requirement.
(10:34) Gnomonkey does not understand why Jagex keeps nerfing potentially interesting Sailing content so nothing is ever useful.

Granite

(2:34) Gnomonkey says some Granite sweats may want its integrity maintained, but he does not care about Granite being devalued by a better method, and does not think Jagex cares either.
(3:04) Gnomonkey says the integrity of Mining in general should be maintained, and that a method that makes Granite pointless at the same requirements would not be healthy.