compfreak847

Exactly. But given a set of information, they think things through to come up with the best possible result. Sure, sometimes a few months later they find out that someone abused it or a previously-unheard of section was affected by it and it requires correction, but those are impossible to predict. I'm saying it would go up - someone would have to die and lose their dragon boots hundreds of times to counter ONE person losing a hilt in the above mentioned manner. One person saves his dragon boots, another person loses his newly-dropped Berserker ring. See above. That is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Just because there isn't an example to prove or disprove what your saying doesn't mean it's automatically correct, or indeed, by definition, has anything to do with you being correct. But we can't assume they would have, so we have to go with the most likely option.

Which part of that refers to bloodvields? I'm sort of curious, as apparently I missed the part where he switch from spectres to bloodvields. Two things: #1, yes, I was indeed talking about specters. See above. #2, I'm not saying that any of these are what makes it better or worse - I'm saying you have to consider them instead of going LULZ I DO TASKS IN 20 MINUTES AND U DO THEM IN 2 HOURS LOLZ HURR HURR UR AN IDIOT LEARN TO SLAY HURR HURR. Not that I'm referring to anyone in particular, of course. OK, I'm not understanding what your trying to say. Please explain further. My question is, are you referring to my methods (Using a cannon, equipments\invos etc., all not specific to a person and easy to chane) or my actual skills (Mousing speed, reaction time, coordination, specific to a person and impossible to change)? I thought you were referring to my physical computer usage skills with jabs about reaction time, and my response to abyssal and other timings were directed as such. Methods are something that can be changed and must be proven. And I'm pointing out that it is a factor of the randomness of hits. There are simply no other variables that can be simplified further. Remember, this isn't as if I tested two hours and measured the difference between them; I tested dozens of hours, and the difference between the maximum and minimum was 10%. But slayer is much more complex; instead of clicking a couple of times every 3 minutes, your required to attack each and every monster, pick up drops from far away and (on some tasks) use a cannon. Armored zombies was simply my way of showing that even with all possible chance of human error removed, there is still significant randomness from the combat system itself. See other, much longer threads where I go into details on the hit spread calculator; suffice to say, it is not simply a random number. Look, all rates were required to obtain slayer results. We didn't spend 40 pages talking about nothing; all rates for all tasks are in there. That chart was at the beginning; you and I went through each task until we found a number we both (at the time) believed to be correct based on testing. And your misunderstanding me on the numbers. As I said earlier, if two players with equal stats and methods slay at the same rate over a long period of time, they are going to obtain very close to the same results. Therefore, one of us is either lying outright, something that I would believe to be impossible at this range of the thread (If you or I was simply making up numbers, it should have come out before this or one of us would have given up), or somehow our methods are not matching up. Can you understand what the word is supposed to be? Again, ti's dyslexia (yes, that's another common typo of mine, but one that I usually catch before posting) swapping the "i" and "p". But it certainly doesn't obfuscate the meaning of the word. Who's to say you were not simply using it as an example? I could say that at Avansies I take no damage with protect from range, but it doesn't mean that's the method I used. Additionally, cannon was proven to be inefficient at Specters earlier in the thread, and I was assuming you were trying to remain as efficient as possible. As shown above, quite frequently playing detective and trying to reverse-engineer your methods from your outfit yields the incorrect interpretation - the reason methods should be outlined as well. Approx. 78k melee XP\h, not including 2.2 minute banking time, or an extra bank in the middle for an invo of rannars, meaning around 45 minutes per task and 19.5k slayer XP\h during testing. Informally, using aim, my rate drops to approx. 56k XP\h from distractions and waiting for one drop before attacking to reduce hassle. In the context of this thread: Sucks: Inferior to one or more other methods Best: Superior to all other methods [Most] Efficient: A method that results in the lowest possible overall time to complete a tasked based on money spent and overall XP gained. Don't bother posting videos. Editing and cropping mean the results from them appear to be whatever the poster wants them to be. I could post a video of me hitting nothing but 45s with a whip on abyssal demons, but it doesn't really prove anything.

How the hell does that even relate to my post? Here's the situation: I'm at Bandos. I can kill him in under 2 minutes, so with his fairly common high-value drops I would be making a massive (10m+ an hour) profit. However, that's balanced because I have to obtain 40 KC every time I run out of food (every 3 or so kills). Now, if I bring 500k cash, I can trade my friend for sharks every time I run low and camp there for hours, earning hundreds of millions at a rate of over 5 times what was previously obtained. What part of "increasing the speed GP is obtained by high level players by 500%" doesn't involve unbalancing the game?

Not without it counterbalancing by working against another person. Name a single instance where they thought something through, changed it, and later changed it again without a single ounce of feedback or additional info. Any update that a single person complained about or pointed out a single issue doesn't count, as that's extra info. For a set of given information there isn't a single case where they failed to think things through. I don't see how increasing overall value lost as well as unbalancing the economy and cost\reward balance of every monster is going to benefit ANYONE.

Therefore, fewer updates are bad. Yet you are saying that fewer updates are not bad. Do you enjoy updates or not? If you enjoy them, lesser enjoyment due to fewer updates is a "bad" thing; if you don't enjoy them, greater enjoyment due to fewer updates is a "good" thing. It's really quite simple; I don't see why your not seeing what I'm trying to say.

They've been convicted. And you usually make such informed posts... I know that; even if I had just read the title, I would have picked up on that :lol: I'll make it clearer: by "convicted", I meant convicted after the entire case, appeals and all, is finished and the 4 of them are sitting in jail contemplating how they are going to scrape together $4.5m. Now yes, I am aware that they will probably manage to get out of prison and only pay a fraction of the fine, but I'm using it to make a point. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent Sorry, but that's up for the judges to decide; they are the ones elected to determine where the line is drawn.

It's exclusive. If you like updates, reducing them is a bad thing and increasing them is a good thing. (Bad that the RSOF is opened) If you don't like updates, reducing them is a good thing and increasing them is a bad thing. (Good that the RSOF is opened). Since 'all updates' includes both good and bad, it boils down to "would you like updates to be released every day at the same quality that they currently are, or would you like updates to never be released again". It's a black and white situation, you can't both want fewer updates and want more.

CRAPCRAPCRAPCRAPCRAP *Gears up in anti-flame gear for the flood of noobs that will undoubtedly follow* I'm going to have a very busy next few months letting new players know that stupid, poorly thought out, spammy\flamey post aren't going to slip by me in rants. Beware all who read this, if ye shall post a post in ye olde rants forum that differs from my opinion in any way prepare to have a fight to the death ending with either me or both of us providing a massive amount of facts and sources to prove the other wrong. Don't make stupid posts that you can't back up or your gonna be called out on it, if not by anyone else then by me -.- -.- -.- Yeah, I'm being biased, stereotypical and pessimistic, but the facts are on my side. Unfortunately :| I hereby make the prediction that many rants will follow about TIFs community going to pot from this, similar to miniclip, and I hereby predict that those posts will have a point. Probably not as bad as they make it out to be, but they will have a point. Let's see how good of a prophet I am.

And my point is that the chances of forgetting to change it - even once - and dying to lose dozens of million in very high end items isn't worth the small chance that you'll save the price of a low ticket item. And that doesn't even count rare monster drops! Literally EVERY item that comes from a monster would have to have its drop rate nerfed, balancing it out so the average person lost fewer items on death but gained fewer items on monster, ending up with the same overall bank value, further changing the game from skill based to luck based and VASTLY complicating the items on death scenario, while actually making the problem described worse. Bad idea. Sorry, but the current idea is the best. Jagex didn't become the second largest online game corporation in the world by failing to think things through.

The part where "not caring if they were slowed down" turned into "not bothered". It was a simple yes or no question.

If a newspaper posted detailed instructions on how to break in and enter a government building, steal valuable items, and sold you the tools do to it do you think they would get into trouble? This case wasn't about the site, it was about making material available, of which they are unquestionably guilty. Quite honestly, I hope they are convicted. It's obvious the site isn't there to peddle legal, free downloads, it's just a matter of jumping through the legal loopholes.

Umm, NO. Incredibly stuipd and overpowered at ANY level, unless it costs at least 5m to use it. Infinite GWD\DKS\PKing\Fight Caves plz? Sorry, but this is one of the worst ideas I've heard in a very long time. It would completely and utterly unbalance and ruin the game. Anyway, they already have the banking part of it. Pack yak and imp boxes do a great job, especially the yak. High requirement, but works great.

Teletabs for members, how many level 20 FTPers are going to be running around in the wildy? At any rate, the "run behind a tree" method works fine, something that wouldn't defeat the usual low level PKers.

What? You do know they already banned discussion of gf\bfs long ago, and are handing out heavy punishments for such? As it happens I do not remember that. Is this on RSOF? I really don't bother with RSOF much at all so I wouldn't know the slightest thing about their rules. It was in an update on the main page a very long time ago. I really don't feel like hunting for it, so take my word for it. If you want to be stubborn and insist I find it, I will, but it IS there. I don't say something without having proof to back it up -.- I did state it was a fact, that was my opinion. And yes, I'll take your word for it. Now I feel bad that I didn't back up my post with the fact like I usually did. I quickly found it in the rules. I don't have a link to the newspost, but it's currently in the rules at Yeah, pretty cut and dried. Thanks for taking my word for it, though - at least it means I have a reputation :)

So do you like updates, or not? If you like updates, reducing them would be a bad thing. If you don't like updates, reducing them wouldn't bother you. I like updates and every now and then it's something I use, so it does bother me.

[/hide] Big congrats. You did the right thing, instead of going on rants and venting about an unfixable problem, you worked through and recovered. That's amazing, I would be royally pissed if I lost that much + defender + fire cape :shock: :shock: I was browsing tif like I usually do while I kill bork after the cutscene, and apparently the mage hit me high or something so when I switched back I was in fally. I wasn't really that annoyed, just surprised it actually happened after 200+ borks. Then I was like 'Meh, waste of time. Guess I'll go get it back :| '. That really is advisable, I now have everything back (because I still had my addy defender <3:) and all it has cost me are that bones that should have gotten me 84-85 pray (well, slightly more but that was just deducted from my cash pile) :P Yeah, I had almost exactly the same thing happen to me. Suddenly found out I was at 21 HP and forgot to withdraw my tele. Was in bandos and all my leet gear from monster hunting, woulda lost around 40m. Luckily I made it out by killing him and home teleing (he was red barred, I didn't have time to run to the portal, I was praying that the mage didn't decide to cast a spell in the last few secondss).

But thusfar it has been quite obvious that I am not "bad" at slayer - the same methods achieve very similar rates; we are using standardized equipments and inventories, and from timings ranging from reaction time tests to abyss run timing to XP\kill speed comparison at everything from GWD to monster hunting, I know that I am highly efficient (I recently came in less then a second slower then Zarfot's all time best rate for an abyss run - and he's been doing it dozens of times longer then I have), and I've only seen one other person in game who can come close to matching me. But without any facts, it's very hard to do any comparison. We need data on it to include this in our XP rates. This was from dozens of hours of testing the largest difference I've ever experienced. Generally it's within 5%. I'm simply saying that 10 minutes is just too short to get numbers within a few percentage points, especially at a "complex" monster like Specters. You couldn't hunt Kree for 5 minutes and establish a kill per hour rate accurate to within a percent or two. I was operating under the impression that you had actually read my previous posts dealing with numbers. Have you or haven't you? That could clear things up significantly. And banking time were also hammered out earlier in the thread. Honesty, you seem to have forgotten everything we discussed earlier. Ehh? I don't see a typo in the first sentance, though I could have made it clearer by adding quotes: You can drop the "stuipd" argument (i.e. the argument that I'm an idiot). My responses have been on target and made complete sense in the context of your post. I'm not sure why your continuing to harp on that point instead of responding to the actual post. If you can't understand my posts, it is MY fault. If I can't understand your posts, it is YOUR fault. We're both reasonably (or so I believe) intelligent human beings, and should be quite capable of grasping any point laid out in a reasonbly well communicated manner. Basically, all I'm saying is don't say "Your post made no sense, so its your fault. Oh, and its your fault you didn't think my post made any sense". Notice the key word "if". It's another example of why you should be listing your methods. In response to your question: I go through 30-40 in a task, at a cost of approx. 11k. And that is referring to your continued accusation of my "misreading" of your typo, not the argument itself. Why are you continually trying to swap factual arguments for personal arguments? Define "reasonably close" and "some". Probability deals with numbers, not generic terms meaning "from 2 to infinity".

I missed the point where he ran the numbers for cannon at specters, perhaps you could point it out? Or are you just making it up to avoid the fact that you either refuse to or cannot do so yourself? :roll: Where are YOUR rates to differ? You can believe 2 + 2 = 5 and be as optimistic as you want about it, but unless you have actual numerical proof of it, your mistaking your opinions for facts =D> Unfortunately, time isn't the only perspective. I typed up a very long and detailed response to that pont, and it boiled down to these basic paramaters working against the cannon that morningrise is trying to pretend don't exist: #1: Experience lost due to cannon's damage being worth less (2 range XP from a cannon, worth far less then melee XP vs. 4 melee XP & 1.33 HP XP from melee) #2: Combat rounds lost due to far away kills from cannons extended range (Specific to tasks, but if a cannon kills a monster 10 squares away from the next nearest one, your going to lose at least 2 whip hits running over to pick up a good drop) #3: Combat rounds lost due to faster kills (Specific to tasks, worse on low HP monsters); basically, if a monster dies in 2 whip hits + various cannon hits, your going to lose more time running to the next monster and picking up the drops. This sometimes occurs with melee, but it's a time that does not go down with faster kills and works against cannons speed. #4: Speeds related to tasks that a cannon does not affect (i.e. banking, getting a new task, running to the current one) #5: Costs directly related to a cannon (Cannonballs) #6: Costs related to cannon usage (Prayer potions due to multi combat) #7: Spawn time issues (Harder at kalphites; at crowded times, it's very difficult to get a full world, and even then you spend a significant amount of time waiting for respawns - all the while receiving much less XP per task and spending more money thanks to the cannon). There were quite a few other factors, but those were the main ones that I calculated to end up with a final figure that represented the earnings necessary to make the method equally efficient to melee; if it was over 400k, it was less efficient, and if it was under it was more efficient. Quite simple, and no amount of ignorance or opinions can change that.

Oh, dur. TIF autolinks killed them. Here's the fixed version with URL tags: http://www.mechscapeworld.com/images/research/JagexFinancialOverview.gif http://www.mechscapeworld.com/images/research/JagexStaff.jpg Proof that *someone* didn't even bother looking at my sources, though =D> I know, but it was a totally separate debate. I said "opening up the forums gives us fewer updates". You said "I don't like updates" :?

What? You do know they already banned discussion of gf\bfs long ago, and are handing out heavy punishments for such? As it happens I do not remember that. Is this on RSOF? I really don't bother with RSOF much at all so I wouldn't know the slightest thing about their rules. It was in an update on the main page a very long time ago. I really don't feel like hunting for it, so take my word for it. If you want to be stubborn and insist I find it, I will, but it IS there. I don't say something without having proof to back it up -.- Yay. Another thread we agreed on. I was primed and ready for a long debate when I saw you had responded :lol:

Big congrats. You did the right thing, instead of going on rants and venting about an unfixable problem, you worked through and recovered. That's amazing, I would be royally pissed if I lost that much + defender + fire cape :shock: :shock:

I'm assuming that none of you read the earlier portion of this thread, or you would haev seen that for most task (including specters), cannon was proved to be inefficient and made slayer look WORSE. Using the rates for a cannon instead of meleeing would make slayer less efficient in comparison and armored zombies better. Now, I could have made the argument that because most people cannon I should use those numbers to make slayer look worse, but I believe that only the most efficient methods should be used. So for those telling me to use a cannon, that's EXACTLY why I don't simply post my end rates, results, and methods here: had you gone back to read the beginning of the thread, you would have seen that using a cannon would make slayer look worse -.- @Ydraisle: Busy in RL atm, I'll respond to your post later this afternoon.

Where do the rules say that? I might have overlooked them, but all I saw is the section 1.1 where it said rules like offensive language applied to TIF too #-o

It's not as much as a problem as you make it to be. In my opinion, it's due to the loss of the mature regualrs that used to keep discussions on topic and accurate. People like Muggi, Salim, Kent, Bubsa, and far more of the oldies have left for good. There's only a few people I can think of off the top of my head that I remember from the 'old times', Makoto (doesn't post much) and Zirro (More off topic then rs-related posts), Me, and some of the mods are about all I can think of right now.

And you lost sense of context. Sorry, but these are real people your talking to, not an animated computer avatar. Try walking up to a female co-worker or student that you've never before seen in your life, and ask them loudly if they want to make babies. See what happens. What? You do know they already banned discussion of gf\bfs long ago, and are handing out heavy punishments for such?