Slayer Sucks

[ydrasil]

Because all experience value is NOT the same. Do you view herblore cape just as hard to obtain as, say, cooking cape? No, the herblore cape takes longer to obtain and earn the money for, and therefore the value of the XP is greater.

 

Ah so we get back this point all over again. It seems you do not understand what is meat by the value of experience. We went through this ages ago where I explained it, and yet you still have not grasped the concept. Just because a Herblore cape takes longer and costs more to obtain, does not make it more valuable. It is not a matter of how much the skill gains/loses or necessarily the time it takes to gain the experience.

 

 

 

A person might train to 99 firemaking (the most useless skill in the game - in my opinion anyway), and that person also trains to say 99 Herblore. From that information alone, can you tell which is more valuable? No you cannot. You can state your own value, but not theirs. This person might hate the Herblore skills and love the Firemaking skill. They could enjoy Firemaking and to them it is the best skill in the game. That means to them, Firemaking is more valuable than Herblore.

 

 

 

Value is not so much a set amount, but rather it is relative to the other skills. While a player might be able to say the exact amount they value a skill, they can tell how much they value it with respect to the others. It is seperate to what it costs to obtain the experience. If you don't understand this, then say so. I could try to clarify it, but it really is not that difficult a concept and i'm not sure I can simplify it any more.

 

 

 

Nowdays the average is roughly half that, but it's luck based and more competitive. Few people have time to drop everything in RL and go bandos for 4-5 hours.

 

Half 400k, or half 1mil? To suggest it is only 200k an hour is ridiculous so I am assuming you meant 1mil. That means you are saying it is possible to average 500k an hour. That means the average profit that a player who can also obtain 103k melee experience at Armoured Zombies is at least 500k if not more.

 

 

 

No, because if they were no one would be getting 825k per hour.

 

So by saying to all those people in H&A forum that 825k is possible, you were lieing? Your posts here and there contradict one another. If what you say here is correct, and that if people used this method, then getting 825k is impossible. That means any time you said Aviansies was 825k to someone in H&A you were leing. If what you said there was true, that means that 8225k is possible for other people. It is one or the other.

 

 

 

No, you are training a portion of combat. There's a very large difference.

 

 

In doing so, you train combat by gaining combat experience. As such, you gain the fastest combat experience in the game. Why is that hard to understand?

 

 

 

No, I would not have. You stated your rates as if they were what you obtained, not what you "assumed" you could obtain.

 

If you are referring to the rate proposed around page 12-15 I think it was, had you read what I had posted at all, I never said that it was my rate. I had also always stated that I believed my rate to be higher, and when tested my rate did indeed prove to be higher.

 

 

 

And I am just as adamant that you are wrong and are unwilling to admit it despite considerable evidence to the contrary. That's frequently known as a "debate". Further points to this nature will be ignored, as it's nothing but spam and is contributing zero to deciding with is superior.

 

What is this evidence of which you speak? I have seen no evidence that shows Armoured Zombies are more efficient than Slayer. There is only you saying it is, with no evidence pointing to it. My response there was directly due to you claiming I do not post evidence to support what I have posted. That I do not explain what I have, that I don't show how I got to the conclusion. That was false and I responded to it as such.

 

 

 

As stated before, my evidence is in the form of backing up the 50\50 split; if there were stronger evidence to the contrary it could be overturned, but as there is not it remains the most accurate conclusion at the moment.

 

What evidence? There is only you claiming that there is evidence to support your claim, but you have posted any such evidence. Either the evidence does not exist or it does, but you are unwilling to post it for whatever reason. If that is the case then it stands to reason that what you say cannot be taken as fact regarding this matter.

 

 

 

You saying yours is the most accurate conclusion is not necessarily accurate at all. Lets say for example that a new element is discovered. We know nothing about it other than the fact that it exists. I could then say it has an atomic weight of 278.4. I could then claim it is the most accurate conclusion because there is no evidence the contrary, regardless that I have no evidence to support my claim. That is essentially what you are doing.

 

 

 

I have already gone over this several times. My main concerns lie in the large margin of error he gives himself - a variability of 30% makes calculations of this nature impossible. Additionally, as he is not separating his profit rates, it's impossible for us to adjust for the falling prices (Dark bow is a good example; what would be earned now is a fraction of what would be earned a few months ago), and in many cases his methods differ substantially from the ones we are debating.

 

Where is this large margin of error you say exists? Where did you even get the arbitrary number of 30%? I have been through that thread many times and never seen such a number nor that large a difference in his numbers. Once again you have no evidence to supoort your claim. Profit rates are proportional to experience rates. See what profit you get for a set amount of experience, this number can be adjusted to equal the amount of Slayer experience per hour he gets and the hourly profit rate for a given task.

 

 

 

The methods in this thread you have proposed must be used are simply pathetic in my opinion. They are terribly inefficient and I would not use them given a more efficient method. So I will continue to use a cannon because I know for a fact it is more efficient than not to. I will continue to use combat familiars because it is more efficient than not using one. It is that simple.

 

 

 

You have not come up with any substantial error in his rates with which you have evidence to back up.

 

 

 

Someone your level could also have higher slaye rlevel then low. Averages must be worked for everyone, not a specific person.

 

Have I ever said otherwise? You have said that the only way to debate without using opinion is to use the maximum rates. I agree with this because these rates can be lowered according to different levels. Yet the moment this happens, you argue that they are too high? All of my rates are lower than the maximum, evidenced by not having maxed stats. So by comparing with similar stats the two different methods, the more efficient one can be determined and it will scale down accordingly to lower levels. It is that simple.

 

 

 

I posted my rates long before he posted that, as well as saying that I had read Zarfot's guide many times - further proof he never bothered to read my replies. Additionally, it's quite obvious I wasn't quoting him word for word; I was using exaggeration of his posting mannerisms to illustrate my point.

 

I searched for the term "47 min". Surely if you had mentioned that rate before, it would be found in the word document. Only 2 results came up, which was referring to the difference in posting times. So you have never mentioned a rate of 47 minutes before. Your posts indicate you have not properly read that guide, regardless of how many times you say. That thread is all that is truly needed to show Slayer is better, in which case this thread would never have existed. You are too arrogant however to think someone could be getting a better rate than you. You may have esaggerated, but it was not an exaggeration of "his" posting mannerisms.

 

 

 

Then read the earlier replies more carefully; I conclusively proved cannon to be inefficient at 400k\h, and no further evidence to the contrary has been presented.

 

I have read, and you did no such thing. All of those calculations were based on Qeltar's numbers, which on their own are terrible inefficent and lower than the average. Upon my own testing of Bloodvelds, I conclusively proved a cannon efficient at 400k an hour. The only real way to prove it is to perform the test yourself, because Qeltar's numbers are terrible. You have even claimed you performed 80 hours of testing with a cannon. Yet there was no such mention of it earlier in the thread nor any evidence agreeing with that you have done any such test.

 

 

 

May I ask what purpose would be served by coping the first 40 pages of this thread into several posts again?

 

May I ask how someone of your claimed intelligence can miss the point by this much? The logic behind a method is not hundreds of pages of text. It certainly did not encompass the entirety of the first 40 pages either. You are using this as an excuse (a pathetically bad exucse at that) just so that you will not have to post your methods. If it is as you say that Slayer is inefficient, would that not mean you would have more to gain by posting this and showing once and for all Slayer as inefficient?

 

 

 

Ah yes, that 6 minutes video of your rates. How could I ever dispute it :roll:

 

Yes how could you? At the rate I was killing them, extrapolated to an hour does given an accurate approximation of the rate. As such it was not entirely accurate, it was a few thousand experience below what I normally achieve. This is you once again using any excuse you can think of to keep saying Slayer is inefficient.

 

 

 

Covered in the PM. Those rates were not my numbers alone; I took into account Qeltar and Zarfot's rates (and in two cases, yours) on tasks that they used similar methods to try and obtain the most acurate picture of what can be expected from those tasks.

 

I've read the message, it was not covered. It specifically says "They were taken from the last iteration of numbers throughout the thread." That means the last numbers you had posted throughout the thread for each NPC is what your rate actually is. Not once where any of the numbers you posted found. I even made a mistake where I said only 2 were not in there. You actually said we had never agreed on Dust Devils and Gargoyles, as well as 2 or 3 others. So out of the 13 you gave, according to you, only 8 or 9 were ever actually within the thread. Does this not conclusively prove that no matter how much anyone looked, no-one would ever find your rates (experience and profit) for every task? The only correct answer is that it does prove that.

 

 

 

When I asked for rates, I was expecting all of the rates. Not 8-9 rates of simply melee experience per hour. I wanted (and still do) your Slayer rates per hour as well as the Ranged, Hitpoints, Summoning and Profit. How else can there be a comparison? Now you cannot use the bs excuse that they are in the thread, as it has been conlusively proven they are not. Why is it so difficult to post a table outlining average experience rates for each skill of each NPC and the profit rates that accompany them? When you do that a comparison can finally be made to see why your rate is so much lower.

[compfreak847]

 

Ah so we get back this point all over again. It seems you do not understand what is meat by the value of experience. We went through this ages ago where I explained it, and yet you still have not grasped the concept. Just because a Herblore cape takes longer and costs more to obtain, does not make it more valuable. It is not a matter of how much the skill gains/loses or necessarily the time it takes to gain the experience.

 

 

 

A person might train to 99 firemaking (the most useless skill in the game - in my opinion anyway), and that person also trains to say 99 Herblore. From that information alone, can you tell which is more valuable? No you cannot. You can state your own value, but not theirs. This person might hate the Herblore skills and love the Firemaking skill. They could enjoy Firemaking and to them it is the best skill in the game. That means to them, Firemaking is more valuable than Herblore.

 

 

 

Value is not so much a set amount, but rather it is relative to the other skills. While a player might be able to say the exact amount they value a skill, they can tell how much they value it with respect to the others. It is seperate to what it costs to obtain the experience. If you don't understand this, then say so. I could try to clarify it, but it really is not that difficult a concept and i'm not sure I can simplify it any more.

 

Look, do we need to go through this again? I'm not counting "fun" in this equation, it's a mathmatical calculation to determine which gives a specific result in the shortest amount of time. I can say with unquestionable certainty that the most efficient method to train firemaking takes X amount of time vs. Y amount of time for herblore when the GP and other skill XP effects are standardized.

 

 

 

 

Half 400k, or half 1mil? To suggest it is only 200k an hour is ridiculous so I am assuming you meant 1mil. That means you are saying it is possible to average 500k an hour. That means the average profit that a player who can also obtain 103k melee experience at Armoured Zombies is at least 500k if not more.

 

But that is luck based, and as mentioned earlier, very few people can go to bandos GWD any time they want - near peak times, there are far more teams and profit rates drop; plus, few people have the luxery of being able to go to GWD and spend 4-5 hours without a break.

 

 

 

 

So by saying to all those people in H&A forum that 825k is possible, you were lieing? Your posts here and there contradict one another. If what you say here is correct, and that if people used this method, then getting 825k is impossible. That means any time you said Aviansies was 825k to someone in H&A you were leing. If what you said there was true, that means that 8225k is possible for other people. It is one or the other.

 

825k is possible, but not for the average player.

 

 

 

 

In doing so, you train combat by gaining combat experience. As such, you gain the fastest combat experience in the game. Why is that hard to understand?

 

Because your only training a portion of combat. As mentioned earlier, ALL combat skills must be taken into account.

 

 

 

 

If you are referring to the rate proposed around page 12-15 I think it was, had you read what I had posted at all, I never said that it was my rate. I had also always stated that I believed my rate to be higher, and when tested my rate did indeed prove to be higher.

 

I'm referring to every rate argument we had leading up to where you left for a month and returned with your new rates.

 

 

 

 

What is this evidence of which you speak? I have seen no evidence that shows Armoured Zombies are more efficient than Slayer. There is only you saying it is, with no evidence pointing to it. My response there was directly due to you claiming I do not post evidence to support what I have posted. That I do not explain what I have, that I don't show how I got to the conclusion. That was false and I responded to it as such.

 

I have given my rates and the formulas proving slayer inefficient.

 

 

 

 

What evidence? There is only you claiming that there is evidence to support your claim, but you have posted any such evidence. Either the evidence does not exist or it does, but you are unwilling to post it for whatever reason. If that is the case then it stands to reason that what you say cannot be taken as fact regarding this matter.

 

Quite simple; it's the 16-32-64 max hit of 0-65-175 strength bonus proving the 50\50 split. This isn't rocket science.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You saying yours is the most accurate conclusion is not necessarily accurate at all. Lets say for example that a new element is discovered. We know nothing about it other than the fact that it exists. I could then say it has an atomic weight of 278.4. I could then claim it is the most accurate conclusion because there is no evidence the contrary, regardless that I have no evidence to support my claim. That is essentially what you are doing.

 

Continuing the analogy, we see the 3 elements before it with atomic weights of 275.4, 276.4 and 277.4, with the 3 above it at 279.4, 280.4, and 281.4. Yeah, it could be totally different, but it's likely 278.4 and at most varying between 276.5-277.3.

 

 

 

 

Where is this large margin of error you say exists? Where did you even get the arbitrary number of 30%? I have been through that thread many times and never seen such a number nor that large a difference in his numbers. Once again you have no evidence to supoort your claim. Profit rates are proportional to experience rates. See what profit you get for a set amount of experience, this number can be adjusted to equal the amount of Slayer experience per hour he gets and the hourly profit rate for a given task.

 

Referring to the slayer->summoning XP rate listed in each task's details.

 

 

 

 

The methods in this thread you have proposed must be used are simply pathetic in my opinion. They are terribly inefficient and I would not use them given a more efficient method. So I will continue to use a cannon because I know for a fact it is more efficient than not to. I will continue to use combat familiars because it is more efficient than not using one. It is that simple.

 

I have proven them mathematically; opinionated arguments like you "know" it isn't going to help anything unless you post numerical proof.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You have not come up with any substantial error in his rates with which you have evidence to back up.

 

Other then that they differ from mine in some cases, and in others are using different rates (and are therefore irrelevant). I also thought you might find this quote from him interesting:

 

 

Training efficiently, I estimate that slayer gives only about 20-25% slower combat xp than the fastest non-slayer methods.

 

 

 

 

I searched for the term "47 min". Surely if you had mentioned that rate before, it would be found in the word document. Only 2 results came up, which was referring to the difference in posting times. So you have never mentioned a rate of 47 minutes before. Your posts indicate you have not properly read that guide, regardless of how many times you say. That thread is all that is truly needed to show Slayer is better, in which case this thread would never have existed. You are too arrogant however to think someone could be getting a better rate than you.

 

You will notice that I gave my XP rate for Spectres. It could be assumed that from such it would be possible to calculate average task time.

 

You may have esaggerated, but it was not an exaggeration of "his" posting mannerisms.

 

It may have come across to you differently, but that's how I interpreted it.

 

 

 

 

I have read, and you did no such thing. All of those calculations were based on Qeltar's numbers, which on their own are terrible inefficent and lower than the average. Upon my own testing of Bloodvelds, I conclusively proved a cannon efficient at 400k an hour. The only real way to prove it is to perform the test yourself, because Qeltar's numbers are terrible. You have even claimed you performed 80 hours of testing with a cannon. Yet there was no such mention of it earlier in the thread nor any evidence agreeing with that you have done any such test.

 

What "evidence" can be given besides rates, which I have already given? So far, you still have not provided any mathematical evidence of a cannon being superior.

 

 

 

 

May I ask how someone of your claimed intelligence can miss the point by this much? The logic behind a method is not hundreds of pages of text. It certainly did not encompass the entirety of the first 40 pages either. You are using this as an excuse (a pathetically bad exucse at that) just so that you will not have to post your methods. If it is as you say that Slayer is inefficient, would that not mean you would have more to gain by posting this and showing once and for all Slayer as inefficient?

 

It most certainly is; the pages of me and you listing calculations and arguing about methods are enormous. There really isn't much else in those pages.

 

 

 

 

Yes how could you? At the rate I was killing them, extrapolated to an hour does given an accurate approximation of the rate. As such it was not entirely accurate, it was a few thousand experience below what I normally achieve. This is you once again using any excuse you can think of to keep saying Slayer is inefficient.

 

I've had 1 hour long sessions that vary 10%. I've gotten 25% variance in a 10 minute test at armored zombies. Taking a 6 minute example and trying to extrapolate it is laughably inaccurate; for all I know, you hand picked the best session. Heck, I could make armored zombies out to be 130 or 140k XP\h if I recorded a few minutes of my best rate.

 

 

 

 

I've read the message, it was not covered. It specifically says "They were taken from the last iteration of numbers throughout the thread." That means the last numbers you had posted throughout the thread for each NPC is what your rate actually is. Not once where any of the numbers you posted found. I even made a mistake where I said only 2 were not in there. You actually said we had never agreed on Dust Devils and Gargoyles, as well as 2 or 3 others. So out of the 13 you gave, according to you, only 8 or 9 were ever actually within the thread. Does this not conclusively prove that no matter how much anyone looked, no-one would ever find your rates (experience and profit) for every task? The only correct answer is that it does prove that.

 

No, it does not. Those were not specifically my rates - they were my rates, taking into account Qeltar, Zarfot (and occasionally) your rates to see where mine differed greatly, possibly due to inefficiency of mine.

 

 

 

When I asked for rates, I was expecting all of the rates. Not 8-9 rates of simply melee experience per hour. I wanted (and still do) your Slayer rates per hour as well as the Ranged, Hitpoints, Summoning and Profit. How else can there be a comparison? Now you cannot use the bs excuse that they are in the thread, as it has been conlusively proven they are not. Why is it so difficult to post a table outlining average experience rates for each skill of each NPC and the profit rates that accompany them? When you do that a comparison can finally be made to see why your rate is so much lower.

 

Isn't it quite simple? Those are ALL the tasks I do. I did not include a cannon in results; calculations proved a cannon inefficient or having a statistically insignificant effect. As I mentioned earlier, profit rates and summoning XP can be found in my thread. I've spoon fed you enough; go back and look if you want the details. Slayer XP, for the most part, is melee XP / 4.

[D Jay99]

I did not include a cannon in results; calculations proved a cannon inefficient or having a statistically insignificant effect. As I mentioned earlier, profit rates and summoning XP can be found in my thread. I've spoon fed you enough; go back and look if you want the details.

 

You basically expect everyone to dig through your thread of over 70 forum pages, just to find some data so they can argue with you. I kind of expect you to dig through your posts and find the money made/hour you need for cannon to be efficient, otherwise I'll just assume you don't have that data or you are delaying the discussion on purpose.

 

 

 

Besides, whenever someone posts a baseless rant, you come up with this:

 

 

 

http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=783809

 

"You need to present a valid argument for your rant and back it up".

 

 

 

Thus, as long as you don't provide any data to prove your 50k melee xp/hour from slaying, we'll just have to assume you haven't provided a valid argument for your rant. You can't just state that slayer is 50k xp/hour without actually having a reliable source or providing data or your own.

 

 

 

And yes, I indeed read most of the discussion, but you can't expect me to dig through all of those pages again and again every time I forget one of your rates you posted somewhere in there.

 

 

 

If you want to end this discussion, you'll have to post rates, otherwise everyone will be arguing against rates that have supposedly been posted 40 something pages back, which is ridiculous.

[ydrasil]

Look, do we need to go through this again? I'm not counting "fun" in this equation, it's a mathmatical calculation to determine which gives a specific result in the shortest amount of time. I can say with unquestionable certainty that the most efficient method to train firemaking takes X amount of time vs. Y amount of time for herblore when the GP and other skill XP effects are standardized.

 

What did you think the point of the value of experience was? It is not simply a matter of fun. The only possible way I can think of is to give an example where it shows (I would think) what is meant by the value of experience. At Armoured Zombies you get 103k melee experience per hour. However, into what melee skills do you get that experience. They are all equal in how much can be obtained per hour (for arguments sake I am assuming Strength is the same speed as Attack and Defence). What influences a players choice in choosing which one to train? Does every player value the experience in Attack/Strength/Defence to be equal? Or do they prefer one of the other two or two over the other 1?

 

 

 

Hopefully that should finally give you some indication of what is meant by the value of experience. I cannot think of any other way to simplify it for you and to be honest, if you haven't understood it by now, there really is no hope for you.

 

 

 

But that is luck based, and as mentioned earlier, very few people can go to bandos GWD any time they want - near peak times, there are far more teams and profit rates drop; plus, few people have the luxery of being able to go to GWD and spend 4-5 hours without a break.

 

An average takes the luck based part into account, it wouldn't be an average otherwise. Honestly, you are digging yourself a deeper and deeper hole with all this constant contradictions. If what you are saying here is true, than you cannot ever average 1mil an hour. This means any time you have said that is your rate you have lied. Just as you would be lieing to tell other people they can average that much.

 

 

 

825k is possible, but not for the average player.

 

But clearly we aren't talking about the average player, we are talking about someone with your stats. Only a person with those stats can get the rate of 103k at Armoured Zombies. So it is either someone can get 103k at Armoured zombies whilst also being able to get 825k at Aviansies, or they cannot get 825k at Aviansies and as such cannot get 103k at Armoured Zombies. Anything different is being biased and inconsistent.

 

 

 

Because your only training a portion of combat. As mentioned earlier, ALL combat skills must be taken into account.

 

What does training a "portion" of combat have to do to mean you are not training combat. Lets see if you follow these simple steps:

 

 

 

Are Range and Hitpoints Combat skills?

 

Yes

 

 

 

What experience do you gain by using chinchompas at Ape Atoll?

 

Ranged and Hitpoints

 

 

 

How much experience per hour do you get?

 

375k+

 

 

 

Is there any other method of combat that results in that much or more experience?

 

No

 

 

 

What logical conclusion can be made from that?

 

That using chinchompas at Ape Atoll gets a large amount of combat experience per hour that is unmatched by any other method. As such it is the fastest combat experience in the game.

 

 

 

That is all there is to it.

 

 

 

I'm referring to every rate argument we had leading up to where you left for a month and returned with your new rates.

 

So was I. I had never said or inferred that it was the right I achieved. I had always said I believed my rate to be higher, and that proved to be true.... Haven't I said this before? Oh right, I have. You just do not seem to understand it.

 

 

 

I have given my rates and the formulas proving slayer inefficient.

 

You have only just given your melee xp/h rates. You have not provided Slayer rates, not provided profit rates, not provided Summoning rates. That means there is no way you can have proved Slayer inefficient.

 

 

 

Quite simple; it's the 16-32-64 max hit of 0-65-175 strength bonus proving the 50\50 split. This isn't rocket science.

 

How does that prove it is a 50/50 split? At 0 strength bonus you hit 16, at 65 you hit 32 and at 175 you hit 64. So a 65 strength bonus increase from 0 resulted in rising the rate by 16. A 110 increase on that makes it go up by 32. Is it just me or am I not seeing a 50/50 split here?

 

 

 

Continuing the analogy, we see the 3 elements before it with atomic weights of 275.4, 276.4 and 277.4, with the 3 above it at 279.4, 280.4, and 281.4. Yeah, it could be totally different, but it's likely 278.4 and at most varying between 276.5-277.3.

 

Thank you for proving my point. You got to the conclusion that it is most likely 278.4... may I ask you came to that conclusion? What evidence do you have to support that claim? You went under the assumption that it would be found between the elements with those atomic numbers? You had to make up 6 extra elements to come to that conclusion.

 

 

 

The only information that was given was that a new element was found. No information is given that could even hint at what its atomic weight is. Since no-one else had worked it out or taken a guess, I said some arbitrary number. This makes what I have said the most accurate conclusion regardless of that fact I have no factual basis on which to make that claim. It was a very simple analogy.

 

 

 

Referring to the slayer->summoning XP rate listed in each task's details.

 

So according to you, there is a large margin of error for the Summoning experience? Which is specifically listed in the task details? What evidence do you have that the ratio's provided are incorrect? This is my point. You will argue that something is wrong, but you supply no facts or evidence/proof or anything to support your claim. Nothing other than your word that you are right and that the rate is wrong.

 

 

 

I have proven them mathematically; opinionated arguments like you "know" it isn't going to help anything unless you post numerical proof.

 

Maybe you misunderstood what I mean by using the term "know". I used that term because it was proven mathematically that Slayer is more efficient. That is how I know Slayer is more efficient. It was not an opionated argument because it was based on facts and evidence that support my case. All the numerical proof is earlier in the thread which you refuse to look at.

 

 

 

Other then that they differ from mine in some cases, and in others are using different rates (and are therefore irrelevant). I also thought you might find this quote from him interesting:

 

I have seen that quote before. That specific quote has been in there since the second thread for that guide. Also note that it was an estimate. Also note that he gets over 30k Slayer experience per hour, as I also do, which shows at that rate more combat experience is gained per hour compared to Armoured Zombies.

 

 

 

You will notice that I gave my XP rate for Spectres. It could be assumed that from such it would be possible to calculate average task time.

 

It being able to be assumed from the rate you provided is irrelevant. The point is you once again lied to try and prove a point of making Morningrise333 look bad. You had specifically said that the rate of 47 minutes had been supplied. You now say it could be assumed from what you gave. That means you never gave the rate and lied that it was there.

 

 

 

What "evidence" can be given besides rates, which I have already given? So far, you still have not provided any mathematical evidence of a cannon being superior.

 

So the test I did at Bloodvelds that showed a cannon is more efficient you are just simply going to ignore? Yea that will work... Maybe if you believe it for long and hard enough it might come true! Then again, you could simply stop acting like a moron and stop trying to up with some bs that no rates have been provided.

 

 

 

It most certainly is; the pages of me and you listing calculations and arguing about methods are enormous. There really isn't much else in those pages.

 

I was not asking for the debate now was I. You can't be referring to the debate either as that is impossible. It is impossible, because what you are suggesting is the logic behind your methods came from this debate about your rates. So you never had any logic behind your rates before they were apparently debated with? It comes down to simply why you use what you do at a specific task.

 

 

 

Bloodvelds for example: Where do you kill them, and why do you kill them there in comparison to another? Very simple questions. What equipment do you wear and why is that used in comparison to others? What prayers if any are used, and why? What potions if any are used and why (also how often you pot)? For Bloodvelds, do you use a cannon and why? Note every answer for why cannot be simply it is efficient. The only one out of those that might take up a large portion of the text is the why, more specifically to a cannon as that requires evidence. While the others require evidence, they can be shown by simple logic as why it is superior rather than rates that something is exactly 1.0384% better. Such as for you kill Bloodvelds (not Mutated) near the Blood Altar. Why? It is multicombat and allows for use of a combat familar to increase experience. There are other factors such as the times when a NPC is redbarred but doesn't die but you click to attack another. This would have no effect in the experience rates.

 

 

 

It is not hundreds of pages, it is simple and logical based arguments.

 

 

 

No, it does not. Those were not specifically my rates - they were my rates, taking into account Qeltar, Zarfot (and occasionally) your rates to see where mine differed greatly, possibly due to inefficiency of mine.

 

Well there you go. I know Qeltar's rates, I know Zarfot's rates, I know my rates. I do not need them. I asked for nothing more and nothing less than your rates. Specifically only yours as only then can we see where your inefficiency lies. By doing what you have done, those are no longer your rates and we can now not clearly see where you are going wrong. So i'll ask again (this has got to be over the 10th time by now):

 

 

 

What are your rates?

 

 

 

Isn't it quite simple? Those are ALL the tasks I do. I did not include a cannon in results; calculations proved a cannon inefficient or having a statistically insignificant effect. As I mentioned earlier, profit rates and summoning XP can be found in my thread. I've spoon fed you enough; go back and look if you want the details. Slayer XP, for the most part, is melee XP / 4.

 

So you are saying you only do 13 out of a possible 24? Out of the 11 you don't do, 1 you cannot receive, 4 can be blocked and 6 you actually cancel. You are losing out on approximately 40% of your Slayer points which drop your profit rates by a fairly high amount. Well who knows, maybe that is more efficient. You don't do Greater Demons, even though you can get a higher melee xp/h rate than other tasks you do. Mithril Dragons are slower experience, that is true. However, they have a high profit rate per hour and tasks are short. It is much more efficient to kill 4-8 of them and gain a sizeable profit, than to waste 30 points cancelling them. Scabarites are arguable the best Slayer monster. Warped Terrorbirds can give over 35k Slayer experience an hour. Many of the tasks you don't do are more efficient to complete than to cancel.

 

 

 

Profit rates and Summoning experience rates cannot be found in the thread. You Slayer rates or melee rates also cannot be found in the thread. The fact that no-one knew you only did 13/24 of Duradels tasks only goes to show you have never indicated as such. Had you truly given rates one would think that others would know this. So don't come up with some bs that they can be found earlier in the thread. Nor the fact that I have to be "spoon-fed". I have read every post in this thread at least twice and some many more. I have never once encounted your rates. You have never posted them, you have never placed them in a comprehensive table. Explain to me how you planned on comparing our rates if you didn't even know what your rates are in the first place? That the rates you Pm'd me were not actually your rates.

 

 

 

To be honest, this is getting beyond stupid. You are unable to comprehend simple concepts (value of experience), do nothing but respond that it is earlier in the thread (when so much evidence has shown that such information is not there) and other such things that are just so illogical, that it amazes me you could say that, let alone believe it. I given rates, I ahve shown calculations, I have explained every step of the way, I use logical steps to form a conclusion and all of this has been supplied and you do nothing but simply say "your wrong, i'm right".

[madyigreen]

To be honest, this is getting beyond stupid. You are unable to comprehend simple concepts (value of experience), do nothing but respond that it is earlier in the thread (when so much evidence has shown that such information is not there) and other such things that are just so illogical, that it amazes me you could say that, let alone believe it. I given rates, I ahve shown calculations, I have explained every step of the way, I use logical steps to form a conclusion and all of this has been supplied and you do nothing but simply say "your wrong, i'm right".

 

 

 

i had an arguement with him as well i read every bit of what you said and i actually read 300 posts of this guy and i read through amazingly ALL 77 pages of this and i never noticed it either what he is saying is "your wrong, i'm right" or in reality anything around that as is he is probably a predictable person i have read alot of posts on my own time around 40 hours (3 weeks in total time) is what i spent reading endless posts i got my fill of info on him and your 100% right

[madyigreen]

Do'h nevermind my comment just noticed it was 3 years old whoops!! #-o

[pureprayer]

Are there any 4-5 tasks that together are better then zombies?

[ydrasil]

Are there any 4-5 tasks that together are better then zombies?

 

If by better you mean more combat experience per hour (overall without th Slayer), than there are many which exceed Armoured Zombies. Based on Armoured Zombies giving 146k combat experience per hour, the ones that do give more combat experience per hour are:

 

 

 

Aberrant Spectres - 188,794

 

Black Demons - 160,177

 

Bloodvelds - 207,386

 

Dagannoths - 267,999

 

Dust Devils - 171,487

 

Fire Giants - 160,239

 

Nechryaels - 174,995

 

Scabarites - 212,731

 

Suqahs - 155,347

 

Waterfiends - 175,601

 

 

 

Those are all based on my numbers. Of the other 6 I do, one misses out on exceeding it by 4k experience, 3 miss out by about 10k, one by 26k, and the last one by 71k (Mithril Dragons :lol: ).

[Guthorm]

Are there any 4-5 tasks that together are better then zombies?

 

If by better you mean more combat experience per hour (overall without th Slayer), than there are many which exceed Armoured Zombies. Based on Armoured Zombies giving 146k combat experience per hour, the ones that do give more combat experience per hour are:

 

 

 

Aberrant Spectres - 188,794

 

Black Demons - 160,177

 

Bloodvelds - 207,386

 

Dagannoths - 267,999

 

Dust Devils - 171,487

 

Fire Giants - 160,239

 

Nechryaels - 174,995

 

Scabarites - 212,731

 

Suqahs - 155,347

 

Waterfiends - 175,601

 

 

 

Those are all based on my numbers. Of the other 6 I do, one misses out on exceeding it by 4k experience, 3 miss out by about 10k, one by 26k, and the last one by 71k (Mithril Dragons :lol: ).

 

 

 

I don't want to call you a liar or anything, but those figures seem a bit large. :?

 

 

 

Assuming two maxed out players test out zombies and slayer tasks. They have the exact same gear with the exception of headgear and necklace. the player testing zombies probably have neiz or verac's helm with salve amulet(e) while the one with slayer tasks uses slayer helmet and amulet of fury. Both have piety on and super setting at the same levels. So their difference when fighting the monsters should be..

 

 

 

Slayer has 7 more attack and 8 strength bonus(5 if the other is using neiz). The zombie tester have 5% more of strength and attack levels. I don't know how great the difference between the two of them, but they can't be that far off.

 

 

 

With all those equipment and prayer on, monsters like zombies and dust devils' defense should not really factor that much, so I imagine their experience rates will be similar assuming you never pick up any drops and never bank. Even with a familar, I can't imagine tasks like dust devils beating the zombies by that a huge amount. :shock:

 

 

 

Now with tasks like waterfiends, in which the slayer must use inferior equipment and the monster is much harder than the zombies, I can't really believe that they will have a better or even a similar rate to zombies. :?

 

 

 

Just my very rushed post, I never did any testing, and all this is based on logic. :)

[sadukar123]

He's probably taking into account ALL xp gained. (HP, Range from Cannon, xp from familiar.)

[Guthorm]

He said combat experience I think. :? and cannon doesn't give hp experience anyway with only half the range experience. Hitpoints experience should be same when hitting a zombie or a slayer task monster so it doesn't really matter much.

[sadukar123]

HP and range are still combat skills. -_-

 

 

 

Familiars give HP xp.

[Guthorm]

HP and range are still combat skills. -_-

 

 

 

Familiars give HP xp.

 

 

 

I know HP and Range are still combat skills. :) But HP and Melee gain at a proportional rate, so I don't think it matters. As for range cannoning, I have no idea. :lol:

 

 

 

And familiars can't give that much of experience. Maybe something like 3-5kish? :?

[ydrasil]

I don't want to call you a liar or anything, but those figures seem a bit large. :?

 

 

 

Assuming two maxed out players test out zombies and slayer tasks. They have the exact same gear with the exception of headgear and necklace. the player testing zombies probably have neiz or verac's helm with salve amulet(e) while the one with slayer tasks uses slayer helmet and amulet of fury. Both have piety on and super setting at the same levels. So their difference when fighting the monsters should be..

 

 

 

Slayer has 7 more attack and 8 strength bonus(5 if the other is using neiz). The zombie tester have 5% more of strength and attack levels. I don't know how great the difference between the two of them, but they can't be that far off.

 

 

 

With all those equipment and prayer on, monsters like zombies and dust devils' defense should not really factor that much, so I imagine their experience rates will be similar assuming you never pick up any drops and never bank. Even with a familar, I can't imagine tasks like dust devils beating the zombies by that a huge amount. :shock:

 

 

 

Now with tasks like waterfiends, in which the slayer must use inferior equipment and the monster is much harder than the zombies, I can't really believe that they will have a better or even a similar rate to zombies. :?

 

 

 

Just my very rushed post, I never did any testing, and all this is based on logic. :)

 

Your logic is good, but I might not have said this as best I could. All of those rates were combat experience per hour, not just melee. With the comparison between the different headgear and amulet, while not 100% sure, they should be pretty much equal. It comes down to the Armoured Zombies having an additional 4.95% boost to Attack and Strength. Although whether that rounds up or down I am not entirely sure (many things round down even at a number such as that in Runescape). However Slayer has the +10 to Attack bonuses and the +5 bonus to Strength. While we can't know for sure which is better, if one is better it would be by an insignificant amount. So the best option is just to consider them equal.

 

 

 

Just to add. Out of all the Slayer tasks, only one beats Armoured Zombies on a purely melee xp/h basis. That task is Dust Devils. Also, all of my rates are based on using Superhuman Strength instead of piety except on three tasks. The three tasks I use piety on are Waterfiends, Skeletal Wyverns and Scabarites (on Scabarites mainly for the defence bonus as the cannon does most of the work : ).

 

 

 

HP and range are still combat skills. -_-

 

 

 

Familiars give HP xp.

 

Yay someone finally cleared this up. I never bothered to work out if the familiars give Hitpoints experience also. Good to know though :thumbsup: .

 

 

 

I know HP and Range are still combat skills. :) But HP and Melee gain at a proportional rate, so I don't think it matters. As for range cannoning, I have no idea. :lol:

 

 

 

And familiars can't give that much of experience. Maybe something like 3-5kish? :?

 

On tasks where I use a combat familiar, I get about 8-15k I think it is depending on task. Although as an average over all tasks it would be less. With the Cannon, experience given to Range is 2x damage done. No Hitpoints experience is gained.

[Guthorm]

For the familiar experience comment, I was talking about Hp experience, I think familiars give an extra 10kish per task. I really cannot comment on the cannon experience as I never did any testing, but I still find that daggnoth task give 268k per task a bit large. :?

 

 

 

Lets say familiars give 15k more exp rate, and I imagine melee exp will be similar to armour zombies, So 146k+15k=161k experience. You are saying the cannon gives 107k range experience per hour? :shock: I never really cannoned alot, but that seems a bit large. Is it true? :?

[VMDchainsaw]

Personally, I've never tried slayer so I can't say anything about it. If I had a RS membership, I would try to train Slayer, for the total levels. And it also raises your CB, I think. I don't play RS much anymore, so I really do not know.

 

 

 

This is neither a flame or a complement of slayer. I'm just saying that I have never tried it, because it didn't attract me to it.

[ydrasil]

For the familiar experience comment, I was talking about Hp experience, I think familiars give an extra 10kish per task. I really cannot comment on the cannon experience as I never did any testing, but I still find that daggnoth task give 268k per task a bit large. :?

 

 

 

Lets say familiars give 15k more exp rate, and I imagine melee exp will be similar to armour zombies, So 146k+15k=161k experience. You are saying the cannon gives 107k range experience per hour? :shock: I never really cannoned alot, but that seems a bit large. Is it true? :?

 

The 268k for Dagannoths incorporates all the experience other than Slayer. The cannon gets a tremendous amount of experience here, you still get a large amount of melee experience and hence Hitpoints. There is also the bonus from using a combat familiar, also the amount of Summoning experience gained from charms is quite substantial. I don't have exact numbers at the moment as they are on another computer but you can find a listing of my rates in a table on a few pages in the thread. Page 43 I know has it on it, there are others but 43 is the one I can remember.

 

 

 

You can't add 15k to the Armoured Zombies for the combat familiar either. It is single way combat, so they can't be used to attack and increase the rate of experience. I am also not sure where you got the rate of 107k from but I have never said that using a cannon will average that much. Although off the top of my head I think of the tasks I cannon only one task gets over that amount, which is Dagannoths.

[Deathmath]

At 77 ranged i get like 35k ranged exp/hr cannoning trolls. (ice ones, not forum ones) That seems a bit much.

[Championfurydelta123]

I loooovvvveeeee Slayer.......... buy I have no idea how you just changed my mind :ohnoes:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very good facts :D!

[Maxingmck]

287 :thumbsup: \

 

i did read it but where r u getting 30k ranged xp a task and 50k combat???????

 

they should be equal

[gorgoroth]

Slayer's a great way to train. You never really get bored, and you basically get free total levels. I know this is going to read as an insult, but to see someone with your stats. Almost all 99 melees with 76 slayer, it really disgusts me.

 

You... Get... Free... Total.. Levels...

 

 

 

I can't really argue there, I guess.

 

 

 

Well, look at it this way Comp. Spend 10 hours on Slayer at 50k exp an hour for a Melee skill (totals at 500k exp) and about 15k Slayer exp (totals at 150k exp). Spend 10 hours at Armoured Zombie at 100k exp an hour (totals at 1mil exp). At higher levels 500k exp isnt even going to get you a level and even 150k exp might not get you a Slayer level. 1mil Melee exp on the other hand will get you atleast 1 level for certain (unless you are on 98 in which case it will put you 120k away from 99). Anyway, so for 10 hours of Slayer you have nothing to show but a measly 620k in total exp and maybe 500k cash were as with the Armoured Zombies you will have atleast 1 level and 1.5mil cash to show. 1.5mil Cash can now be used for some of your lower buyable skills. This could get you upto 5 more levels. Even if you spend the 500k gained from slayer on a buyable skill you still wont reach anywere near the total levels gained while doing Armoured Zombies. its 11 total levels with armoured zombies again 5 at most with slayer.

 

 

 

Therefore i must conclude that slayer is not only a waste of time, but it is a waste of money. I hope i made my point clear enough.

[gorgoroth]

Ha i knew you were going to attack my total. It's what I would've done. :thumbup: That wasn't an insult though. Here's the thing though, I admit, my total is disgusting. I fully admit that. But so is a low slayer with high melees.

 

You don't really know what you are talking about. So you're going to go around calling everyone with high Melee levels and low Slayer level a noob? Well ever hear the saying : To each his Own?

 

 

 

Some people like training against different monsters because they get bored doing the same thing over and over and over again. Some people, those with a matture attention span, don't mind grinding away at the same old monster for hours on end. Now, you would call me the dumb one for having a low slayer level and potentially loosing out on millions? Well lets see, i can do Green Dragons till i turn blue, make 120mil+ maxing out my melee skills then max out my ranged at aviansies making another 100mil and then max out my mage at aviansies making yet another 15mil OR i could grind away at slayer, max out my skills and have 100mil odd to show for it. Thats 235mil agains 100mil. Only difference is going to be a few total levels (which i could easily catch up on by spending some money). Hmmm....now that is stupid, isnt it :wall:

[Zierro]

Some people, those with a matture attention span, don't mind grinding away at the same old monster for hours on end.

 

 

 

I don't know whether to take "mature" as having a positive connotation or a negative one here.

[Italian5kamikaze]

Compfreak is gone, so theres no point in trying to prove him wrong anymore, even though there never really was. Just thought I'd mention that seeing as some of you haven't realized that yet.

[bedman]

Compfreak is gone, so theres no point in trying to prove him wrong anymore, even though there never really was. Just thought I'd mention that seeing as some of you haven't realized that yet.

 

what happened?