Tip.It Times: 3 May 2009

[strilmus]

Yeah, I pretty much didn't understand the second article's symbols either.

 

 

 

Was speed taken into account though?....

 

 

 

Also, people train at both cost AND time, so it's up to them to decide what they want. At that point their threshold for cost vs time comes into play and depending on the budget folks will either opt to train by using a lot of bone bolts and watching TV while their char fires for a couple hours, or pay attention and use broad bolts instead.

 

 

 

Either way, I find it strange that you can't really fire anything other than bone or standard type bolts (and of course, the grappler) on Zanik's crossbow canon-wise, but other than that I suppose there could be some sort of balance issues or inability to make the game both understand a charged up shot and a non-standard bolt.

[03warrior]

I remember when i first started playing this game; my high leveled friend told me to just mine rocks and give him all the gems I found. Eventually I wanted to smith the ores I had and some other high level I met gave me a hammer. I thought that was cool.

 

 

 

I didn't understand the math parts of the second article, mainly because I've never taken statistics. But I did read the conclusion and it sounded good.

[waheera1]

My two-penneth for the week then:

 

 

 

First article: I liked it, but I really hated the way it was written. It seemed a little too much like the accumulated musings of a wise old gamer rather than a cohesive editorial. Even so, I liked the points that were made and I appreciate this thoughtful approach.

 

 

 

Second article: Pointless. I hate to be a killjoy here, but anyone with half a brain to compare weapon statistics and the like would be able to tell you that broad bolts could hit harder, whilst bone bolts are cheapest. This comes largely from the improved ranged statistics of the rune xbow when compared to zanik's, as well as (I believe) a higher ranged strength boost from the bolts. A more useful comparison for example might've been the comparative training rates/hit rates when using standard ranged armour, since the issue of void/hides/karils is rather more contentious. Or perhaps by extrapolating the gathered data to work out the approximate costs of gaining lvl 99 from 70/80 ranged. That would be far more useful than just confirming an obvious truth. Another idea might have been to compare the alternative methods available at the 48 ranged marker that Zanik's requires. After all, most people purely seeking speedy ranged xp will probably not be using any of these methods anyway.

 

Also, what benefit is there, when allegedly examining the merits of zanik's xbow v rune xbow, not to compare rune xbow with mith bolts as well as zanik's? It seemed like a poor attempt to pad out the sparse times with a VERY basic assessment of relatively obvious statistics.

[waheera1]

Finally, my statistics class has a real life use! It's great see that there's a growing interest towards applying rigorious methologies to RuneScape. We have been gathering data on RS for nearly a decade, and it's ripe for more analysis like this to shed on the likes of this. I hope for more similar activities in the future (in drop rates, damage rate, etc).

 

 

 

Regarding the first article: I thought it :wall: has :wall: a good thesis, from the point of view that differs from :wall: allot :wall: of what has been said about the forums. However, it is really hurt by the lack of editing when it comes to grammar and spelling. The article could really be fleshed out better. Much of the article is rather scattered, so even though it has many good ideas, few of them are elaborated upon.

 

 

 

Small tip - If you're going to comment on grammar, make sure your own is impeccable! Otherwise it will surely come back to bite you in the arse!

 

 

 

I highlighted "the" simply because either you meant there is only one single differing view to the forum expressed ones, and this is indeed it, or you should've put "a"! :-P

 

 

 

That said, I agree with you!

[waheera1]

So we needed to do a study to figure out theres a difference between a lvl 48 bow with bone bolts and a lvl 61 bow with bolts that take 55 slayer? I could of told you that...

 

 

 

And it's kinda stupid to have a damage study for a thing on training with them. Most people train for cost, not damage, or else everyone would use onyx bolts.

 

 

 

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!! =D> =D>

 

Quite right too!

 

 

 

(and if anyone knows how to combine my 3 posts in a row into one longer post, please feel free to do the honours!)

[cujoman31]

It wasnt rocket science to figure out that having a better range attack and a better range strength you are going to get more xp per hour. Especially without the if you can make xx amount of cash per hour you should use broad, the conclusion is pretty useless. Why not compare something useful, such as void vs arma or black? Try out agaisnt better monsters or see how much void really makes a difference.

 

 

 

Also, it got into the short forms for what he was talking about way to quickly. Give people who havent been in school for a while a refresher, its not something anyone really uses on a semi-regular basis. Not to mention the people who have never see stuff like that before in their life because they either never took it in school or havent gotten that far in school.

 

 

 

So in my opinion, second article= complete trash.

 

 

 

First article. I can see where the author is coming from. Its hard to see the game from the perspective of someone who is ranked 500k in overall. Lower level members and ftp provide a lot of resources to the game. People with 1800+ skill total are probably going to keep playing regardless of updates. However, the game cannot survive without all kinds of lower levels playing and staying interested.

[green9090]

To the first article- there is mention of lower level updates being important to keep them playing. Um... no. Have you looked at the quest list lately? Have you seen how crowded most skills are below level 60? There is enough low level content to keep low levels entertained all the way until they are high levels. We do not need any more. Ever. The part of the game that is missing- not broken, not underdeveloped, but missing entirely- are the high level advantages in most skills. They just simply end, before you're even halfway to 99 (by exp). That is a problem. What motivation do the low levels have to train to high levels if there's no advantage to it? None at all.

 

 

 

To the second article- you forgot addy bolts for Zanik's crossbow; an oversight that makes the comparison almost completely invalid. Though I would guess that it would perform more poorly than a rune crossbow with broad bolts, without giving the bow it the chance to perform at its fullest, the experiment doesn't mean much.

[quelmotz]

Why don't you all stupid complainers shut up and go and write an article/paper like the second one, and go and try to compare whatever crap, addy bolts, armadyl bow, whatever you want to compare and see how hard it is to do it? Don't go and flame people's article as pointless when you DON'T even understand what the hell is it talking about.

 

To summarize for you idiots who can't bother to read and comprehend.

 

The Zanik's crossbow is very cost-efficient when used with bone bolts, but it is weak in comparison with the Rune crossbow with broad bolts. However, bone bolts + zanik crossbow is cheap so it offers a cheap alternative for poorer p2pers or those who can't use rune crossbow. Seriously, why the hell are you saying people only care about cost? If so, then everyone will just walk around with wooden shortbows and bronze arrows, or training bows and arrows. Its a balance between cost and xp, and richer people can afford to get more xp by paying more, and poorer people will use those with low cost but as a result get lower xp.

 

Even an f2p player can understand the article better than those p2pers.

[swordofjustice]

Yeah I have to say I quite agree with the first article simply because as a "lower" leveled player I am called a noob when all other players are at my level in one point. Plus we do make a large contribution to the economy because if we weren't there buying your old armours, items or things you can make easily with your higher levels rs would go down the toilet. and I have to say its been a while since I last leveled up simply because I'm not looking for recognition by other players, its like have the "good" rune armor e.g tinted, gold or god.

 

but they have the exact same stats they just cost 10x the amount when instead I could have normal rune and afford to pay for skilling instead of standing in the ge looking for recognition from other players when all that happens is lower levels ask me for money.

 

And I'm not calling those people noobs or anything but it can be frustrating to see that the only attention I get from having "pretty" armour is gettin hassled. and btw I'm one of the people who likes to give away money which I can't do if I've spent all my money on armor.

 

Plus if its not too much of a hassle: is there any other F2P's that are craving a new F2P quest

[green9090]

armadyl bow

 

I stopped reading because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

[SwreeTak]

This week's Time's first article was a good one. Way to much higher-lvl players ignore low-lvl players. Often I see how players ignore other, lower level players, just because they're lower level and asking for help.

 

I try to help noobs as often as I can, since I remember how some players helped me when I was new to the game. It's just a very small thing, which often means a lot to someone else. We should all try to help out each other more, not only IRL, but also in RuneScape.

[waheera1]

Why don't you all stupid complainers shut up and go and write an article/paper like the second one, and go and try to compare whatever crap, addy bolts, armadyl bow, whatever you want to compare and see how hard it is to do it? Don't go and flame people's article as pointless when you DON'T even understand what the hell is it talking about.

 

To summarize for you idiots who can't bother to read and comprehend.

 

The Zanik's crossbow is very cost-efficient when used with bone bolts, but it is weak in comparison with the Rune crossbow with broad bolts. However, bone bolts + zanik crossbow is cheap so it offers a cheap alternative for poorer p2pers or those who can't use rune crossbow. Seriously, why the hell are you saying people only care about cost? If so, then everyone will just walk around with wooden shortbows and bronze arrows, or training bows and arrows. Its a balance between cost and xp, and richer people can afford to get more xp by paying more, and poorer people will use those with low cost but as a result get lower xp.

 

Even an f2p player can understand the article better than those p2pers.

 

 

 

Do you really expect anyone to care what you think when you take such an imbecilic, aggressive approach to their comments? As far as I can make out you're the first "idiot" to take that counter-productive approach on this specific forum. Sort it out.

 

 

 

As for your other points, a large number of the aforementioned "stupid complainers" made similar observations to those you just made... Their main criticism seems to be that a complex statistical analysis of this particular comparison is a waste of time and effort since the results were blatantly obvious before any of the sums were done.

 

 

 

True, there are many "stupid" p2pers, but the same goes for f2pers, and your style of arguing marks you as just such a person.

[therehadtobe1]

I liked both articles but found the second more interesting, unfortunatley I didn't do stats so I don't understand it all, but it looks interesting. Could someone just give me a quick run though of what it all means?

[haggisoflife]

Thanks for that, another great read (especially the first article)

[mclaran]

I really enjoyed the second article. I would like to see more scientific journal-style articles on how to most efficiently train, make money, etc.

[Deathmath]

Green, a very valid point :) I really do agree with the fact that there is already a lot of low-leveled content, but much of it isn't very good at all. Generally the newer content is higher quality.

 

 

 

Not to argue though, you have a point.

 

 

 

I also STRONGLY agree with the fact that skills end early, but I'm not nearly to that point :P

 

 

 

Not sure how to deal with it, and having no experience I don't feel great writing on it. I never said that wasn't valid :P

[cujoman31]

Why don't you all stupid complainers shut up and go and write an article/paper like the second one, and go and try to compare whatever crap, addy bolts, armadyl bow, whatever you want to compare and see how hard it is to do it? Don't go and flame people's article as pointless when you DON'T even understand what the hell is it talking about.

 

To summarize for you idiots who can't bother to read and comprehend.

 

The Zanik's crossbow is very cost-efficient when used with bone bolts, but it is weak in comparison with the Rune crossbow with broad bolts. However, bone bolts + zanik crossbow is cheap so it offers a cheap alternative for poorer p2pers or those who can't use rune crossbow. Seriously, why the hell are you saying people only care about cost? If so, then everyone will just walk around with wooden shortbows and bronze arrows, or training bows and arrows. Its a balance between cost and xp, and richer people can afford to get more xp by paying more, and poorer people will use those with low cost but as a result get lower xp.

 

Even an f2p player can understand the article better than those p2pers.

 

 

 

Im working on comparing void vs black. Will it ever be posted on forums? Maybe. But probably not.

 

 

 

If I was posting it on any kind of forums, I would want some criticism, not just a bunch of people saying "oh wow thanks". Id want to know how I could make it better, what I overlooked, etc.

 

 

 

And really, the article didnt explain any of the math, and the conclusion was pretty obvious. Its like comparing a whip to a dragon scim.

[zozrog]

happy to be back on tip.it, took a break...

 

 

 

well, in the first article, i didnt understand where the author was coming from. there seems to be a whole lot more medium and low level content and updates than high leveled ones.

 

well written but i dont agree on most of the points.

 

 

 

the second i really enjoyed. great to see some tested theories put into an equation. some of the terms used were not the universally accepted terms but since it was explained so well, that didnt matter.

 

 

 

had fun reading the times, just like i do every week =D>

[LadyDtw]

I was suprised and happy to read the first artical. It was something that's a bit of a rant I've had with friends on Runescape, it's even a driving force in the reasion I keep playing. High leveled vs. Low Leveled is going to be a subject that will be fought over from now until the game ends. And the kindness factor is going to be a major reasion for that. I hope if I've ever insaulted someone, ignored someone, or been an all around pain in the neck, I hope people will tell me...and allow me to make amiends. Even though lately, I'm so crazy busy that I might ignore you through simple busyness >.

[Aidos Drakon]

I enjoyed both of this week's articles. The content was much improved this time even though the style of writing could be improved.

 

 

 

I took AP Calc instead of Statistics so I do not completely understand the terms in the second article. I am able to follow the flow of the article and get the jist of it due to, oddly enough, AP Bio. A lab that we did on population genetic flow required us to analyze our data with a chi-square chart. We developed our null hypothesis that the observed population distribution would not significantly deviate from the expected results. Then used the chi-square charts to get a value to compare to the critical value (CV) in order to accept or reject the null hypothesis. The article uses a similar method to the one we used.

 

 

 

Reading this article has inspired me to look into taking a statistics course next year in college.

[Hut999]

Read the article on levels/updates. Good read, made me create an account to reply to it :o

 

 

 

As a level 128, i am guilty of the crimes of ignoring the lower level players(To me, 110 and below :o)

 

 

 

I read the article however, and agreed 100% with it, good article, and maybe after reading it i will change my ways!

[Kyle]

I really liked the second article because it was written in a truly scientific way by people who know how to write a scientific paper.

 

 

 

As someone who has had to read literally hundreds of scientific papers as part of a masters degree, I can appreciate the effectiveness of papers like these and the efficient organization. Job well done to the contributors of that work.

[Atonisk]

I'm sick of articles like the first... Currently, the majority of updates cater to mid-card players, low levels, and extremely low levels. We haven't had a really solid high end-game addition in ages, despite the highest levels being the backbone of this game as they're constant subscribers.

 

 

 

Although I have to agree that, despite all of the updates to help players learn the ropes, there's a complete lack of self-sufficiency. It seems that there's even more pestering for help now than any time before. Back when I was a low level, I always tried to consult external resources first---despite not much being around at that point---yet these days it's like playing 20 questions with 30 or 40 players a day. There's so much available now; more than I would've ever dreamed of, including jagex-created articles on skills, yet newer (and even older) players are not properly availing themselves.