Zaaps1

Fixed, but my hide tags appear to be broken :(

Funny how you counter my argument about saying: "You should draw the most negative conclusions when a company doesn't give his reasons" with: "You should not" Great way to argument, should I say now "no"? - WHY can't we jump to conclusions? - I think by doing so, we force JAGEX (the company) to "always" (as long as possible) reveal their intentions: so they can shut up the naysayers. - Without these critics, Jagex (the company) may (and will) become lax and will slowly give less and less insight to their actions (Why should they, nobody questions it anyways if they just say "it's good")? I counter no specific argument, but the general idea brought forth over the past few posts. Critics do allow revelation to Jagex's intentions, but there are always two ways to accomplish something. There is a difference between drawing negative conclusions arrogantly and drawing the negative conclusions thoughtfully, even if the same conclusion is reached. It is important for people to stand up against Jagex when they make errors, which I stated. Likewise, it is important for people to stand up against Jagex when they are leaving us in the dark. But just like correcting errors, you can either do it intelligently or blindly. So yes, I agree that drawing negative conclusions can force Jagex to reveal its intentions. But that drawing a negative conclusion is not synonymous with being arrogant.

Friend code refers to the Nintendo DS games.

Thanks for all the thoughtful replies guys! It is true that the goals of Jagex aren't always apparent, which is no fault of Jagex's and is certainly not a fault of ours. There are cases when we need to do our best in examining their motives. However, even is Jagex doesn't openly state their reasons, it does not mean people can jump to conclusions.

Eh, or they just haven't looked at it. Or they couldn't tell you if they're taking it even if they were because that would give away a future update--new content takes a pretty long time to develop. Yes, true. But again that was an example used. All it does it illustrate the behavior of such players. Of course there are other reasons that Jagex might have, but the point is that they are overlooked and the conclusion is drawn that they are being outright ignored.

I stress again that any examples I've used are just that, examples. I know that the details of some of them are debateable, but none of them change the fact that they are just there to illustrate a general concept. Indeed, Jagex isn't always perfect. However, that was not the point. The idea was not that Jagex understands more than any of us and that Jagex always does best for us. The point was that too many players think too shallowly before forming their opinions. Jagex is greedy, and being greedy is part of human nature. However, it is important to differentiate between when Jagex is being greedy, when Jagex is being helpful and when Jagex is being irrational. Which is true, but I don't know enough about Eriksson's interactions. On the Columbus example, I am playing off popular belief. It is true that Eriksson was the first European to reach the "New World", but most people do not consider him of major importance. In fact, I don't believe that Eriksson did very much, or else the Americas would've been colonized long before they were. It's a technicality more than anything.

Of course, you could use a beast of burden as well to hold bones. Laws + Dust runes are better than house tabs. You could also use a slayer ring tele to Polly and set your house to Polly. Then you could waste no inventory space at all on teleports.

Technically, LBS has a higher stab bonus, but Z Spear has +20 str bonus instead, which is far more useful. By 2 points, which will hardly make a difference. And that's only with LSB + Rune Defender Which of course, you won't use while killing dragons. This makes the Zammy Spear the best option to use when killing Metals.

I would use the basic calculation of 2 per inventory/run to the altar. Do not be afraid to buy more than you need, since they are rather easy to sell back.

In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue. This is taught to nearly every elementary school child in the United States. I myself remember learning it back in first or second grade (to be fair, it might've been the hats we made that I remember more than Columbus, lol). They then proceed to learn about Exploration, Columbus' ships, the Native Americans, and their relations with Columbus, which are generally shown in a positive light. However, the same children often do not get taught the complete truth until high school or college. Indeed some don't learn the complete story at all. The full story is, in fact, that Columbus committed nothing less than genocide (although small when compared to Spain's later explorers) to the Natives. Although there was trade, there was also murder and robbery. This is a known fact. This is a known fact hidden from children. This is a known fact many adults do not know. What is known is that Columbus discovered the New World and that he paved the way for future explorers. The conclusion is then reached that Columbus may be considered a benevolent father of the United States and other American Nations. Of course, the fact that Columbus butchered and robbed many Native Americans is often ignored in favor of the idea that Columbus is who we owe the Americas to. The question then arises, who people who are aware of the fact: "Were his actions necessary?" Most radical revolutions undergo a variety of stages, although they are all basically the same in composition. They all must be built-up. They all climb to a climatic, radical stage. They all eventually "eat themselves up" and reside to a more moderate stage, often compromising the original values of the revolution. Usually, it is during this moderate stage where the real lasting, historical impacts take place. It is where the lasting change is created. However, could the moderate, productive, stage arise without going through the bloodthirsty radical stage? "Where those radical actions necessary?" Ancient Athens is often remembered for being the first Democratic government in the Western World. Athenians did build a democratic government, this is true. This government did influence and shape many future democracies and republics, this is true. However, what many people do not know is that the fate of the Athenian City-state and its democratic government in fact rested on two factors: slaves and silver. In fact, many historians believe Athens survived not because it has a fair and effective government, but by being lucky in its geography. This is also true. Athens' position near ideal silver mines and its use of slavery gave it the labor and money it NEEDED to break away from the Monarchies and Oligarchies that surrounded it. Slavery is, of course, a moral sin. Slaves, while given some legal protections, were not given many rights at all. But this slavery was necessary to sustain the famed Athenian form of government, which was a major foundation to many modern governments and may in fact have shaped the entire modern world to some extent. What am I saying with all of this? Clearly, you can see that bad things can be the ultimate roots for good things. In other words, oftentimes evil is necessary for human progress. "Evil is necessary for human progress"? What can that mean? Simple, that the foundations for the advancement of the human race are built on immoral institutions or actions. Then "evil" plagues caused human progress to occur, and in fact the same human progress could not have existed without the evil it built upon. But this isn't a damn history class Zaaps, you say. How does this relate to Runescape? Simple as well. Jagex oftentimes make bad decisions, or so it seems at first. But in reality, these decisions cover a lot of ground and ultimately do more harm than good. These decisions aren't necessarily "evil", but they are unpopular and may be devastating to some players. Yet such decisions are often foundations for a greater good. Case example: the RWT updates. True, they hurt every player to some extent. True, they dealt a major blow to Jagex's reputation and payroll. But they did solve the problem didn't it? Jagex did eliminate almost all RWT'ers, and almost all macros and gold-farmers as well, right? Then this unpopular decision was necessary for progress. Such progress could not have come about any other way. Jagex is often heavily criticized for its updates. In fact, players rant and flame nearly every update (although with varying degrees, to be fair). However, most of these players miss the real purpose of the updates and simply see what's on the surface. No update is ever as simple as "Oh, we've decided to add a new quest!". No, Jagex could not have gotten so far following that agenda. There is an underlying goal to every single update. This goal is what shapes the update, and it is this goal that causes unsatisfactory opinions from many players, when in fact they more often then not help them. To take a more recent example, how many of you have seen a complaint to some degree about the Herblore update with the new potions? Many of them simply consisted of "oh this is too strong" or "this is too hard to get" or "make them tradeable!" Was the goal of the update to make combat stronger? Was the goal to give combatants new toys to play with? Or was the idea to make Herblore worth training again, and not a novelty skill? When you understand that the idea of the update was to make Herblore more usable, it becomes obvious that Jagex has fit the bill perfectly. Too strong? Who cares, it's a motive! Too hard to get? That's the idea! Tradeable? Would defeat the purpose of training Herblore! Once the full picture is understood, and the ultimate benefits are acknowledge, it is easy to justify the "evils" Jagex has committed. It is aggravating to see players rant and flame about updates and actions they do not even fully understand. How can anyone possibly be taken seriously if they think so shallowly? How can you make a good point if you do not know what's deeper? What can you possibly have to say that is of any value to anyone if you cannot understand the rationale behind Jagex's actions? You cannot. I've heard too many times that "Jagex doesn't care about its players" or "Jagex doesn't listen". How can you be so shallow in thinking? You need to understand the motive and goals of Jagex. Maybe then you will understand WHY they APPEAR to be ignoring many player's suggestions. Do you know BETTER than Jagex? Maybe after you go and understand how Runescript works and understand every command in Javascript and understand exactly how every single piece of Jagex operates and works, then you can go up to Jagex and say: "You had better to this and stop ignoring us". If Jagex is not taking the bait of your suggestion, obviously there is something unfeasible about it or it is a fault of your own for not explaining it well. Perhaps by not adding you suggestion, they are actually doing us all a big favor? I've also heard too many times that Jagex doesn't care about X group of players because they removed Y feature from the game. Well, does Jagex spin a wheel and randomly decide which features to remove? Do you know all of Jagex's goals and agendas? Do you understand exactly why they make every decision? Then how can you possibly say so? Hear, I do not mean to say that you should NEVER question Jagex. Jagex is not a deity. Jagex is in fact a symbol used to described humans. Humans make mistakes. Jagex therefore makes mistakes. Of course when they make a legitimate error in an update, rants and such as justified. What is NOT justified are uninformed, unthoughtful and irrational diatribes of how Jagex has once again "ruined" their game. How should we debate or discuss Jagex's updates? The only thing, other than minor mistakes Jagex could have missed by human error, are the BASIS for their goals. It is important to remember that, however emotionally upset we get, that Jagex's apparent evils are actually part of a plan that ultimately leads to your own benefit. There is nothing worse than ranting when unaware of the true intentions of an action. Again, I am not saying that Jagex is always right. I am also not saying to never question Jagex. What I AM saying is to be more thoughtful when replying to an update. Jagex may very well have made a mistake, but that does not justify being arrogant. The only way to make meaningful posts is to understand Jagex and its goals. Only then is it revealed that Jagex SUPPORTS progress. DISCLAIMER: I am not taking any particular sides in any of the examples I've mentioned. I was simply using them to make a statement about the current state of player behavior. Of course, not every player acts this way. Perhaps even a majority do not.

Scizor deals with Tyranitar pretty well... and Latias doesn't even deal with Infernape well. Get a Starmie with a Timid nature with Rapid Spin and Surf there you go. ... I'm really hoping that's a joke. Tyranitar can easily take a STAB +1 Surf coming from a Modest Max SpA Starmie, thanks to its ability (Rock types get 50% SpD in sandstorm). Tyranitar can easily OHKO Starmie back with Thunderbolt, Dark Pulse, Crunch or Pursuit. Or, worse yet, set up a Dragon Dance, THEN take out your Starmie. Infernape also frequently carries Thunderbolt and Thunderpunch. If it uses either on switch, you have a dead Starmie. If it's scarfed, you have a dead Starmie, unless you're running scarf as well. The Starmie was for the Infernape still the only way it will live is either Focus Sash (Stealth Rock takes cover of it) or Choice Scarf which is only for revenege anyways there are better faster revenges besides that if they carry thunderbolt you can switch a Volt Absorber or Ground Pokemon (Only if you know it carries Thunderbolt etc.) even past that most Infernapes carry Grass Knot instead of Thunderbolt. 46.9% of Infernapes run Grass Knot, 16.7% run U-turn. Both of these put a serious dent into Starmie. Many infernapes are leads (read: no Stealth Rock damage, and thus working Focus Sash). Any other Infernape that's not scarfed is going to switch out... unless U-turn already switched it out. Bottom line, Starmie can't deal with Infernape nearly as well as other Pokemon. Latias resists grass, fire, and fighting, and both HP Ice and U-turn fail to 2HKO, meaning no Infernape set threatens it. Salamence resists grass, fire, and fighting, and only fears HP Ice. Tentacruel doesn't fear anything from Infernape either, resisting fire, fighting, and ice, and being neutral to bug. Starmie can counter some Infernape sets. Salamence counters more, Tentacruel counters nearly all, as does Latias. Starmie is outclassed as an Infernape counter. Starmie doesn't really have much going for it anymore. The only real use is a Rapid Spinner who can counter many Spin Blockers. Otherwise, it is outclassed in nearly every aspect. Maybe the only thing it's good at is dealing fast STAB Surfs, but even so there are better special attackers who can land Surfs.

It's more labor intensive, to be sure. But it's definitely faster xp. Lava runes are better, but they are exponentially higher in cost, which makes them impractical.

Thanks!

Now I have to ask the question: Pull-ups, of Chin-ups? Pull-ups: Maybe 5-7 Chin-ups: 13-15

If you wouldn't mind getting 1 magic level first, your best option is to do Smoke Runes, although if you're willing to take loss instead of profit/break even, Steam Runes get 5k more xp/hr. Just fyi, steam runes are the fastest way to train runecrafting until the mid-80s, when ZMI becomes better. I'd say you're pretty borderline for steam runes (cost vs. time), but should definitely do smoke.

Runecrafter Robes or Trimmed Wizard Robes. You can also add a few holiday items here and there. For example, the Tri Jester Scarf if you wear green runecrafter.

On the topic of items that reduce your weight, you should remember that making your weight any lower than 0kg is pointless, because a negative weight is the same thing as 0 weight (in Runescape, at least). This means there is NO difference between -32 kg and 0 kg.

Gold definitely beats both mithril and adamant in f2p.

I was always good with seas. But I don't like to just straight outgun the other guy. Seas is very good for that. I like toying with my prey. That's one problem I had with mobilizing armies of RS. We couldn't say our own thoughts, no taunting others. I believe Jagex stated that MA could not have free chat due to technical restrictions.

MY data for Barrage (before the magic updates) 114k magic xp/hr 59.5k hp xp/hr 513 casts/hr 6 blue/hr 40 green/hr 163 crim/hr 96 gold/hr 1.45 ppots/hr = ~6 doses/hr 1 cast = 222 magic xp 1 cast = 115 hp xp 1 blue = 85.5 casts 1 green = 12.825 casts 1 crim = 3.15 casts 1 gold = 5.34 casts Ice Burst is more like 180 magic xp/cast and crimsons every ~3.5 casts, although I have no definitive data on it. Others might.

Right, but I'm not getting that option in the second convo.

I don't understand, can you explain that in a easy language please. :wink: Ok, using your Armadyl plate example. If the Arma plate alchs for ~20k, and the Rune plate for ~40k, why not simply change the Armadyl plate's alch value to 300k-500k? No one in their right mind is going to alch it anyway when you lose millions doing so. This is much better than making this whole new Faux system and assigning each item a new alch value. Of course, with some things, such as the SS vs. Fury problem, this isn't as practical. But overall, it's a much better solution. Small holes such as the above mentioned one can be easily patch anyway. The Faux system from my view should be used ONLY if they must. But yeah i see what you mean and i agree. However i was thinking of a raise to 40K (Rune platebody is 39K) so that it would make Armadyl plate protected over Rune. But i think it's better to think OVERALL, and also a higher alch price for items similar to Armadyl plate would be best. Who would be so stupid to alch a Saradomin sword for 200K (Just example of alch price) or Armadyl plate for 300K-500K. FAUX price should be used for non-tradeable items, what do you think of that? Again remember, time is money and money is time so why should non-tradeable items which take time not be considered in "Items kept on death"? Yes, make a Faux price only for non-tradeable, non-quest related items (but including quest rewards or valuable items such as the Anchor). In addition, I believe, and always have since release, that the Items Kept on Death screen should let you find out the particular value of any given item (alch wise). I always thought it stupid just to tell you which 1,3, or 4 are kept because it doesn't let you compare that to the others. So let's add that feature to the IKonD that lets you check the alch price of any item or (for non-tradeables) the faux value. EDIT: I don't think the Arma plate should reach just 40k. The Rune plate isn't the only thing to consider. Godsword shards, for example.

I don't understand, can you explain that in a easy language please. :wink: Ok, using your Armadyl plate example. If the Arma plate alchs for ~20k, and the Rune plate for ~40k, why not simply change the Armadyl plate's alch value to 300k-500k? No one in their right mind is going to alch it anyway when you lose millions doing so. This is much better than making this whole new Faux system and assigning each item a new alch value. Of course, with some things, such as the SS vs. Fury problem, this isn't as practical. But overall, it's a much better solution. Small holes such as the above mentioned one can be easily patch anyway. EDIT: heh, 2009 views. Funny little coincidence.

Could you please change the font? I know it's nothing big but that was a bit of a pain to read. Thanks. Definitely use a Lurker. It lets you craft ~300 more ess per hour. You can mimic the Terrorbird's effects by drinking 1 dose of super energy potion every 5-10 runs or so (you only sacrifice 1 rune per 5-10 runs by doing this). Clearly, the terrorbird has no place in runecrafting.

No, same value for everyone. And non-tradeable items could be given faux alchemy prices because THEY ARE VALUEABLE TOO! TIME>MONEY>TIME>MONEY In other words, Jagex would decide the value of the faux prices? Ok, that would help in the cases you cited, but in the end the system isn't any different than the current alch system. Might as well just revamp a few alch prices then, right? Just balace out "Items kept on death" by using for example FAUX alch prices (If that's possible) so that incidents like this this won't happen: Onyx bracelet protecting over Saradomin sword (We all know Onyx bracelet will never be more valueable than Saradomin sword) Fury protecting over Armadyl plate (Fury>2-4M, Armadyl 20M+) And so on, things like this you know? Any more questions? :thumbup: But what I am saying is that you are adding a whole new complex system that could be averted by just altering a few alch prices to better suit an item's real value.