samurai_fly

Yes I get that now -__-

Sir Vyvin in Falador. EDIT: Oh wow, I just got his name #-o

Two costumes as a reward: first [hide][/hide] second [hide][/hide]

Reward: [hide] Alvani's robes, and a rock which spawns a burning chicken. Maybe something extra from roddeck? (Where's roddeck?) [/hide]

AND WE HAVE A WINNER!

nope... :( I'm not entirely sure there'll be a fourth item either.

I tried it with two plate body, plate legs, even plate skirt, but no such luck :/

I just had the same idea. Testing now :P

I don't think so, that doesn't fit with the style of the other two clues.

You're on the right track. I've done the first two, stuck on the last :( spill! I don't know how to do the hiding thing though, and I don't want to just give away the answers :P hide tags: [hide] Spoiler Here [/hide] Okay, cool. These are all anagrams and synonyms and such. First clue: [hide] A ghost speaking = 'woo', lair = 'den', told to be quiet = 'sh', give in = 'yield', without a "why" = eild, so the answer is wooden shield. [/hide] Second: [hide] six is the number. sibling = bro, New Zealand = NZ, (so bronze), spain = 's', promise = word, so the answer is bronze sword. [/hide] Third: [hide] not too sure about this one. "our arm" is an anagram of 'armour', but I'm not sure about the rest. Obviously we need two of them though. [/hide] That's all I've got so far. EDIT: seems LrdOfDth beat me to the first two.

You're on the right track. I've done the first two, stuck on the last :( spill! I don't know how to do the hiding thing though, and I don't want to just give away the answers :P

You're on the right track. I've done the first two, stuck on the last :(

I think I'm going to quit this thread. No matter how many times I say it, people just keep ignoring it. You have NO SOLID EVIDENCE of innocent people being banned for macroing. You have nothing but heresay, nothing but words from the mouths of the accused, who will always deny their involvement to the very end. Have fun with your fruitless discussion.

Do you have any proof of these accusations? Or are you just rehashing an old argument you heard somewhere? I may be wrong, but I personally have yet to see any evidence of these claims of people being banned for mousekeys. Bear in mind that second hand accounts are unreliable at best, and supposed first hand accounts are even less reliable without any proof.

JaGEx has already stated that they won't be banning people using mousekeys, what makes you so certain that they will?

You would rather they went soft and let things go back to how they were pre-GE/wilderness-get-rid-off-ness-ness? To be perfectly honest, if they catch someone who is, in their honest opinion, a bot (bear in mind that they are in the best possible position to know this), then they have every right to ban them and deny any chance of an appeal. Your tone suggests that you believe there are many people being banned erroneously, but are you able to provide evidence of anyone who has without a doubt been wrongfully banned? I said it before, I'll say it again, if you play the game honestly, and keep your account secure, then you'll have nothing to worry about.

Yep.

One could claim that "A Tail of Two Kitties" would have been far too obvious a pun. The way I think of it, "A Tail of Two Cats" is a pun on a pun. One would expect it to be a tale of two kitties, but it catches you out, and BAM! HEADSHOT! I mean, CATS! It's somewhat more subtle that way. [hide=OFFTOPIC]BTW, I just realised that I'm replying to you in two different threads #-o believe me when I say its a coincidence, and nothing more.[/hide]

Ravenkana: Okay, here's what I think. NOTE: This is only my opinion. I have no idea what actually goes on behind the hallowed doors of JaGEx Ltd, but this is what I would do if it was my company/I was a programmer on their team. I assume, and it seems a fair assumption to make, that a lot of the macro-programs out there will be basic things that will be VERY easy to detect. We can assume then that JaGEx can be very sure that an account presenting with such obvious tell-tale signs as are shown by such a program is definitely botting, and can be banned with very little input from a human. This could include, but is not necessarily limited to, the types of macro-programs that interact directly with the RuneScape servers via a separate client. Any other account that exhibits "suspicious" activity will have a log kept of this activity. Once it reaches a certain point, when the software is reasonably certain that the player is macroing, then they are added to the pile of accounts to be checked by a human staff member. Depending on the data, this could involve nothing more than a cursory glance at the evidence - I'm sure you can appreciate that once they have seen how a certain macro-program works, they will become very good at recognising the signs it presents. If the evidence proves inconclusive, then perhaps it is checked in more detail by a human, or perhaps it is added to a program for further macro-detection, to be returned at a later date. Another thing you should realise is that if these macro-programs are available to your average joe to download, and these will make up the vast majority of macro-programs, then JaGEx can download them too, and they can reverse-engineer them to see how they work. Once they know how they work, detecting them will be that much easier. As an addendum, I never said that JaGEx staff were infallible, I was just stating that it was not left purely to the machines, as you were suggesting. I'm sure that if there is reasonable doubt in their mind as to whether a person was macroing or not, or indeed any doubt at all, they would give the player the benefit of the doubt. JaGEx themselves have stated that they "do not ban accounts lightly" - this suggests to me that if you play the game honestly, and without breaking the rules, you have nothing to fear. Finally, to those saying that lucipher was banned unjustly, without inside information, there is no way you can be sure exactly what he was banned for. After the ridiculousness of the glitchathon that was the latest update, and the claims (later said to be false) of lost lent items on the forums that followed, one must take any information one reads on the forums with a grain of salt. I'm not saying he wasn't banned unjustly, I'm just saying that you can't be sure that he was.

Ah, but you assume that JaGEx relies purely on their computer's to make that judgement, when it has already been stated in this thread that this is not true. Sure, lets assume that the computer software got it wrong, and flagged an innocent. That's all it has done though, flagged it. JaGEx have been quoted saying that after their system flags a person, a HUMAN checks each one personally, to ensure that the computer got it right. Even then, if ALL this fails, a person wrongfully accused has not had all of their avenues of contact with JaGEx removed, just the easiest ones. Imagine, if you will, a hypothetical situation. 10,000 macroers, botters, autoers, whatever, are banned. If half of these people appeal, JaGEx has 5,000 appeals to read from people who know that they have committed a crime and haven't got away with it, yet try their luck anyway. This is valuable time JaGEx staff don't have.if out of 10,000 bans, there was 1 wrongfully accused, I guarantee you they would find a way to contact JaGEx. While we talk philosophy, all of this has been mentioned already in this thread, which isn't long, so I assume you've read it. You, then, are committing one of the worst crimes in philosophy: you ignore perfectly valid arguments simply because they disagree with your own.

Ravenkana: You seem so sure that they're lying, but can you prove it? It is a dangerous assumption to make. While we're talking lawsuits, have you ever heard of a little thing called libel? Making unfounded claims about anybody that have the potential to damage their reputation is treading in dangerous territory. To the other people who are talking about JaGEx monitoring what people are running on their computers and such, the JVM runs in a sandbox when running applets. This is a security measure put in place so that a java applet cannot access files on a computer, or do other such nefarious things. The only way they would be able to detect a program running, I believe, would be if it interacted with their servers or clients in any way. This is the way in which the "best" (and I use the term VERY lightly) macroing programs work I believe. Another option you have is programs that move the mouse, and these are, as has been mentioned earlier, prone to failure and mistakes in coding. I imagine it is VERY difficult to code in how to handle randoms, let alone deal with the problem of appearing lifelike. It has been said earlier, but it bears repeating: the Turing test has yet to be beaten.

I often seem to get comments about my name (Samurai Fly for those too lazy to look a few cm to your left -_-). I also have a few other accounts i quite like, or old one's of my brother's that he doesn't use anymore: Ufologist - my very first account :o (2001 sometime) Sin is Jecht - noob account with bunny ears :D (SPOILER, if you haven't played FFX yet -_-) Some of my brother's ones: Bomb Iraq - this one is still active somehow! Camel's Bum Trademegoods - I like this one :P and various others I can't remember.

I suspect this is to do with the recent update, in which the combat level max was raised to 138. The revenants are supposed to reflect the now gone pkers, so it makes sense they'd release stronger revenants with the combat max increase.

Good point. That'd work.

I'll admit that it is a bit annoying having to bank mid run, but really it doesn't cost you all that much extra time i believe, and I have been sometimes getting up to 15-20 extra bars per ring (never a full load extra though), which when you are training high level smithing saves you rings and, it could be argued, actually does save you time. My reasoning for this? Since you are occasionally smithing 2 bars at one time, you are getting the 150 (or whatever the number is) bars in about the same time you would get 140, so although you may have to do an extra run to the bank, you still should gain, or at least not lose, time.