Jump to content
Due to the significant updates that have taken place, you now need to login with your display name or e-mail address, NOT your login name. ×
Due to posts that are 5+ years old being rebuilt, some of the older BBCodes may not have converted properly but still be in the post. Most posts are unaffected but some using what was our custom BBCode (like [spoiler]) will be a bit broken. ×

masterdez

Members
  • Content Count

    239
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About masterdez

  • Rank
    Unicorn Horn
  • Birthday June 26

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    UK

RuneScape Information

  1. Shame, you wont have access to any mods and the top end graphics only availiable on a PC.
  2. This made me laugh, the WoW "community" (if you can even call it that) is diabolical - in no way is it better than the RS community (but then again it definately isn't worse). Plus WoW is free to play now (for the first 20 levels)... GW2 is only one, Diablo III and SWTOR, and to a certain extent some lesser known ones such as ArcheAge and TSW. Runescape wont die though at least for another 5 years - the player base is still very large and people play because it's cheap, easy to access and easy to play. But then again, great games such as Age of Conan and Lord of the Rings Online are free and have great gameplay.
  3. Happy birthday :D

  4. Yes, a profit is ALMOST guaranteed for one game. But in the long term, the SLIGHT chance of losing, which has an impact exponentially stronger than the impact of every little win, the results still even out to 0 net profit. Seriously, this is one of those arguments where I'm positive I'm not wrong. Just wikipedia the Martingale System. I guess that's right, with a large, non infinite stack of cash, there will always be the finite chance of losing, putting the net profit down to 0. However, the theoretical case where someone has an infinite stack of cash, leads to a situation where the probability of losing actually does tend to zero, as chance of losing is infinitesimally small. Cheers for the correction, hadn't thought about it enough!
  5. Truth. Where the trickery comes in is luring people in to thinking they are going to keep winning. You stake some one low amounts but keep doubling, but losing on purpose, then for a big stake you win and end up profiting. There are still risks in this though. The opponent can decide to stop staking you after they have won several, or you could always still lose the last stake and lose everything. There are only two ways that a player can get a statistical advantage over an opponent. The "tricks" that can give a player an advantage such as using instant spells correctly, having better internet allowing you to get first hit, using the trap door properly, obstacle skills, and many more. The other way is to stake players with out equal stats, which involves betting more or less than your opponent based on the stat discrepancies. Where the advantage comes in is being able to properly quantify the value of the discrepancies and bet less than you "should" this will ultimately raise the expected value of your winnings. For example if you are staking someone of equal stats and you are betting the same amount then your expected winnings is always 0. However if you are staking someone with lower stats you have to properly evaluate how much lower they are, say x% worse. This means that you should increase your bet by x% as well. This will keep your expected winnings at 0, but say you bet y% more where y<x then your expected winnings will go positive. The process of evaluating the stats difference to find the "x%" is what makes pro stakers rich since the "x%" can never accurately be quantified numerically. Then you make bets like this over and over and the large the sample gets the more your winnings will trend towards the positive expected value. This is just like Vegas odds. For all sports, casino, and lottery betting the probability of winning is < 50% Therefore you are always expected to lose and the casino or bookie is always expected to win. Without meaning to sound like a troll, you're both wrong. To correct Rocked, No matter how you try to break it up, the only way to make money in a single 1/2 chance game is to get above-average luck. Now to our situation, where we have an undetermined number of stakes, and goal is to make a profit, and leave when a profit is made (as may be the goal of a staker). As i demonstrated in my previous post, I proved with a large cash pile, a profit is almost guaranteed. Xensure - staking with the aim to lose, is a tactic, but a risky one at that, as your opponent can quit at any time. My hypothesis was assuming each stake was played with the intent to win, as is normally the case. A better internet connectivity doesn't determine who get's the first hit. Most obstacle skills are obsolete now, and most players will, at least for the first few weeks, use movement off, simply due to the masses of people that will be staking. Betting on discrepancies is, as you said, a matter of opinion. However your statement about Vegas odds is complete rubbish. The only reason bookies/casinos make money is because they take the odds and reduce them slightly (not because odds are below 50%). For example, in roulette, there are red numbers, black numbers and the 0 green. The odds you get of putting money on red is 50%, and on black 50%. This doesn't include the 0, and is an example of the small margins that casinos use to profit.
  6. As the amount of money you have tends to infinity, the number of times you can double "re-bet" tends to infinity. This leads to a probability of profit, assuming 50-50, of something like: P(Profit after number of bets X) = 1 - 1/2^X As the number of bets gets large, the probability of a profit tends to 1, until at a high number of bets, profit becomes a certainty.
  7. It's definitely exciting. A lot of it is also about picking your fights, and knowing when to stake big. For example, you could stake someone, where the items/money staked are doubled in value each time. 100k, 200k, 400k, 800k, 1600k, 3600k, 7200k, etc You would only have to win one duel - the last duel, to actually profit from the encounter.
  8. The problem with armour staking is that there are too many variables involved, and it is difficult to predict if what you have is better than your opponent. In the case of both players having the same armour, exactly the same amount of luck is involved as would be if both players wore no armour. Pures should be aware that anyone above 20 defence can stick on a whole set of PvP armour. If you're prepared to take the risk of not knowing what armour your opponent has, then go for it, but don't be upset when they have full torva. Staking, for the most part (if you are fighting someone of approximately equal strength), involves two factors. Getting the first hit, and luck.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.