Slayer Sucks

[ydrasil]

Rates are being used from viewtopic.php?f=66&t=765267&hilit=re%3A+slayer+sucks&start=800 and previously. I quite you:

 

 

 

Look, if you want to start changing the rates we used to come to that conclusion, you can't just throw in numbers and use them. If you want to, I'll gladly start this debate over and begin calculating and testing numbers from scratch, but unless there's something drastically different between when we agreed earlier on and now, I don't really see anything productive coming out of it.

 

There inlies your problem. You should know well enough by now that those numbers were not even based on tests, those came from somwhere within the first 20 pages and were made up on the spot as I recall. Also remember at the time they were made up I had always said I believed it was much higher (and indeed it is). I had since tested and logged many tasks which I posted on this thread. There was a drastic increase in experience and those are the number I am using. I do not agree with that statement of mine and you are foolish to think that I do and to purposely ignore the updated information. You are quoting something of mine 24 pages ago, over 2 months ago. It would be the same as if I now went on and on about comparing it to Zombie Monkies. You believed what you had posted back then. Me doing that, and what you are doing now is exactly the same thing. I no longer agree with that statement I had made (and I am pretty sure you don;t believe Zombie Monkies are better than Slayer, I would hope not anyway).

 

 

 

To summarise that, I never simply started spouting random numbers and using them. I tested my numbers and posted them here many times. The rates I am using and sticking with are 195k experience per hour with approximately 107k profit per hour (or slightly higher).

 

 

 

That's possible, but without knowing all the details people tend to barge in and try and renew the obvious points of the debate that have already been covered. At least this way when people come in blathering about zombie monkies I know they haven't bothered to read the replies, and it's easier to weed out. You do have a point, though - 65 pages is too much for a casual debate. I just don't think a 'casual debate' is going to do anything, however - we've debate these numbers far more in depth then I can ever hope to cover in a single post, and arguing with them is going to take a deep understanding of all the underlying posts. So if they want to argue about "fun" or another of my points (I still firmly believe in every part of my original post), they don't have to wade through hundreds of pages of numbers, but if they DO plan to argue the numbers, they better read carefully before posting.

 

That is the whole point of updating the first post. In doing so people won't simply barge in and renew obvious points because those points are no longer there.

 

 

 

P.S. I was about to begin posting again because I have a bit of a holiday at the moment from Uni :

[compfreak847]

 

There inlies your problem. You should know well enough by now that those numbers were not even based on tests, those came from somwhere within the first 20 pages and were made up on the spot as I recall. Also remember at the time they were made up I had always said I believed it was much higher (and indeed it is). I had since tested and logged many tasks which I posted on this thread. There was a drastic increase in experience and those are the number I am using. I do not agree with that statement of mine and you are foolish to think that I do and to purposely ignore the updated information. You are quoting something of mine 24 pages ago, over 2 months ago. It would be the same as if I now went on and on about comparing it to Zombie Monkies. You believed what you had posted back then. Me doing that, and what you are doing now is exactly the same thing. I no longer agree with that statement I had made (and I am pretty sure you don;t believe Zombie Monkies are better than Slayer, I would hope not anyway).

 

Not a chance. I don't know about you, but I did a considerable amount of testing for those rates; there has been nothing to challange them since. All you've done since then is randomly thrown total XP numbers into the thread every now and then with no explanation or details.

 

 

 

To summarise that, I never simply started spouting random numbers and using them. I tested my numbers and posted them here many times. The rates I am using and sticking with are 195k experience per hour with approximately 107k profit per hour (or slightly higher).

 

Then I guess we'll start over from page 1 \

 

 

 

Post your details for each task, and I'll start comparing to mine. I still have tables with the XP rates I used, so we can compare them closely.

 

 

 

 

That is the whole point of updating the first post. In doing so people won't simply barge in and renew obvious points because those points are no longer there.

 

But they still will; any time they disagree with the numbers, they spit out a semi-gibberish post that shows they haven't even read the first post. If ANYONE is going to argue the numbers, they HAVE to go back and read the entire history - I'm not explaining reasoning behind a cannon again. If they just want to discuss fun vs. XP, the current post suits that purpose.

 

 

 

 

P.S. I was about to begin posting again because I have a bit of a holiday at the moment from Uni :

 

Debate time :thumbsup:

[ilovecardj]

In terms of maxing out all stats to 99 which most people plan to do, training without slayer is a huge waste of time, if your going to get 99 anyways. not to mention the most impressive cape in game. if your 138 cb and 65 slayer, good for you. any one can easily afk those stats.

 

 

 

Slay for the cape, but on the way your gonna hit alot of 99s as well. besides its a fun skill with proper block set ups, which you lack.... iron and steels not blocked? heres part of the problem.

 

 

 

 

 

If you look at it like getting all melees to 99 and summon ONLY. sure waterfiends/lobs/armoured zombies wins, no contest. if your looking at getting all 99s, slayer clearly wins. no point in getting 99 att/str/def/hp all over again cause you were to lazy to train slayer to begin with.

 

 

 

Just some input id like to share

[pureprayer]

In terms of maxing out all stats to 99 which most people plan to do, training without slayer is a huge waste of time, if your going to get 99 anyways. not to mention the most impressive cape in game. if your 138 cb and 65 slayer, good for you. any one can easily afk those stats.

 

 

 

Slay for the cape, but on the way your gonna hit alot of 99s as well. besides its a fun skill with proper block set ups, which you lack.... iron and steels not blocked? heres part of the problem.

 

 

 

 

 

If you look at it like getting all melees to 99 and summon ONLY. sure waterfiends/lobs/armoured zombies wins, no contest. if your looking at getting all 99s, slayer clearly wins. no point in getting 99 att/str/def/hp all over again cause you were to lazy to train slayer to begin with.

 

 

 

Just some input id like to share

 

This debate was here a while ago, it was ended by saying "who will max out total level anyway".

 

 

 

Rc cape > slayer cape.

[ydrasil]

Note this is a long post, I tried to gather as much evidence as I could to prove my point.

 

 

 

Not a chance. I don't know about you, but I did a considerable amount of testing for those rates; there has been nothing to challange them since. All you've done since then is randomly thrown total XP numbers into the thread every now and then with no explanation or details.

 

I have no problem debating, but I would prefer the debate remained about things that actually happened. There was no considerable amount of time invested by you, me or anyone for that matter for the rate that was being described in my post. That rate I made up on the spot somewhere wihin the first 20 pages I believe it was. It was nothing more than an assumption of getting 22.5k Slayer experience per hour while also getting 65k melee experience per hour (that is all). The next assumption was that the remaining Slayer experience was to Range (from a cannon), that makes 6.25k Skayer experience is gained via a cannon resulting in 12.5k Range experience per hour. The amount of Summoning experience was determined by using a ratio of about 0.9:1 of sum:slay experience, resulting in 20k. That gets 141.7k overal experience approximately. Those were all based on those 2 intial assumptions, there was no testing.

 

 

 

You tested Armoured Zombies and got the rate of 103k, not Slayer. As I mentioned a few times already, you have yet to provide your numbers for Slayer. Not once throughout the entire thread have you posted them. The second part of that quote is almost funny, except that it shows you purposely ignore results (which is ironic as you wanted proof Slayer is better, those rates show it is better, and yet the thread continues - gives credence to my belief the thread is only continuing for the purpose of a debate rather than the topic itself). The table of rates I posted was not randomly compiled as you suggest. That you can even say there was no explanation or details is beyond ridiculous.

 

 

 

When I posted it the first time, you asked questions about it I answered. Later on I mentioned my table of results, and you know what you posted? Pretty much just "All you've done since then is randomly thrown total XP numbers into the thread every now and then with no explanation or details." So I asked what was it that I had supposedly not explained the first time (even though I did answer all your questions). I proceeded to answer those and yet, apparently I have not given one detail or explantion on them? *Points to post in italics in the parenthesis above*

 

 

 

I deceided to search for my name after the post where you had quoted me from. Two pages later I brought up the different and tested rates:

 

 

 

[hide=My Quote]

I actually want to change the numbers I discussed earlier in this thread. Most of them were just guesses really than real rates. I have been doing Slayer recently and have logged all of the 72 tasks I have done so far. As a sidenote, I also went from 84 Slayer to 87, will ahve 88 soon : . I also level'd Attacl/Strength/Defence/Range up by one. I have blocked Hellhounds, Greater Demons, Iron and Steel Dragons, and I cancel Warped Terrorbirds, Goraks and Kalphites. The blocked tasks give low experience rates (although Iron Dragons are faster than Skeletal Wyverns, and all are faster than Mithril Dragons), Terrorbirds are great experience, but I just don't like them. Goraks also good experience but no good drops or charms, and Kalphites are always packed in my experience.

 

 

 

Also note I use superhuman strength as a minimum on every task, on some tasks I instead used piety. Those tasks are Waterfiends, Skeletal Wyverns and Mithril Dragons (although I did use it on one task of Abyssal Demons, and still profited). I use a cannon on only 6 tasks, these are; Aberrant Spectres, Bloodvelds, Dagannoths, Fire Giants, Scabarites and Suqahs. Also note that my rates are gotten from having done 3-9 tasks for each NPC except for Fire Giants where I only have the one.

 

 

 

The rates I have been getting far exceed what I had originally said. I had originally said that the rate for Slayer per hour was about 22.5k. Over the course of these 72 tasks, I have been averaging 30.8k per hour. For melee experience per hour I originally stated it was 65k (although at the time i said I believed it was higher), I am currently averaging 75.6k per hour. Hitpoints branchs off of that and I am getting 26.7k per hour. I said Range was 12.5k (for no other reason than it combining with 65k melee experience to add up to 22.5k Slayer xp/h), I am currently averaging 30.5k per hour. All of that experience comes from either my cannon, or Geyser Titan. Finally, I originally said Summoning was about 18k per hour, I am currently averaging 31.3k per hour. It will be lower for some people as I am using the average experience for me for crimson charms (i.e from 89-99 Summoning, which is about 406.4 per crimson).

 

 

 

That all adds up to 194.9k Overall experience per hour, or 164.1k if you exclude Slayer (for whatever reason). I also am currently making a profit of 12.5k per hour (I am so rich! :lol: ). However, the average time per task for me is 34:40 approximately. This means I am completeing 1.73 tasks per hour, for 41.6 Slayer points per hour, for 1.2 Slayer Dart Packages, for 93.5k per hour. That all adds up to making 106k per hour of profit. This profit can be increased in certain areas for a reduction in experience. For example, instead of killing Fire Giants in the Waterfall with a cannon, you could use a combat familiar in the Chaos Tunnels. That would make that task profit and hence increase the average profit rate. Also, while I am not entirely sure on this since I am not 90+ Slayer, Dark Beasts might profit and also result in a higher profit. Also according to Zarfot's guide it gets 32.6k Slayer experience per hour, so it results in a higher average experience per hour.

 

 

 

Using these numbers compared to what you say the rate is at Armoured Zombies (103k melee experience per hour and 190k profit, I used 9k per hour for Summoning experience also), we can see what is needed for Slayer to be more efficient. Making a comparison with only combat experience (i.e no Slayer experience) the comparison is 146.3k experience with 190k profit to 164.1k experience and 106k profit. This makes the profit required for Slayer to be efficient to be 776.7k per hour. So already it is possible for Slayer to be more efficient.

 

 

 

If you value Slayer experience (and in my opinion, I see no reason why wouldn't), then the comparison is essentially the same but with 194.9k experience per hour with Slayer. This makes the profit required for Slayer to be more efficient as 337k. That amount is easily attainable.

 

 

 

In short, how can Slayer 'suck' for combat experience if it averages 17.7k more combat experience per hour than Armoured Zombies. Not to mention that you get a decent amount of profit and the Slayer experience you get also.

[/hide]

 

That was the first time I had brought them up, I don't see how you can say there is no detail or explanation. I explained which prayer I used as well as which tasks where I used a cannon. I mentioned which tasks I cancelled/skipped. I even went through the difference in the rates between the made up ones and these tested ones, I even explained how I worked out the Summoning rate. This brings me to your reply to it, which only goes to show you didn't even properly read my post:

 

 

 

[hide=Your Reply]

Two issues with that: Are you using cannon on all tasks, or is 30k = 60k on the tasks you cannon; How are you getting 32k summoning XP\h? That seems highly unrealistic given the numbers we have seen from zarfot\Qeltar. Your combat rates seem more in line; obviously with better prayers you are getting more XP, and the higher slayer\combat levels + summons are helping out a lot with the XP.

[/hide]

 

 

 

You actually asked what tasks I used a cannon on. I mentioned that in the second paragraph. You even say the combat rates are "more in line" which only seems to infer there was nothing wrong with that aspect of it. It was explained in my response. Your next response was similiar in such a way that you asked something that I had already mentioned in my original post. Finally after I actually posted a picture of the table you responded with:

 

 

 

Looks fairly good, I can make a similar thing. Your profit is being thrown off by tasks like demons\spirit mages\mithril dragons, though.

 

How can this be taken in any other way but that you agree with the results (except the profit)? You never asked for any more details or explanations about what I posted then. Anyway, the next time I posted was on page 49 to reiterate what I has posted before so that others may see. Want me to remind of you of what your reply was? Here it is:

 

 

 

[hide=Your Reply]

I am still waiting for details on your numbers; last time you posted a cryptic chart with incomplete information, and promptly vanished. Charms were being compared to Waterfiends, me and kent's calculations are on a different thread. I find the familiars almost worthless at various task for the aforementioned reasons. A macaw has a huge impact on the herb drops, and I found the geyser titan's effects minimal compared to the cannon. A cannon makes for a very fast task and quick kills, preventing the summon from 'locking' onto a task. Black demons are a huge pain with prayer, as your are forced to use it or go to the extremely cramped area on the west side of the tunnels. Ditto applies to bloodvields. Dust devils are about the only task I use a combat familiar on. I have a hard time with gargoyles; what's your outfit? My proslete never seems to stop their attacks very well. I couldn't see myself doing nechs without a unicorn. Abyssal demons are a bunyip monster. Suqahs are very fast, and the respawn rate is the main limiting factor.

[/hide]

 

See the dilemma here? Waiting for details.... to what questions? If there were missing details you would have asked the first time round, but did not (note that the questions you asked the first time round had nothing to do with details or such, they had already been answered). my reply to that went over all this also. It isn't till your next post you actually ask for details in which I hadn't already shown. The questions were:

 

 

 

[hide=Details]

By "details" on your numbers, I mean:

 

 

 

What are you using for timing on banking\getting a new task? Is this standardized, or are you varying it for every task?

 

What are you doing about rare drops? Are they being ignored in the profit calculations, then added back in using the much more reliable drop rates of other slayers?

[/hide]

 

Even still parts of these questions were already answered. Either way, I answered them in my next post. Your next questions were:

 

 

 

[hide=Questions]

Major drop rates cannot be assumed from 2-3 tasks. You saw this earlier with some of your profit lists - do you REALLY believe your going to get a whip or two most tasks, and make almost 1m per hour at demons? Results like that are skewing your numbers; they should be as compartmentalized as possible.

 

 

 

Since you added in the timings afterward, what are your times for banking\receiving each tasks?

[/hide]

 

I answered these also. My response answered the specific part about the drop rate and profit to what I believe was more than adequate. However i'll add more detail here. Assuming a 1/425 drop rate of a Whip, I am killing about 143 per hour. That is approximately 0.336 Whips per hour, which translates to 504.7k per hour (with Whips at 1.5m exact, not sure of exact price as I have not logged onto rs to check the ge, and the ge database on the main page only says 1.5). Add on to that the value of the other drops which ranges from 150-225k in my experience makes the profit rate I was getting pretty close. Your response simply stated "You stated that you had added in the banking\task obtaining\running times; I was interested in what numbers you had used." (there was more in the post, but this was the only part that applied to this part of the discussion). I didn't respond to that because I believed I had explained it as best I could. I had never stated, inferred or any other word you can think of that applies, that I had added in the banking time. I had mentioned this exact point so many times and if it didn't sink in then. Either way, you made no more posts relating to my rates.

 

 

 

Back to the first quote I started off replying to, I believe I was up to here:

 

Then I guess we'll start over from page 1 \

 

 

 

Post your details for each task, and I'll start comparing to mine. I still have tables with the XP rates I used, so we can compare them closely.

 

Post my details.... As I have proven just now. I answered all the details you had asked about. However this is where it got me interested "and I'll start comparing to mine". Please do! You have yet to show what your rates are, I have already shown and backed up every single rate I have posted. You seem to be unable or unwilling to post yours. So in short, post your results then.

 

 

 

But they still will; any time they disagree with the numbers, they spit out a semi-gibberish post that shows they haven't even read the first post. If ANYONE is going to argue the numbers, they HAVE to go back and read the entire history - I'm not explaining reasoning behind a cannon again. If they just want to discuss fun vs. XP, the current post suits that purpose.

 

This is where you are wrong, they have read the first post. In a thread this size the most you could expect a person to read through is the first post (possibly the whole page) and the last page (and possibly a few pages preceeding that one). Since the thread gets longer, those posts will no long get read at the back (which is now part of the middle). The only constant is the first post/page. That is what must be updated then. many of the replies have been about saying Slayer is not 50k/h which I am sure you agree with is not the case. So get rid of that and update it to what you actually think the rate is.

[compfreak847]

 

I have no problem debating, but I would prefer the debate remained about things that actually happened. There was no considerable amount of time invested by you, me or anyone for that matter for the rate that was being described in my post. That rate I made up on the spot somewhere wihin the first 20 pages I believe it was. It was nothing more than an assumption of getting 22.5k Slayer experience per hour while also getting 65k melee experience per hour (that is all). The next assumption was that the remaining Slayer experience was to Range (from a cannon), that makes 6.25k Skayer experience is gained via a cannon resulting in 12.5k Range experience per hour. The amount of Summoning experience was determined by using a ratio of about 0.9:1 of sum:slay experience, resulting in 20k. That gets 141.7k overal experience approximately. Those were all based on those 2 intial assumptions, there was no testing.

 

I'm honestly not sure what your talking about, as there was extensive testing on (I thought) both of our parts in the beginning, continuing on for dozens of page.

 

 

 

 

I answered these also. My response answered the specific part about the drop rate and profit to what I believe was more than adequate. However i'll add more detail here. Assuming a 1/425 drop rate of a Whip, I am killing about 143 per hour. That is approximately 0.336 Whips per hour, which translates to 504.7k per hour (with Whips at 1.5m exact, not sure of exact price as I have not logged onto rs to check the ge, and the ge database on the main page only says 1.5). Add on to that the value of the other drops which ranges from 150-225k in my experience makes the profit rate I was getting pretty close. Your response simply stated "You stated that you had added in the banking\task obtaining\running times; I was interested in what numbers you had used." (there was more in the post, but this was the only part that applied to this part of the discussion). I didn't respond to that because I believed I had explained it as best I could. I had never stated, inferred or any other word you can think of that applies, that I had added in the banking time. I had mentioned this exact point so many times and if it didn't sink in then. Either way, you made no more posts relating to my rates.

 

 

You still have not answered nearly all of my questions. You have not given me a listing of rates from each task, nor drop profits and banking times used, or profit rates with rare drops separated out. Those are essential - you can't just throw out a "total" XP number and expect to debate that. Once you give me those we can begin debating various tasks.

 

 

 

 

Post my details.... As I have proven just now. I answered all the details you had asked about. However this is where it got me interested "and I'll start comparing to mine". Please do! You have yet to show what your rates are, I have already shown and backed up every single rate I have posted. You seem to be unable or unwilling to post yours. So in short, post your results then.

 

Those were posted eons ago dozens of pages back in this thread, your welcome to go back and look for them. Unfortunately, I lost most of the spreadsheet files from the debates when I reformatted and forgot to back them up, but there are screenshots and listings of XP rates.

 

 

 

 

This is where you are wrong, they have read the first post. In a thread this size the most you could expect a person to read through is the first post (possibly the whole page) and the last page (and possibly a few pages preceeding that one). Since the thread gets longer, those posts will no long get read at the back (which is now part of the middle). The only constant is the first post/page. That is what must be updated then. many of the replies have been about saying Slayer is not 50k/h which I am sure you agree with is not the case. So get rid of that and update it to what you actually think the rate is

 

That's exactly my point - if they are going to debate numbers, they cannot simply read the first post to argue. It's easy to weed out the ones who do. And no, my 45k\h XP rate is still standard for not paying attention. I stand behind that post, in which I used my personal rates instead of the max obtainable. For the sake of converting this into a logic instead of opinionated debate, we went with the "max possible" numbers.

[ydrasil]

I'm honestly not sure what your talking about, as there was extensive testing on (I thought) both of our parts in the beginning, continuing on for dozens of page.

 

There were many calculations done but not tests. All those calculations were based on those numbers which had no real basis to them. I don't see how you can't understand what I am talking about here. The intial comparison was Zombie Monkies to Slayer, It was compared to Slayer as having gotten that 141.7k per hour overall experience. Calculations =/= testing is what I am trying to get at.

 

 

 

You still have not answered nearly all of my questions. You have not given me a listing of rates from each task, nor drop profits and banking times used, or profit rates with rare drops separated out. Those are essential - you can't just throw out a "total" XP number and expect to debate that. Once you give me those we can begin debating various tasks.

 

Then you continue to ignore my posts, as I did answer every question. Listing of rates... is that table not the average rate for each task that I have been getting? I made up that table with the intent of it being an average so that is not a problem. Average profit's were given, and yes I did mention more testing would provide a more accurate average. However as I have shown with the example of Abyssal Demons that my profit compared to calculating the profit based on drop rate and kills per hour is pretty much identical. I have mentioned several times that I had not timed banking inbetween tasks as that was when I inputted the data I had just accumulated. Did you not read through all of my previous post? I stressed this point that you kept asking for it and my continuing replies that it had not been done. So no, I did not just throw out a "total XP number and expect to debate that". How on earth you can even say that after all the evidence I gave in the previous post, which does not nothing but show you are wrong in this respect is beyond me. You didn't even ask any questions here.

 

 

 

Those were posted eons ago dozens of pages back in this thread, your welcome to go back and look for them. Unfortunately, I lost most of the spreadsheet files from the debates when I reformatted and forgot to back them up, but there are screenshots and listings of XP rates

 

So you admit you have been lieing? How did you expect to make a comparison if there is nothing to compare it to? How about you look for them for once. I know for a fact they are not there so I have no intention of wasting my time looking. The only thing you have posted that even comes close was a picture of a table compiled from Qeltar's database. Those are not your rates and it has already been clearly established that Qeltar's rates lack an ideal degree of accuracy. So no, you never posted your rates and if this is how you are going to keep thinking of it, I can only surmise you don't actually have any results and by saying it was already posted you can get away with not posting anything.

 

 

 

That's exactly my point - if they are going to debate numbers, they cannot simply read the first post to argue. It's easy to weed out the ones who do. And no, my 45k\h XP rate is still standard for not paying attention. I stand behind that post, in which I used my personal rates instead of the max obtainable. For the sake of converting this into a logic instead of opinionated debate, we went with the "max possible" numbers.

 

45k is anything but standard. We have yet to see anyone who has agreed with that rate, and since that is the case how can it be a standard? There is no way to fully define what is meant by not paying attention. I am fairly certain that if I were to "not pay attention" that my rate would not drop by 18.3k Slayer experience, which is a 60% drop. I cannot think of anything that would cause a drop of that magnitude (and no, "not paying attention" is not a reason that can be used, it is too open ended and provides no insight). However, as I have also mentioned, the rate you have given for Armoured Zombies is a max (of which we also have yet to hear of anyone else who has attained that rate). With Slayer, the rate I am getting is not a max. This only makes Slayer even better in comparison to Armoured Zombies than what it already is.

[compfreak847]

 

There were many calculations done but not tests. All those calculations were based on those numbers which had no real basis to them. I don't see how you can't understand what I am talking about here. The intial comparison was Zombie Monkies to Slayer, It was compared to Slayer as having gotten that 141.7k per hour overall experience. Calculations =/= testing is what I am trying to get at.

 

Calculations were based off of testing - you had tested (or at least claimed) you did for your rates, I used mine and qeltar together to some up with something we agree upon.

 

 

 

 

Then you continue to ignore my posts, as I did answer every question. Listing of rates... is that table not the average rate for each task that I have been getting? I made up that table with the intent of it being an average so that is not a problem. Average profit's were given, and yes I did mention more testing would provide a more accurate average. However as I have shown with the example of Abyssal Demons that my profit compared to calculating the profit based on drop rate and kills per hour is pretty much identical. I have mentioned several times that I had not timed banking inbetween tasks as that was when I inputted the data I had just accumulated. Did you not read through all of my previous post? I stressed this point that you kept asking for it and my continuing replies that it had not been done. So no, I did not just throw out a "total XP number and expect to debate that". How on earth you can even say that after all the evidence I gave in the previous post, which does not nothing but show you are wrong in this respect is beyond me. You didn't even ask any questions here.

 

I don't need to. That data is required for an argument; we can whine about how far off each others total rates are, but until we drill into the details, we arn't getting anywhere with the differences. Get specifics, I'll compare, and we can argue and test the differences. I'm not about to redo every single number I've ever tested or seen from slayer just to see if my results differ from yours this time, and I doubt your about to do the same.

 

 

 

 

So you admit you have been lieing? How did you expect to make a comparison if there is nothing to compare it to? How about you look for them for once. I know for a fact they are not there so I have no intention of wasting my time looking. The only thing you have posted that even comes close was a picture of a table compiled from Qeltar's database. Those are not your rates and it has already been clearly established that Qeltar's rates lack an ideal degree of accuracy. So no, you never posted your rates and if this is how you are going to keep thinking of it, I can only surmise you don't actually have any results and by saying it was already posted you can get away with not posting anything.

 

May I ask where I "admitted" I was lying? My rates can be found earlier in this thread, although I haven't found my original spreadsheets on my computer for the desire details.

 

 

 

 

45k is anything but standard. We have yet to see anyone who has agreed with that rate, and since that is the case how can it be a standard? There is no way to fully define what is meant by not paying attention. I am fairly certain that if I were to "not pay attention" that my rate would not drop by 18.3k Slayer experience, which is a 60% drop. I cannot think of anything that would cause a drop of that magnitude (and no, "not paying attention" is not a reason that can be used, it is too open ended and provides no insight). However, as I have also mentioned, the rate you have given for Armoured Zombies is a max (of which we also have yet to hear of anyone else who has attained that rate). With Slayer, the rate I am getting is not a max. This only makes Slayer even better in comparison to Armoured Zombies than what it already is.

 

Sorry, but I don't need to justify my personal rates. I really couldn't care less who agrees or doesn't agree with them. Like I said, I changed them to the maxes in order to have a factual debate which was much funner and easier to resolve then an opinionated debate.

[Nairage]

If I may step in here and say something- comp, you seriously need to get your rates back. You can't base a whole thread on factual information, and lack the rates yourself to prove something. Calculations =/= rates; you are contradicting yourself. You tell others they have to do 1000's of tasks, yet you don't supply data of tasks you did to prove slayer is wrong.

 

 

 

Sorry, but I don't need to justify my personal rates. I really couldn't care less who agrees or doesn't agree with them. Like I said, I changed them to the maxes in order to have a factual debate which was much funner and easier to resolve then an opinionated debate.

 

 

 

Again, you DO need to justify your personal rates if you are going to have a factual debate (debate forum pl0x? :P). If you could care less if people agree or don't agree with you, then it is being ignorant not to succeed to someone else's tests. If everyone disagrees but you, how is it your place to decide that everyone else is wrong, and you are right?

 

 

 

much funner... lol :P

[Zierro]

I hate to come into any conversation uninformed, but browsing through it seems that ydraisil has indeed stated many of the same things I did, and your response was typically to say that he was wrong. He would ask for explanations, and you would decline. How surprising.

 

 

 

I see no benefit in reading 63 pages of that, nor in continuing to give life to a thread by an author whose stance is that he is right and you are wrong, if you disagree go away. The only researched part of this thread that I can see is the first post, the majority of which is wrong. Having stated thus in my first response, you politely told me that my elaborated upon post was wrong, and told me to go away (at the same time telling me that I had wasted time doing something that I explained had taken no time to do, good job reading) with absolutely no counter-argument of your own, which seems to be the pattern of this thread. Obviously there is no convincing you that slayer is superior, even though you can't seem to get together the rather simple facts that would be necessary to prove my post wrong. Have a nice day.

 

 

 

It doesn't surprise me considering we're dealing with someone who claims that one of his posts wasn't breaking the rules, even though shockingly it was deleted by a mod. He needs to do himself a favor and build his credence-reputation up. No one's gonna listen to someone who fabricates their own reality.

 

 

 

On the bright side, these types of people are fun to debate with. It doesn't end even when it does.

[ydrasil]

Calculations were based off of testing - you had tested (or at least claimed) you did for your rates, I used mine and qeltar together to some up with something we agree upon.

 

No calculations were not based off of testing. I never claimed that that was my actual rate or that I had tested it. As you would suggest, how about you go back and actually read my posts (it should be in the earlier posts of mine, possible page 6-10 maybe, so it shouldn't be too difficult for you). I have mentioned dozens of times throughout the thread that it was never my actual rate and have also said I believed my actual rate would be higher. The fact that you are even arguing about the rates I posted that were tested is odd. Tested rates > made-up rates are they not? You said so yourself (somewhere on one of pages between 54-59 or so I think) that while profit cannot be accurately gained from a small amount of tasks, but a reasonably accurate rate for the experience can be gotten from a smaller number of tests. Mine range from 1 for Fire Giants, 3 is the next lowest, all the way up to 9 for Abyssal Demons. So of course these rates are pretty accurate.

 

 

 

You say you used your rates in conjuction with qeltar's to come up with something, that was however never agreed upon. One reason, you have yet to actually give your rates. Not to mention qeltar's rates are so incredibly far off from accurate (one test of up to one hour, some as short as 30 minutes, using inefficient methods with inferior equipment - so bad I could probably 'not pay attention', receive a 60% drop in experience and still get a better rate :lol: ).

 

 

 

I don't need to. That data is required for an argument; we can whine about how far off each others total rates are, but until we drill into the details, we arn't getting anywhere with the differences. Get specifics, I'll compare, and we can argue and test the differences. I'm not about to redo every single number I've ever tested or seen from slayer just to see if my results differ from yours this time, and I doubt your about to do the same.

 

Oh please, you need to stop making excuses. There is no actual requirement for an argument, evidence (data) is certainly advantageous however. Also feel free to show were I haved "whined" about the difference in totals. You seem to be using any excuse you can think of to get out of actually going into the difference. Even still, lets go through what you said I was missing:

 

 

 

You have not given me a listing of rates from each task

 

The picture of the table I posted is a listing of rates from each task.

 

 

 

nor drop profits

 

Same table, right-most column.

 

 

 

and banking times used

 

Which I have mentioned several times I have not done. This is the only real thing I am missing, even still not even you can deny the rate still far exceeds Armoured Zombies.

 

 

 

profit rates with rare drops separated out

 

Which I have already shown are not that inaccurate. Calculating the average money based on the drop rate of Whips with the kill rate per hour resulting in the same profit per hour as my current profit being proposed in the table.

 

 

 

That is all that I have apparently missed. Two of them I have provided so those are irrelevant. One of I have already shown is almost irrelevant (might be off slightly in the profit, but so far it seems to difference is minimal). Finally, the last is banking times. They would reduce rates, but nothing significant enough to lose out on about 50k experience to make it lower than Armoured Zombies.

 

 

 

May I ask where I "admitted" I was lying? My rates can be found earlier in this thread, although I haven't found my original spreadsheets on my computer for the desire details.

 

Read the following quotes:

 

Post your details for each task, and I'll start comparing to mine. I still have tables with the XP rates I used, so we can compare them closely.

 

Those were posted eons ago dozens of pages back in this thread, your welcome to go back and look for them. Unfortunately, I lost most of the spreadsheet files from the debates when I reformatted and forgot to back them up, but there are screenshots and listings of XP rates

 

You say you have them so therefore a comparison can be made. You then say you lost them when you reformatted (you are some type of IT professional - remember you saying a few times, it seems unlikely you would forget to back-up the information on your computer). You aren't so much as "admitting" it, but those quotes more than qualify that you were indeed lieing or at the very least purposely misleading me. Also as I have mentioned, your rates cannot be found earlier in the thread as you never posted them earlier in the thread. You seem adamant they are there, so why don't you find them and direct me to them (as I mentioned, I will not be looking for something that is not there).

 

 

 

Sorry, but I don't need to justify my personal rates. I really couldn't care less who agrees or doesn't agree with them. Like I said, I changed them to the maxes in order to have a factual debate which was much funner and easier to resolve then an opinionated debate.

 

The only things I can think of now are these assortment of smileys; :? :x :roll: :wall: #-o :^o :shame: -.- Should be pretty obvious how each of these apply.

 

 

 

You are doing nothing but being hypocritcal and a liar. No need to justify? Yet you expect everyone else to justify theirs? Arrogance if I do say so myself. Where are your rates in the first place? Where is your detail? Where are your explanations? You want a factual debate, but will not use facts because what.... they are beneath you to do so?

 

 

 

Zierro's post (the quote from bobthesock and what Zierro said also) explain very well the attitude you have at the moment.

[compfreak847]

 

Again, you DO need to justify your personal rates if you are going to have a factual debate (debate forum pl0x? :P). If you could care less if people agree or don't agree with you, then it is being ignorant not to succeed to someone else's tests. If everyone disagrees but you, how is it your place to decide that everyone else is wrong, and you are right?

 

Do you have difficulty reading? I specifically said that my first post was opinionated, but I switched over to factual for the sake of debate.

 

 

 

 

It doesn't surprise me considering we're dealing with someone who claims that one of his posts wasn't breaking the rules, even though shockingly it was deleted by a mod. He needs to do himself a favor and build his credence-reputation up. No one's gonna listen to someone who fabricates their own reality.

 

Yes, because everyone knows that mods are perfect divine beings, and having a post deleted by them signifies the ultimate in ignorance.

 

 

No calculations were not based off of testing. I never claimed that that was my actual rate or that I had tested it. As you would suggest, how about you go back and actually read my posts (it should be in the earlier posts of mine, possible page 6-10 maybe, so it shouldn't be too difficult for you). I have mentioned dozens of times throughout the thread that it was never my actual rate and have also said I believed my actual rate would be higher. The fact that you are even arguing about the rates I posted that were tested is odd. Tested rates > made-up rates are they not? You said so yourself (somewhere on one of pages between 54-59 or so I think) that while profit cannot be accurately gained from a small amount of tasks, but a reasonably accurate rate for the experience can be gotten from a smaller number of tests. Mine range from 1 for Fire Giants, 3 is the next lowest, all the way up to 9 for Abyssal Demons. So of course these rates are pretty accurate.

 

I wasn't aware that you had simply pulled numbers out of your behind to come up with your rates. Mine WERE based on testing, and are extensively detailed for each task (along with profit rates) earlier in this thread.

 

 

 

 

Oh please, you need to stop making excuses. There is no actual requirement for an argument, evidence (data) is certainly advantageous however. Also feel free to show were I haved "whined" about the difference in totals. You seem to be using any excuse you can think of to get out of actually going into the difference. Even still, lets go through what you said I was missing:

 

OK, we can do it that way. My numbers 75k. What's yours? If it's anything else, it's wrong. Go retest all your data a few months and get back to me. You need numbers to argue, not something you threw out with no information whatsoever :roll:

 

 

 

 

Same table, right-most column.

 

All I see is a number spit out with total drops.

 

 

 

 

Which I have already shown are not that inaccurate. Calculating the average money based on the drop rate of Whips with the kill rate per hour resulting in the same profit per hour as my current profit being proposed in the table.

 

I'm not talking simply about whips, I'm talking about all rare drops. Dragon boots are an example, along witih the 'standard' rares like crystal keys - something that is very important when dealing with razor thin profit margins; a few lucky or unlucky drops over a few tasks can completely throw up your total numbers.

 

 

 

 

The only things I can think of now are these assortment of smileys; :? :x :roll: :wall: #-o :^o :shame: -.- Should be pretty obvious how each of these apply.

 

 

 

You are doing nothing but being hypocritcal and a liar. No need to justify? Yet you expect everyone else to justify theirs? Arrogance if I do say so myself. Where are your rates in the first place? Where is your detail? Where are your explanations? You want a factual debate, but will not use facts because what.... they are beneath you to do so?

 

I hate to break it to you, but you apparently failed to realize we're still talking about my first post. Is it necessary to justify my opinion to you? No. Is it necessary to justify my facts to you in order to have an argument? No, duh. Go back and read my posts.

[ydrasil]

I wasn't aware that you had simply pulled numbers out of your behind to come up with your rates. Mine WERE based on testing, and are extensively detailed for each task (along with profit rates) earlier in this thread.

 

As I has mentioned months ago when I first suggested that as a possible rate I explained that it was not actually tested on. It was based on the assumption of 22.5k Slayer experience per hour and 65k melee experience per hour, from that it was determined to be 12.5k Ranged and 21.7k Hitpoints. Your rates were based on testing? You have never once posted your rates, so either post them now or stop saying you have. The only thing that comes close was at one point (in the middle of the thread I might add, so this was after my proposed rate), that you decided to log data for a tasks. The only result you came back was a picture of an excel spreadsheet for Greater Demons. You did that only once (or was it twice for the Greaters? Unsure). One task is not an average for Slayer (those are your words which you have replied to many people). So that means that one task of Greater Demons only is invalid.

 

 

 

OK, we can do it that way. My numbers 75k. What's yours? If it's anything else, it's wrong. Go retest all your data a few months and get back to me. You need numbers to argue, not something you threw out with no information whatsoever :roll:

 

Yah for the smiley :roll: . Not once have you mentioned that rate of 75k. The easiest way I can prove that at the moment would be to point out if that were the case, why would the debate have continued on as only 65k instead of 75k? Even furthur showing your hypocrisy (and arrogance), where is the detail that others must submit but you do not supply for yours? I have tested my rates, there are no mistakes and they come with a fairly high degree of accuracy. So I do have numbers to argue with. You need to stop saying that I just "threw it out there", as that was not the case (all the evidence I posted earlier supports this).

 

 

 

All I see is a number spit out with total drops.

 

That column is the average profit per hour across every task I had done for that specific NPC. Those numbers are the drop profits so seriously, what the hell is the problem? You ask for drop profits, they are given, but since they are given, they are wrong? Yea ok...

 

 

 

I'm not talking simply about whips, I'm talking about all rare drops. Dragon boots are an example, along with the 'standard' rares like crystal keys - something that is very important when dealing with razor thin profit margins; a few lucky or unlucky drops over a few tasks can completely throw up your total numbers.

 

I wouldn't exactly call Crystal Keys rare, maybe uncommon. The rate for Spiritual Mages I posted was 685k I think. Based on a drop rate of 1/125 and the kill rate of 300, you would expect to get 2.4 Dragon Boots per hour. That correlates to a 571.2k net gain on simply the Boots alone. As I recall, the other drops cover the cost of supplies and profit slightly (about 10k I think it was). That means it would be approximately 581k profit per hour, about a 100k difference. However, this number isn't quite right. The Boots had dropped in price and at the time of my posting were 278k I believe. Using that number and adding the additional 10k is a profit of 677.2k, so my number wasn't exactly inaccurate when I posted it. What other tasks are supposedly being thrown off by 'rare' drops?

 

 

 

I hate to break it to you, but you apparently failed to realize we're still talking about my first post. Is it necessary to justify my opinion to you? No. Is it necessary to justify my facts to you in order to have an argument? No, duh. Go back and read my posts.

 

Unlike what you may think, I am not that stupid (couldn't think of a better way to put that). I knew you were referring to the first post. You had mentioned that you still maintain the belief that 45k per hour is the standard. An opinion only exists because the person who came up with it had a reason to come to that conclusion. An opinion is nothing more than someones interpretation of results, two people can see the exact same data and yet come to different conclusions. There is always a reason for why they come to those conclusions. Although to be honest, I don't recall seeing where I posted that I needed you to justify your opinions. As for facts, let me quote someone who you hold an immeasurable amount of respect for (was thinking of a different word but it just wouldn't quite come to me):

 

 

 

Go retest all your data a few months and get back to me. You need numbers to argue, not something you threw out with no information whatsoever :roll:

 

 

 

In case you have not realised, that quote is from you. So according to this it can only be interpretted as any facts I provide need to be justified, any you provide (although you have yet to give any towards a Slayer rate) need no justification and are automatically correct. That is arrogance and hypocrisy. Also, don't tell me to go back and read your posts. I have read all of them and always base my reply off what you post. You however quite often misinterpret and do not properly read my posts. Like on page 53 when I posted my results of my test and you asked a question in which the answer was clearly indicated already. You then asked another question which was also already indicated (you even said you looked back through my post twice and never found it, clearly you either lied, or simply and more likely do not always read my posts).

 

 

 

Finally, after all this time, you still have not posted your results for Slayer. If you lost it as you say, do not keep saying you can compare them to mine when yours do not exist. If they are in this thread as you say, find them and you can direct me to where they are. I cannot prove they are not in the thread to you, I can prove it to myself by looking throug it (by I already know they are not there). The only way you can prove it to yourself is to look through the thread and find them yourself if they are there. If they are not (which is the case), it only goes to show that I was right all along that they were never there and that you have never once posted your results in the thread. To reiterate, look through the thread and find the results if they are there.

[Zierro]

Yes, because everyone knows that mods are perfect divine beings, and having a post deleted by them signifies the ultimate in ignorance.

 

 

 

No one said they're perfect, but they do a nice job getting rid of rule-breaking posts when they're reported. Also, it's not the fact that your post got deleted that makes you ignorant - it's how you said it wasn't breaking any rules even though it got deleted that makes you ignorant.

[compfreak847]

 

As I has mentioned months ago when I first suggested that as a possible rate I explained that it was not actually tested on. It was based on the assumption of 22.5k Slayer experience per hour and 65k melee experience per hour, from that it was determined to be 12.5k Ranged and 21.7k Hitpoints. Your rates were based on testing? You have never once posted your rates, so either post them now or stop saying you have. The only thing that comes close was at one point (in the middle of the thread I might add, so this was after my proposed rate), that you decided to log data for a tasks. The only result you came back was a picture of an excel spreadsheet for Greater Demons. You did that only once (or was it twice for the Greaters? Unsure). One task is not an average for Slayer (those are your words which you have replied to many people). So that means that one task of Greater Demons only is invalid.

 

All of my rates are mentioned earlier in the threads - I combined both Qeltar's and mine, and the demon testing came later when the rates were called into question. However, you ended up agreeing with them, so I scrapped the demon project.

 

 

 

 

Yah for the smiley :roll: . Not once have you mentioned that rate of 75k. The easiest way I can prove that at the moment would be to point out if that were the case, why would the debate have continued on as only 65k instead of 75k? Even furthur showing your hypocrisy (and arrogance), where is the detail that others must submit but you do not supply for yours? I have tested my rates, there are no mistakes and they come with a fairly high degree of accuracy. So I do have numbers to argue with. You need to stop saying that I just "threw it out there", as that was not the case (all the evidence I posted earlier supports this).

 

See above. I'm referring to threw it out there meaning you didn't provide enough details - I mentioned all of them earlier.

 

 

 

 

That column is the average profit per hour across every task I had done for that specific NPC. Those numbers are the drop profits so seriously, what the hell is the problem? You ask for drop profits, they are given, but since they are given, they are wrong? Yea ok...

 

No, I asked for the drop profits without any rare drops. I highly doubt all of those numbers don't include any rares, and you still have made no mention of banking time - a 150 vs. 200 task has the same banking time but considerably different killing times, skewing the rates if they are not separated.

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't exactly call Crystal Keys rare, maybe uncommon. The rate for Spiritual Mages I posted was 685k I think. Based on a drop rate of 1/125 and the kill rate of 300, you would expect to get 2.4 Dragon Boots per hour. That correlates to a 571.2k net gain on simply the Boots alone. As I recall, the other drops cover the cost of supplies and profit slightly (about 10k I think it was). That means it would be approximately 581k profit per hour, about a 100k difference. However, this number isn't quite right. The Boots had dropped in price and at the time of my posting were 278k I believe. Using that number and adding the additional 10k is a profit of 677.2k, so my number wasn't exactly inaccurate when I posted it. What other tasks are supposedly being thrown off by 'rare' drops?

 

Unfortunately, the kill rate certainly isn't 300, and the drop rate isn't 1/125. I covered this long ago. Price drops were another reason for seperation.

 

 

 

 

Unlike what you may think, I am not that stupid (couldn't think of a better way to put that). I knew you were referring to the first post. You had mentioned that you still maintain the belief that 45k per hour is the standard. An opinion only exists because the person who came up with it had a reason to come to that conclusion. An opinion is nothing more than someones interpretation of results, two people can see the exact same data and yet come to different conclusions. There is always a reason for why they come to those conclusions. Although to be honest, I don't recall seeing where I posted that I needed you to justify your opinions. As for facts, let me quote someone who you hold an immeasurable amount of respect for (was thinking of a different word but it just wouldn't quite come to me):

 

45k is the standard for my laid-back slaying. It's my personal rate. How do you plain to "interpret" it differently?

 

 

 

 

In case you have not realised, that quote is from you. So according to this it can only be interpretted as any facts I provide need to be justified, any you provide (although you have yet to give any towards a Slayer rate) need no justification and are automatically correct. That is arrogance and hypocrisy. Also, don't tell me to go back and read your posts. I have read all of them and always base my reply off what you post. You however quite often misinterpret and do not properly read my posts. Like on page 53 when I posted my results of my test and you asked a question in which the answer was clearly indicated already. You then asked another question which was also already indicated (you even said you looked back through my post twice and never found it, clearly you either lied, or simply and more likely do not always read my posts).

 

All of it was referring to questions that you didn't look into carefully enough. Like separation of drop rates, it's required for debate, and was not mentioned. If you have the info give it, if you don't, say so. It's quite obvious that it was already read, and the information was not in any of the questions.

 

 

 

 

Finally, after all this time, you still have not posted your results for Slayer. If you lost it as you say, do not keep saying you can compare them to mine when yours do not exist. If they are in this thread as you say, find them and you can direct me to where they are. I cannot prove they are not in the thread to you, I can prove it to myself by looking throug it (by I already know they are not there). The only way you can prove it to yourself is to look through the thread and find them yourself if they are there. If they are not (which is the case), it only goes to show that I was right all along that they were never there and that you have never once posted your results in the thread. To reiterate, look through the thread and find the results if they are there.

 

Stop playing dumb. We didn't argue for 40 pages over non existent rates.

 

 

 

No one said they're perfect, but they do a nice job getting rid of rule-breaking posts when they're reported. Also, it's not the fact that your post got deleted that makes you ignorant - it's how you said it wasn't breaking any rules even though it got deleted that makes you ignorant.

 

I also got my signature removed for being oversized when it wasn't. It took 2 weeks and a dozen PMs to various admins to get it restored and the moderator punished. Mods aren't perfect, and the argument that "a mod said you were wrong once, so your obviously wrong now" doesn't really hold water.

[Zierro]

I also got my signature removed for being oversized when it wasn't. It took 2 weeks and a dozen PMs to various admins to get it restored and the moderator punished. Mods aren't perfect, and the argument that "a mod said you were wrong once, so your obviously wrong now" doesn't really hold water.

 

 

 

It wasn't just a mod. It was me, another poster, and a mod who knew that it was against rules. You were the only one who disagreed. It's commonsense to know that posting something like, "If you want to see some fireworks, look at my debate with Zierro. He lost the argument really bad," completely out of the blue is against the rules. Only someone like you, someone who fabricates their own reality just to make themselves look like they know what they're talking about, would disagree with that.

[compfreak847]

It wasn't just a mod. It was me, another poster, and a mod who knew that it was against rules. You were the only one who disagreed. It's commonsense to know that posting something like, "If you want to see some fireworks, look at my debate with Zierro. He lost the argument really bad," completely out of the blue is against the rules. Only someone like you, someone who fabricates their own reality just to make themselves look like they know what they're talking about, would disagree with that.

 

What does the number of people agreeing with you have to do with anything at all, especially when you were proven wrong? Also, what does that have to do with slayer?

[Zierro]

What does the number of people agreeing with you have to do with anything at all, especially when you were proven wrong?

 

 

 

People are more inclined to believe three credible sources than one which concocts their own reality at a whim to make it appear like they're never wrong.

 

 

 

Also, what does that have to do with slayer?

 

 

 

It doesn't. It has to do with how you will never ever change your mind even when contradicting evidence is right in front of your nose, which is the reason why this thread is so long and why it is the same thing over and over again.

[compfreak847]

 

People are more inclined to believe three credible sources than one which concocts their own reality at a whim to make it appear like they're never wrong.

 

Last time I checked, the dictionary doesn't do much realty concoction and caries a bit more credence then someone who tries to argue with it.

 

 

 

 

It doesn't. It has to do with how you will never ever change your mind even when contradicting evidence is right in front of your nose, which is the reason why this thread is so long and why it is the same thing over and over again.

 

That would be a fun argument, if it were not for the simple fact that the 'contradicting evidence', as you so call it, thus far does not exist. I wish it did, though. Someone needs to hurry up and prove slayer better :cry:

 

 

 

Also, the argument "He proved me wrong last time we argued, therefore he is incapable of recognizing he is wrong!" argument caries little water, but does carry a delicious taste of irony.

[Zierro]

Last time I checked, the dictionary doesn't do much realty concoction and caries a bit more credence then someone who tries to argue with it.

 

 

 

You realize you're insulting yourself, right? You're the one who always ignores things that the dictionary and Wikipedia says such as, "not determined by age". Remember?

 

 

 

That would be a fun argument, if it were not for the simple fact that the 'contradicting evidence', as you so call it, thus far does not exist. I wish it did, though. Someone needs to hurry up and prove slayer better

 

 

 

Thanks for proving my point. You're making this easier than it should be.

 

 

 

Also, the argument "He proved me wrong last time we argued, therefore he is incapable of recognizing he is wrong!" argument caries little water, but does carry a delicious taste of irony.

 

 

 

This argument has never been used. This is what I mean about concocting your own reality.

[compfreak847]

You realize you're insulting yourself, right?

 

No, I didn't. What thread are you referring to? I'm talking about the Wilderness thread where you were determined to prove that I didn't know what I meant using a made up definition, which I quickly corrected by pointing to the dictionary page to back mine up. You responded by promptly leaving.

 

 

 

 

Thanks for proving my point. You're making this easier than it should be.

 

Ah, so you agree that my thread is indeed a good argument with no current evidence against it? In that case, what are we arguing about? I was under the impression you thought I was proven wrong in this thread :!:

 

 

 

 

This argument has never been used. This is what I mean about concocting your own reality.

 

That's odd, someone must have hacked your account and submitted this post. I'd advise you to change your password and contact the mods so the proper action can be taken against him.

[Zierro]

No, I didn't. What thread are you referring to? I'm talking about the Wilderness thread where you were determined to prove that I didn't know what I meant using a made up definition, which I quickly corrected by pointing to the dictionary page to back mine up. You responded by promptly leaving.

 

 

 

Must I make a list of all the definitions of words you ignored? Okay! :mrgreen:

 

 

 

Maturity, Psychology, Physical, Be, Act, Determined, Flame, Spam, Can, Can't...

 

 

 

It goes on and on, but when words like "be" and "can" are on there, it paints a very vivid picture of your debate (haha) style.

 

 

 

Ah, so you agree that my thread is indeed a good argument with no current evidence against it? In that case, what are we arguing about? I was under the impression you thought I was proven wrong in this thread

 

 

 

If you're not good at debating, what on earth makes you think you're good at joking :?:

 

 

 

That's odd, someone must have hacked your account and submitted this post. I'd advise you to change your password and contact the mods so the proper action can be taken against him.

 

 

 

You didn't prove me wrong. A mod deleted your post, therefore it was against the rules.

[compfreak847]

 

Must I make a list of all the definitions of words you ignored? Okay! :mrgreen:

 

 

 

Maturity, Psychology, Physical, Be, Act, Determined, Flame, Spam, Can, Can't...

 

 

 

It goes on and on, but when words like "be" and "can" are on there, it paints a very vivid picture of your debate (haha) style.

 

I'm afraid you mis-remembered it, it was I who posted the definitions. If you wish to continue that debate, I suggest using the appropriate thread. Since my last post remains on it, I'll ignore further posts in this thread and wait for you to post there.

 

 

 

 

If you're not good at debating, what on earth makes you think you're good at joking :?:

 

What does that have to do with this argument?

 

 

 

You didn't prove me wrong. A mod deleted your post, therefore it was against the rules.

 

A mod deleted my signature, but it wasn't against the rules, as an admin confirmed. Mods aren't perfect.

[Zierro]

I'm afraid you mis-remembered it, it was I who posted the definitions. If you wish to continue that debate, I suggest using the appropriate thread. Since my last post remains on it, I'll ignore further posts in this thread and wait for you to post there.

 

 

 

Actually everything was already cleared up by Omali and I.

 

 

 

What does that have to do with this argument?

 

 

 

It doesn't. I was just pointing out that you are not good at debating, so you should probably work on that before you attempt humor again.

 

 

 

A mod deleted my signature, but it wasn't against the rules, as an admin confirmed. Mods aren't perfect.

 

 

 

You want me to ask an Admin if that deleted post was out of line, because I can gladly do it.

[compfreak847]

 

Actually everything was already cleared up by Omali and I.

 

All he and you mentioned was that both children and adults can appear mature, which I completely supported. My argument, detailed at viewtopic.php?f=66&t=787454&start=360#p6563861, was never responded to.

 

 

 

 

It doesn't. I was just pointing out that you are not good at debating, so you should probably work on that before you attempt humor again.

 

Odd, perhaps you should rethink in light of you having been proven wrong, as you seem to be having difficulty dealing with it. Lack of debating skills would indicate that I would generally be proven wrong in debates, when it seems to be the opposite.

 

 

 

 

You want me to ask an Admin if that deleted post was out of line, because I can gladly do it.

 

I tried that with other posts, but it generally requires a copy and paste of the contents, the name of the deleting mod, and clear-cut evidence that no rule was being broken to argue it successfully to the admins - they aren't perfect either, and the prefer to let things rest rather then argue a technicality. It didn't bother me much, though; I had communicated my point, and I let it slide.