quelmotz

You're talking about logicality in Runescape? Lol... Just because RS isn't logical presently isn't an excuse to aggravate the illogicality. How is it illogical that a Warhammer can have same speed as a Scimitar? So apparently you have not heard about the laws of inertia and mass, balance means nothing to you and everything is light as a feather. @SirHemen: Holy crap, I've heard of ignorant laymen but you completely beat the lot. I mean it doesn't take a scientific genius to figure out it takes more effort to swing a warhammer than a scimitar and therefore the scimitar would hit faster because the warhammer is heavier... DPS = damage per second = accuracy-defense x average damage (which includes speed). Since defense (and sometimes your accuracy too) of the opponent varies, DPS is not a constant value, and therefore whips have poorer DPS vs. dragons for example, but they have far better DPS vs other monsters. Slashing weapons will almost always reign supreme. There's no need to argue about "players not using crushing/stabbing weapons" - if they were better in XXX case, a significant number of players would use it in that XXX case. And I have yet to see you produce evidence supporting your claims that warhammers do more damage per second vs plated opponents in PvP. I do understand that warhammers will do more damage PER HIT, which could lead to the illusion that they do more damage per second, which I believe is not true.

You're talking about logicality in Runescape? Lol... Just because RS isn't logical presently isn't an excuse to aggravate the illogicality.

How are you so sure? Don't tell me you're a Jagex employee? If you don't know, quit assuming and trying to discourage others.

Heard that? I actually offer suggestions and solutions to the problems stated, unlike you. All you do is debate - does that solve the problems in Runescape? I suggest you go and check out some threads before you start making incredulous claims.

Most people only use dragon dagger P++ for the SPECIAL ATTACK, not the dagger's "normal" attack itself. Yeah sure you can claim its a use but still slash overpower just about everything else. Godswords do crush? Please - +132 slash vs +80 crush. Who in his/her right mind would use godswords to crush, other than on some stuff like waterfiends? Most armors have almost negligible differences in defense vs. crush and slash. If other types of weapons do better, everyone would be using them, unless they cost ridiculously high or something. Word gets around RS fast. I clearly stated that crush and stab weapons DO HAVE USES, but slashing weapons are much more useful, and probably have a few times the uses compared to the two of them added together. Define "a lot". Maybe it was just coincidence on some, or maybe personal gut feeling made your opinion biased? I highly doubt 75% or so of monsters can be killed more efficiently using crush/stab compared to slash. On the contrary, it's the opposite IMO. NO!! That'll make RuneScape ridiculously illogical. How the heck could somebody hit with a warhammer as fast as a scimitar or dagger? And furthermore warhammers have better stats except the stats are made less useful due to its slow speed.

This is round 2 of the thread "Crushing and stabbing weps never used", which died a few months or so ago. I've revamped the thread and solutions to make it clearer and make sure the solutions are more specific and practical. Problem The issue I want to raise here is the fact that slashing weapons reign supreme in melee combat. I am NOT saying crushing/stabbing weapons do not have their own minor uses, such as killing waterfiends, etc, but I'm saying that in 95+% of the cases, it's better if you take slashing weapons. This clearly shows how weak crushing/stabbing weapons are. So what I'm going to suggest is a solution to the problem, to make crushing/stabbing weapons balanced with slashing weapons. Solution The solution I suggest has two parts: 1. Directly improving crushing/stabbing weapons. 2. Indirectly improving crushing/stabbing weapons by significantly widening the difference between the defensive stats of chainmail vs. stab and slash/crush, and plate armor vs. crush and slash/stab. I'll only suggest improvements to the various weapons that exist from bronze-rune (or dragon if applicable). I will not suggest improvements to other crushing/stabbing weapons attained from quests (especially member quests, since I don't know about them at all). Please also take note before I go into the individual weapons themselves, that I am not taking special attacks into account. Firstly, I am not a member and thus I am not able to comment on the efficiency of special attacks, and secondly special attacks often give a boost in power such that the difference between the weapon types are barely applicable, e.g. dragon dagger's special, which is very powerful as far as I know. Thirdly, it is impossible to judge whether a weapon needs nerfing/improving solely based on its special. For example the dragon scimitar has a rather weak special attack, but scimitars are one of the most efficient and common weapons in RuneScape. -------- Dagger: Right now it is by far inferior to scimitars or even longswords, as one of the weakest if not THE weakest weapon in the game. I also find it absurd that you attack as fast with a tiny, light dagger as compared to a heavier scimitar. Either increase the dagger's speed to 7 (hits every 1.8 seconds) and improve some of its offensive stats, or increase its speed to 8 (hits every 1.2 seconds) and perhaps lower its strength slightly. Mace: A very weak weapon, regardless of whether you use its crush/stab attack. Leave its speed as it is, and drastically increase its prayer bonus (perhaps double?) or give it more strength and a bit more prayer bonus (maybe 1.5 times). I'd prefer the second though - it hits ridiculously weakly as of now. Shortsword: Although it can be classified as a "slashing" weapon, it's still quite weak, so what I think is a suitable update is to make it a stronger but slower version of the dagger. Leave it's speed at 6, but increase its stab and decrease its slash, such that it is a quicker, but weaker version of the longsword. Longsword: I'll just suggest slight improvements to its slash accuracy and strength to make it more balanced with the scimitar. Warhammer: Lower its accuracy but GREATLY boost its strength bonus. A warhammer isn't an accurate weapon due to its rather slow speed, but when it does hit...let's just say you don't want to be wearing the armor a warhammer is pounding on. Battleaxe: Maybe boost its accuracy slightly to balance it with the scimitar. --------- Helmets: Boost the rune medium helm to be equal to the rune full helm, EXCEPT that it is stronger in crush than the rune full helm, but weaker in stab (I mean there's a huge hole in the face unlike the tiny gaps in the rune full helm, so opponents can stab you easier, right?). Shields: Make the square shield equilavent to the kite shield, except that it is weak against crush whereas the kite is weak against stab. Body: Boost the chainmail to equal power with the platemail, except it is weaker against stab but stronger against crush, whereas the plate is weaker against crush but stronger against stab. Both have equal defense against slash. Legs: Nothing to change, they're as strong as each other. ** Take note that when I say weaker/stronger I mean SIGNIFICANTLY weaker/stronger. So if someone is wearing rune med helm, kite shield, chainmail and any legs, he'll take an average of at least 2-3 damage more vs. a stabbing weapon compared to the person wearing rune full helm, platebody, square shield and any legs. ------------- If you have any comments, constructive criticisms, please feel free to post. Don't flame or spam please. As you can see I put in at least 1 hour or so to make this thread. At least spend 2-3 minutes writing a reply.

Setup: RC Robes (top, bottom, and hat) Rune Gauntlets Rune Kite or berzerker Leather Boots Amulet of Power Staff of Air Lumbridge Ring (3) Has somewhere in the +70 defence stats, +15ish mage bonus. Should be more than enough for going up against someone in full rune (who, btw, has lousy mage defense bonus). If they take their armor off, so much the better. Finish them with a rune scimitar or 2h. Its what I do, and it used to be very successful before jagex changed autocast. I haven't got the clicking down, but one of these days I will. I didn't mention that. I think you double posted accidentally and accidentally quoted my name.

Fixed your typo. Not trying to be a :ugeek: or anything. Just to add on a very important point: You've mentioned offense - what about defense? I know "the best defense is offense", but still...Mages' "defense" suck like [cabbage]. Notice how I quoted the word defense? Mages have so poor armor that if a warrior manages to get up close the mage is almost guaranteed to die provided he/she doesn't run. Give mages some decent, non-degradable, reasonably priced armor. FoG robes are either severely overpriced or degrade to fast to use efficiently. RC robes - 50 runecrafting? I'm not saying it's impossible to get for F2P, but the effort put in =/= result. Melee's armor is cheap and easy to get compared to mages, and FAR better. Yeah sure they have bind but 5 seconds including 2.4 seconds of casting time? Half the time of the bind is spent casting for god's sake. Give F2P mage snare and make the bind's effect only take place when it hits, i.e. after casting. And perhaps splitbark armor and MAYBE wave spells. Note that everything mentioned above refers to F2P.

Off-topic: Does anyone know when Bachelor Fridge is coming out? Anyway, I like to look of the update, but since almost no people play whenever I log in (damned time zones!) I can't try the different stuff out yet.

I would appreciate a calmer approach to this debate, it is a debate not a 'rant', that is why I began this thread! :shame: An alternative method would, I assume, be just that. I return to my example of doing agility, the guides advise moving up to the harder courses as your skill level improves. I found for myself (with no advice) that I preferred to stay and do agility in Brimhaven (which I might add, is hardly mentioned in the RS manual). This was clearly an 'alternative' method, that did not fit with the advice of the guides. I now suggest this to others as a potentially more 'fun' way to train agility, especially with a friend or two. I now do my farming in an 'alternative' way, a lot of experienced players appear to spend mills buying high level tree seeds to plant. Using the guides, I have found a different (if slower) method of farming that suits me better, and have already passed on that advice successfully to someone who has found that method suits them too. Yet they may not have considered it without the discussion that took place about the method I had worked out. I have now done Barrows (finally), and was totally reliant on the personal experience of another player, I read the guides, but just could not get a clear idea of what I was up against so did not get around to it. I am glad I have done it now, and I will return, but it is thanks to the personal experience of another player. Ultimately it is about personal preference, but I do feel that I would want advice from a player with the experience rather than someone who did not play RS, or had only read the information. Direct me to the guides by all means, but not to say that it shouldbe done this way. Let's look at the context. I asked jrhairychest the same question thrice and he has yet to provide a proper answer, instead continuously flaming me for "aggression" which he himself asked for. I'd love to see you find a quote where I explicitly stated that I knew something like how to train from level 98 magic to level 99 magic. Can't right? I only defended the fact that someone who reads guides is effectively as knowledgeable as someone who has "practical experience". "Alternative methods" are based on personal preference, as you've admitted. So if you were to tell someone your "alternative method", compared to someone reading up on another method based on a guide, is there a difference? Not really. Either way the person will probably try out the method which is based on his/her personal preference, which is roughly a 50-50 chance. And by the way, words of emphasising the point to get it through like typing in CAPS are not the same as words of aggression, i.e. cursing. ----- I found the methods stated in the guides didn't suit my personal preference. I found that the methods given by some players didn't suit my preference either. Did I say they cover all the exceptions? No. :roll: Desperate for quotes that are nonexistent eh?

Its not about things being the end of the world, I expect progress and updates, look at the new spells and a number of updates for higher levels. No problem with them as you have to work your way to that level before you can use them, and it adds incentive. It has always been about variety and not making things 'easier' or 'faster'. According to your opinion, easier = faster. According to mine, easier =/= faster. There's nothing wrong with having different opinions. And as I mentioned earlier, the use of the term "easier" was because the terms were not clearly defined. In case you missed the clear reference to 'easier' :rolleyes: As I said, easier in this case = "faster". Why don't you define key terms properly earlier in the debate then? I work full time and managed to achieve a 99, so am definitely not a 'no lifer' as you call us. I admire gamers who use their skills to make skill development interesting for themselves, it doesn't need to be as tedious as you portray. That only applies to those that are gunning for the fastest (and easiest) 99, just to get a cape, rather than enjoying the game for what it is. See the discussion thread on skill capes, notice that the firemaking and cooking capes etc, are often dismissed as having a 'low status' because they are the 'easiest' to get. You play P2P with plenty of interesting/more fun/faster ways of training. I play the lousy F2P version, with boring and slow ways of training. I happen to not want to fork out approximately SGD$9 per month, so don't flame me for not subscribing to membership. "Easier" in this case refers to "faster". No doubt cooking and firemaking are "faster" to get. They are also "easy" as there are plenty of guides telling you how to do it, but the same goes for smithing, mining, etc, but they are "slow" skills to train - so a 99 in them is respected. And it appears they can't even use their common sense to make the game more interesting for themselves, see my point above. RS is only tedious if you play it that way. See my point above. I recommend you give the F2P version of the game a try before you flame me for not trying to find ways to make the game interesting. Yup....I'm getting the message, and you wonder why I question your interest in debating about RS? There's a difference between PLAYING RS and DEBATING about it. There's absolutely nothing wrong IMHO with debating about something you've quit playing. You cannot change the emphasis of what you have stated in this thread, it is very clear above. Also making reference to 'faster' in the context you are using amounts to 'easier' anyway. As I stated, it is down to the individual to play the game the way that suits them best, maybe some just cannot be bothered to think through a game strategy or how to create fun, like yourself. But need to have 'fun' thrown at them, so they don't have to think at all, even though there is a huge game to be creative in. :huh: "Faster" means less time used to do something. "Easier" means requiring less intelligence to find an effective method to train something. That's my definition. "Huge game"? As I said, try F2P before you comment. What the majority might find interesting in F2P past some level in training can be counted by fingers. I'm not saying no one likes grinding smithing to 99 in F2P for example, but MOST people don't. And please DON'T comment on other's choice to not subscribe to membership. Your $6 or so you pay is equilavent to my $9. And sometimes it's the issue of permission, not money.

Can you please look at the requirements for RC robes? They require 50 runecrafting and quite a bit more time invested into playing the GoP. Compare it to melee's equilavent armors, which clearly require FAR FAR less effort, and are effectively the same. ------ My rationale for an update to F2P magic is that since Jagex can give melee and range such powerful armor and weapons, why are mages left behind with their crappy stuff or equipment that are not practical (i.e. degrade too fast to be efficient)/require too much effort for similar rewards?

I agree. Especially for F2P magic, even though I can't really ask too much from Jagex to update F2P magic. But my rationale is that if they can give melee all that fancy armor and stuff, why not magic?

Actually that's quite a decent post. On the one hand I see your point but it doesn't quite read right. The trouble is there are plenty of high level players in the game who still play, so if they didn't find it fun they wouldn't play. They'd just do something else. I really don't buy into the argument of 'thats boring but I'll do it anyway'. No matter how much they moan players get fun out of it. The fun also lessens when you have players who 'Just have to get 99' so will try to take the quickest way possible without thought. They get bored/frustrated and cry that its hard. You have plenty of 99's and I really don't think that you got them under torture. You did it because you enjoyed playing and doing it, the end result the achievement. Fun is no problem, but not when it comes at the expense of a degree of difficulty. That could be cost (boo hiss!!!) or the amount of time investment. I'm not against things that are fun to do at all. If you read the initial parts of this post you'd see that according to some players the game will get easier because 'its inevitable', and thats wrong. Oh really? I've cited plenty of examples where the game was made what Troacctid termed as "faster". I just used the word "easier" as the definitions of "easy" weren't even stated then. If troacctid had put his post in front the term "faster" would have been what I used. I said the game would become "more convenient" and "easier". In this case these terms refer to "faster". I'm not saying it's inevitable that the game would become "easier" AS IN requiring less skill. I'm saying it would become "easier" as in faster and more convenient to train. I was never against reducing the "skill" required to play the game. But you'll have to classify all those so-called "baby" updates according to whether they made the game easier or not. I believe they didn't make the game require less so-called "skill", as they just made it more "convenient" or whatever you call it by preventing players from getting scammed/lured. You didn't need "skill" to avoid getting scammed. You need common sense. And we also have to define the word "skill". Is it intellect? Persistence? Resistance to tedium? How good you are at the game? IMO skill is how good you are at the game, not meaning stats/monetary possessions. As in how effecient you train. But it's a very unclear line in RuneScape. I think in games in FunOrb, skill basically refers more-or-less to your rating, which directly reflects how many games you've won and by how much. As there's no real "winning" in RuneScape, "skill" is harder to define.

First off, I'd like to remind you of the massive flaming you're going to get by some of the not-so-nice members in the TIF. Brace yourself for some serious debating. I made an old thread in the rants forum about how bad F2P magic is and the rant grew into a massive 24 page or so thread. The title is fine I think. Or perhaps change it to "Surge spells - widening the gap between P2P and F2P?" or something like that, just to be more specific. I believe adding stronger spells to F2P isn't going to help much. Members still have all their nice ancient spells that are far more powerful than the F2P versions, even if wave spells were given to F2P for example. I think snare should definitely be given to F2P, along with better armor. (I mean they don't even have non-degrading bottom robes, whereas melee has a level 40 armor with far better stats than mages' pathetic crap)

@RayOxide: I recommend you give it a thorough chance. It's far from Arcanists as it's not turn-based, so it adds a lot of tension as you don't have the time to slowly calculate your moves and all that. And I find it more "advanced", if you know what I mean. Furthermore, even F2P players can have a decent chance at getting high rating, like me, unlike arcanists where F2P can't even touch a rated game. @Life_mage12: Yeah, I enjoyed the game earlier on, when there weren't so many artillery spammers. I just jumped in with my slave gunner and slaughtered just about anything in my way. It was a great feeling that almost nothing could stop you. I often got longest killing streaks of like 6+ people or something lol. Anyway now the "golden age" of gunners is over. I've already long switched to the superior RSC, but sometimes I still de-stress in unrated games with the gunner slave. And it still works well in maps like city where there are few artillery users.

This thread is just for any sort of general discussion regarding Steel Sentinels, be it strategy, builds, rants about the poor rating system, etc. I myself am a quite experience S.S. player, having played 200 rated games (and far more unrated games) and having a rating of 1809. I also have quite a lot of achievements and such too, though I don't want to sacrifice my rating to try and get some of the tougher achievements like Fusion Tag. Personally I prefer Rifled Sniper Cannons.

That's a fact you have to accept as a pure. You've VOLUNTARILY chosen to be disadvantaged in some parts of the game in return for better performance in PvP situations. Why should Jagex help you when they never FORCED you to be a pure?

The guides were written for members for god's sake. Didn't I bold the word "F2P"? Quit avoiding the point. So what if you get 3 mil using a method different from a guide's method that allows you to get 3 mil? Anyone can give their own POV of how do train a certain skill in the game. Even if they are experienced in it, so what? Their POV would still be different from yours. As I've said multiple times - everyone is different. If a guide gives a X POV, an experienced player gives Y POV, a player who reads the guide will have effectively the same information as a player who asked the experienced player for information because everyone has different preferences. Stop trying to ignore the fact. It's impossible to cover every single possible exception, and I'm sure you know that. An experienced player would give even less detail about exceptions as he doesn't have as much time to detail it out in a short time ingame or in a post. Generally anyway. I know there are some players who would willingly write a huge paragraph on how to train some skills. What's the freaking point of "alternative methods"? You keep dwelling on it and eluding my question. So I'll bold it for you. What is the point of an alternative method that is effectively the same, but based on personal preference? Player X reads a guide, which is Method A based on the writer's personal preference. Player Y gets info from an expereienced player, which is Method B based on his point of view. So it is fair to say that Method A is an alternative from Method B, or vice versa. But there's effectively no difference in how effective the methods are given that player X and Y have different personal preferences from their respective sources of information. ------ And by the way, stop being a hypocrite. You keep saying I'm getting to worked up in the other thread, yet you seem to be the one using a lot of sarcasm and cutting comments and ad hominems. If you're going to strongly criticise people for something, at least practise what you preach so strongly.

Addy and mith ores are more valuable than they have every been. This is incentive alone to mine it. They are not as hard to mine as rune ore. Gold did need a boost, the fact that gold ore prices didn't crash with the living rock's update is proof enough. Gold ore prices are stable at 400+ gp. It's your opinion that mining is tedious and boring. Not all the skills have to be the same or easy. There are plenty of people who like mining. Again when you bring smithing into this argument you are basically saying smithing sucks. We haven't seen a smithing update yet. Mining is fine as it is especially for members. Well I was speaking more of F2P mining. F2P mining currently sucks like [cabbage], with absolutely horrible mining spots, especially for higher-level rocks like gold, mithril and adamantite (Not rune, rune's price is worth the trouble). Mining's goal is to SUPPLY SMITHING WITH ORES. The two skills are inter-connected, and not separate entities. If mining sucks, smithing will suck and vice versa. Please don't try to flame me for being a F2P beggar or what-not. If Jagex is going to introduce a new skill into F2P, they might as well fix the old skills first.

To err is to be human. :ugeek: Anyway, why not post something more relevant. I mean so what if "whose" is wrongly written as "who"? Everyone still understands the title.

What is the point of getting more mith and addy ores if there isn't more xp? Your rant seems to be about not having enough ores to smith. Why not title your rant smithing sucks. More mith and addy ores will never happen as items smithed can be alched making mining too rewarding. You picked the haunted mines as an example of how "impossible" it is to mine mith and addy this is untrue. I used to mine at the f2p hobgoblin mines in the wildy, that was a decent spot to get addy ores. After I got members I used to mine and smith bars using the magic spell at the grand tree mine. Also I even used to mine at the desert mine, there was a decent amount of ores there as well. The OP is very stubborn and has ignored the amazing gold ores and coal ores living caverns update. This single update has made mining popular. Also as gold is one of the best ways to level smithing with crafting gauntlets there is no reason to whine that smithing is impossible. You can DIY smithing now by just mining your own ores if you have the patience. Besides living caverns there are other things that make mining easier now: Varrock armour : Gives extra ores up to addy while mining, this is a significant bonus Shooting stars: Mining xp, free ores, free gp, free gems AND a bonus of extra ores for mining for a certain period of time Stealing creation pickaxes: DOUBLE MINING XP and it takes 12 minutes max to get these points if you do fast sc games Stealing creation hammer: DOUBLE SMITHING XP what more could you ask for and saves lots of gp while levelling smithing Blast furnace : Requires less ores to smith bars AND now there is a direct cart ride from GE to here AND because of personalized shops other players can't buy the noted ores you sell to the store And last but not least, not everyone has the summonning level for a pack yak, but with one it doesn't matter how far and incovenient the mine is just mine, fill and bank ores with a scroll. I DO NOT support more mining changes to make ores easier to get. The argument that monsters are bringing more bars and ores into the game vs players doesn't hold water. Where are you getting this information from? It was harder to mine before and there were plenty of mith and addy ores for sale. Most monsters do NOT drop noted bars or ores, there are a few such as aviansies etc. If anything more monsters should drop noted bars such as metallic dragons. The bulk of ores and bars are coming from players, not monsters. Mithril and Adamantite ores are ridiculously hard to mine. Frankly, the time/effort spent on them is not worth the reward. Low exp and not much value. Your arguments are one-sided. So what if gold and coal got a boost? Gold didn't need it, mithril and adamantite needed the boost. The point of making ores easier to get for the same exp is to supply smithing better with ores. Even if the bulk of ores comes from mining, it is not enough as not many people want to mine as it is not profitable, tedious and boring, thus not enough ores are supplied from miners and therefore smithing is harder to train.

@Erewhon2 First off, as I said, the guide could have easily been written by another lvl 3 skiller with high lvl smihing. He could have another method of doing things that was more enjoyable, profitable or providing higher exp which he wrote down in the guide. A single method can't be profitable, enjoyable and provides high exp at the same time (unless it is overpowered, which we assume is out of the question). Therefore perhaps the method provided in the guide is more exp-oriented whereas the advice provided by the lvl 3 skiller is more fun-oriented/money-oriented. Get what I mean? In a nutshell, what I am saying is guides are written by players with a lot of experience. Therefore regardless of whether you read a guide or ask a player with a lot of experience, what you will get is more-or-less the same, except that one might fit your personal preference more. And who can guarantee that a player/guide will give a more suitable method for training than the other? @Jrhairychest: Please stop bringing other topics into this topic or I shall be forced to report you to a mod. Stop denying an obvious, plain, clear, apparent fact. Guides are written by experienced players. Period. And so? You make say 3 mil thieving. Those people make 3 mil doing barrows/slayer. For example. The difference? Nothing. It's just different methods of earning the same reward. The process is based on your personal preference. Maybe those people enjoy slaying/doing barrows whereas you enjoy thieving? You fail to state a simple point - so what if you earn the same amount of money thieving as those people who slay/do barrows? Guides do also cover the ifs, buts and maybes, because simply - they are written by players. The players will also naturally state what you should do if you meet a certain situation based on prior experience. What makes you think guides don't cover the ifs, buts and maybes? And do you think a player in game is going to waste half an hour telling you every single detail about how to earn millions/day using his method? Fat chance. Whereas guides are written over days, and the writer has plenty of time to cover details and tell you what to do if an unlikely situation arises. But you've forgotten a really important point - different players have different needs and attitudes. I am not saying that a guide can tell you a perfect way to train that perfectly fits your style of play. However I am saying that a pleyer might also not be able to tell you a way to train that perfectly fits your style of play, as everyone is unique. In a nutshell: Two statements. Guides are written by players. Players differ from each other, and therefore the information they give might not perfectly suit you. Therefore regardless of whether you read guides or gain information from an experienced player the end result is the same. Guide X tells you to train combat on the Level 50 Giant Spiders in the Stronghold of Security. Clearly, this method is highly exp-oriented as it is fast, but you don't profit at all from it, in fact losing money due to food, teleports, etc costs. Player Y tells you to train combat on Moss Giants in the varrock dungeon. Although this method is slower in gaining EXP, you make a profit from the large variety of items the moss giants drop. Player Z, based on his experience, chooses to train combat on Greater Demons because he finds it exciting and fun. Though clearly it is inferior in drops and EXP, some players rate fun over all other criteria. So even if you are experienced in the game, your personalised method of doing things might be inferior in other players' eyes. On the other hand, the other players' methods are also inferior in your eyes as everyone has their own personal preference and opinion. Therefore a player who read guide X has as good a method of training combat as Player Z even though he didn't experience the training of combat on giant spiders himself, provided he is a highly exp-oriented player. If he isn't I'm sure the guide provided suitable alternatives to training for money-oriented players, though I've rarely seen guides who give "fun" ways to train.

I fully agree. That was what I was trying to say but apparently jrhairychest was too obsessed with the fact that I had much lower stats than him and therefore I was unqualified from airing my views openly, and ignored my points instead going for the fact that my stats were too low for me to make a proper statement without making a fool of myself. I was saying the game will always become more convenient and "easier". In this case my "easy" and "convenient" mean "faster". I gave clear examples proving this, like the Grand Exchange and the Rest feature, which definitely made the game faster and smoother, but not "easier" as in requiring less skill. Just because a merchant now has better "tools" to help him merchant, doesn't mean it completely removes the "skill" in the game. He still has to predict the fluctuation of the prices of items he is merchanting, and decide when to buy and sell or he will lose money/make no profit/make less profit. Just because there is a feature like Rest, making the game faster and smoother so there is no need to continuously walk around at snail's pace, doesn't mean the game is easier. Does Rest make training mining for example easier? I would like to see data on how long it takes to run and walk all the way to the bank compared to how long it takes to run until 0%, rest until 100% and run, ad infinitum. Even if rest does significantly reduce the time it takes for a miner to bank his ores, all it really does is make the training of mining less tedious, and not requiring less skill.