Systemless

Here is another old map (maybe about 1/2 to one year after release of runescape 2?). After all it seems not modified. Finding a good guess for the date should be possible by looking at the official runescape news archive. http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/7735/map.jpg .: Systemless :.

The underground dungeons do overlap already in many places - Kalphite lair overlaps with Guthix Tears Area. - TzHaar city overlaps with Brimhaven dungeon, Agility arena and Kramja Volcano dungeon. - Dorgeshuun Mines overlap with the Fire Altar - Chaos Dungeon overlaps Edgville dungeon of course this could be solved by assuming that there are several dungeon levels (which has to be assumed anyway for areas like Security dungeon). But the problem is that Jagex has been a bit sloppy when it comes to placing dunegons. The lava maze for example has the entrances exchanged. When you go down the ladder west of the lava labyrinth you end up in the east of the dungeon, while when you go down the ladder more in the east you end up in the west. The distance between the entrances do fit very well, but they are connect wrongly. Another ugly place is the Ogre city chamber, which is just too large when compared to the dinstance between entrances and exits above ground. The dungeon of Tolna can be seen from the varrock sewers ingame. So we know where Jagex placed it technically. But then again the ladder does not fit with the entrance. as far as I know there is no way to build a 100% consistent map of the underground world of runescape, because it is inconsistent in itself. An applet with my current attempt at mapping runescape in three levels (normal map, dungeon map, and an special map for locations that can not be located or do not fit onto the dungeon map) can be found here http://rscommunity.de/rune/map/mapplet.php I would love to see the mess in the dungeon maps cleaned up. .: Systemless :.

the colored images are a bit stretched. You need to scale it to about 100% x 105% to correct the wrong aspect ratio. Areas like the maze should be a square and not a rectangle. .: Systemless :.

there exists another image which could be interesting in this context ;) its only in black and white and the compression is a bit strong, but you can still see the layout of the main plane. And braindeath is here about one worldmap height north of lunar isle. the center region of the landscape north of the main land of Runescape seems to match pretty well with the second image from page 16. one strange thing about this image are the three instances of the bounty hunter locations in the north east corner of the image. If you compare their size to the size of the actual bounty hunter minigame in the wilderness then you see that they are about 1.5 times larger. Either the map is wrong, or Jagex cheated when they created the minigame. Which is true could be checked ingame I guess by comparing the size of the location from the inside to the size of the outside.

As far as I can remember the above images came from the official runescape worldmap, although they where never published officially. About making a true map, I myself choose not to map 100% exactly what the game might use internally. Reasons for that: - dungeon entrance locations do not fit everywhere, even in cases where ladders are used. This is ok if the geometry layout is used just internally with "teleports" and hidden mostly from the user. - for some locations there are more than one "copy". This is ok again, if you need two versions of a location for a quest, but for a map it is very unnatural - some dungeons are at obviously wrong locations. Again this is ok technically but does not result in a nice map. So I tried to create a map which pictures as accurate as possible what the ingame experience of the dungeon map is like. Every dungeon got its place where one would expect it from playing the game. Everything which does not have any location link ingame or which overlaps with a dungeon I placed on a third map. The result can be seen on our German RsCommunity Helpsite for those interested (Switch to dungeon level with the red "!"). http://www.rscommunity.de/rune/map/mapplet.php .: Systemless :.

varrock and edge dungeons are there, a bit north and east of the center of the first map. underground pass is there as well (at least parts of it) in the west of the first map. .: Systemless :.

there existed already more or less complete images once about how the "true" worldmap looks like. Of course they are no longer complete, but they are correct with respect to what can be seen ingame by looking from one dungeon to the next. the problem with these "correct" maps is, that entrance locations to the dungeons do not really fit everywhere with the main worldmap. In some places the spacial arrangement does fit, but in other places it is wrong. So the technical placement of dungeons is sometimes different than what the ingame experience suggests. .: Systemless :.

We have started building a worldmap with an underground layer (plus an additional layer for non-locateable places) on our German runescape helpsite http://www.rscommunity.de/rune/map/mapplet.php you need to press the red "!" from the button menu to see the underground map. But building an underground map is not too easy, since the runescape underground world does not fit exactly at a all places. If you place one entry to a dungeon at the right place, then a second one might not fit with the main worldmap. .: Systemless :.

yes you have no moving parts, but you have still moving fluid (air). Now either you find the materials to build an insanely large structure which would allow you to keep the speed of the air you accelerate slow, or you stay within reasonable sized machines and have to accelerate to a higher speed. The insanely large structure will fail not only because you won't find the material to build it stiff enough, but also because it is just too large to be used. For a technical application, things that get larger than a common airplane or helicopter are very unpractical and come with a lot more trouble. Keep in mind that we have already a lifter system without losses: The airship. And the main problem with those are their delicate structure and their unhandy size. Now we would want a system of about the size and weight of a common helicopter, but with EHD thruster instead of a rotor. Thats ok, but you will need to generate about the same vertical airflow. Of course you won't have the additional speed of the rotor itself generating friction losses in the air. But still you will have a lot of fast flowing air around your electrodes and structure which will produce friction losses as well. My "lol" at the 1% was mainly, because I don't like any theoretical or under special conditions achieved efficiency numbers for which it is claimed that they may be achieved in a practical setting as well. If you supply the energy by wire and keep everything at an extremly low weight (very low air speeds) I am sure you can build pretty efficient helicopters from balsa and condenser foil. You can accelerate as many ions as you like, in the end what counts are how much air you accelerate using your thruster. If any ions leave your thruster you have not only the problem of your thruster getting charged itself, but as well that your efficency will be very poor, because the energy to create the ions would be lost. So what leaves your thruster is accelerated air, with the usual density. So this is not ion propulsion in the classical sense, since you use your ions only to accelerate air molecule in the end. There exist working ion thrusters ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_engines ) but the only known advantage of these thrusters is their propellant efficiency (which is important for spacecrafts). .: Systemless :.

It's all nice for an experiment, but I don't see any advantage of this approach compared to a classical propeller (fan). In the end you will need to transfer the same amount of momentum to the fluid (air) to create a certain amount of thurst for both the EHD thruster and the propeller. The only choice you have (beside the method you use to accelerate the fluid): Do you accelerate a small amount of air to a high speed or a large amount of air to a slower speed. For technical application you will need as much air to as much speed as you can handle and control. The main problem is not to accelerate the air, but to accelerate it in a controlled and efficient way. The fan based hover system (also know as helicopter) has taken a very long development time to be controllable and enough efficient. With all the high voltage (security) and no experiments with larger loads (= larger air speeds), no efficiency at all (1% lol) so far, and no controllability it is a very long way to go. .: Systemless :.

I understand that it may seem very strange to first drop one prayer level if it is odd. But you need to direct your complaint to Jagex here :XD: It does not help to use a different formula, just because it does not make sense to you. .: Systemless :.

I agree with what steiner posted. And to my post above: f(x) is a function of x. For example f could be f(x) := round(x/4). then f(34) + f(32) = round(8.5) + round(8) = 9 + 8 = 17 f(33) + f(33) = round(8.25) + round(8.25) = 8 + 8 = 16 f(66) = round(16.5) = 17 depending on the function f, you need to keep it as sum of the function (instead of funtion of the sum). I hope its more clear now what I tried to say. Otherwise, just follow the post of steiner. .: Systemless :.

lets assume that the current formula has the following structure (which is actually true): combat = h(f(prayer) + g(defence, hitpoints, attack, strength, magic, ranged)) where the function f has the property f(1) = 0, and the function g is close to a linear function. The best guess for "prayer adds to combat just the same way that summoning will" is: combat = h(f(prayer) + f(summoning) + g(defence, hitpoints, attack, strength, magic, ranged)) and since f(1) = 0, this doesn't even modify the combat of any player just by giving everyone summoning level 1. And it gives a maximal combat level of 138 as documented by Jagex. It is clear, that h(f(97) + f(97) + g)) does not need to be equal to h(f(96) + f(98) + g)) or h(f(95) + f(99) + g)). But it is still symmetric in prayer and summoning, so you can always exchange your prayer and summoning level without changing your combat level. Since the combat formula has a good approximation of the form cmb = floor(a * prayer + b * defence + c * hitpoints + max(d * attack + e * strength, f * magic, g * ranged)) your calculation can give a good approximation as well, but it remains an approximation. .: Systemless :.

Based on the assumption, that summoning will be added to the combat level like prayer is added to it and the current 100% correct combat formula, you get the following facts: - max combat level of 138 (confirmed by jagex) - the "additional" summoning level 1 will not changed the combat level of any player - for combat 138 you need at least all maxed out but: ... 98 prayer and 96 summoning or ... 96 prayer and 98 summoning - with all maxed out but the following levels you will be only combat 137 ... 99 prayer and 95 summoning or ... 95 prayer and 99 summoning or ... 97 prayer and 97 summoning These results are based on the 100% correct combat formula for runescape without summoning and adding summoning in the most natural way using the hints from jagex. You can find a website based implementation (no download needed) of the "new" formula here http://www.rscommunity.de/index.php?opt ... &Itemid=65 The calculator is in german, so here the translation for those who are not used to the german runescape: Verteidigung: Defence Lebenspunkte: Hitpoints Gebet: Prayer Angriff: Attack Fernkampf: Ranged Magie: Magic StÃÆÃâÃâärke: Strength BeschwÃÆÃâÃâörung: Summoning Nahkampf: Melee Stufe: Level Kampfstufe : Combat Level Berechnen: Calculate LÃÆÃâÃâöschen: Reset Laden: Load The calculations made in the first post can only be approximations. They should be correct up to +/- 1 combat level. But the structure of the exact combat formula makes it difficult to do any exact math the way it is tried in the first post. .: Systemless :.

no, I don't remember you, and I guess I am not alone with that :XD: .: Systemless :.