For reference, the way to calculate is to sum up the rates for each half hour, and divide by the total number of them, since each rate is for the same time period.

This gives (2.7+2.55+2.4+2.25+2.1+2+1.9+1.8+1.7+1.6+1.5+1.45+1.4+1.35+1.3+1.25+1.2+1.175+1.15+1.125)/20=1.695.

Yeh or you could find the exact by doing this

http://[Censored - Don't use a URL shortner]/fdf4jW

inb4 math nerd

For reference, the way to calculate is to sum up the rates for each half hour, and divide by the total number of them, since each rate is for the same time period.

This gives (2.7+2.55+2.4+2.25+2.1+2+1.9+1.8+1.7+1.6+1.5+1.45+1.4+1.35+1.3+1.25+1.2+1.175+1.15+1.125)/20=1.695.

Yeh or you could find the exact by doing this

http://[Censored - Don't use a URL shortner]/fdf4jW

inb4 math nerd

Except that's not right. Since the bonus rate changes every half hour exactly, simply averaging them suffices. If the rate changed continuously based on some function, then, yes, the integral would be the exact value but in this case it does not change continuously, so not only is that integral overkill, it's wrong.

^ Um yeah that formula just blew up my brain. lolwut is dis

For reference, the way to calculate is to sum up the rates for each half hour, and divide by the total number of them, since each rate is for the same time period.

This gives (2.7+2.55+2.4+2.25+2.1+2+1.9+1.8+1.7+1.6+1.5+1.45+1.4+1.35+1.3+1.25+1.2+1.175+1.15+1.125)/20=1.695.

Yeh or you could find the exact by doing this

http://[Censored - Don't use a URL shortner]/fdf4jW

inb4 math nerd

Except that's not right. Since the bonus rate changes every half hour exactly, simply averaging them suffices. If the rate changed continuously based on some function, then, yes, the integral would be the exact value but in this case it does not change continuously, so not only is that integral overkill, it's wrong.

http://[Censored - Don't use a URL shortner]/i41Goc

Scroll to the middle of the page of this and click on the picture

Goodfight

For reference, the way to calculate is to sum up the rates for each half hour, and divide by the total number of them, since each rate is for the same time period.

This gives (2.7+2.55+2.4+2.25+2.1+2+1.9+1.8+1.7+1.6+1.5+1.45+1.4+1.35+1.3+1.25+1.2+1.175+1.15+1.125)/20=1.695.

Yeh or you could find the exact by doing this

http://[Censored - Don't use a URL shortner]/fdf4jW

inb4 math nerd

Except that's not right. Since the bonus rate changes every half hour exactly, simply averaging them suffices. If the rate changed continuously based on some function, then, yes, the integral would be the exact value but in this case it does not change continuously, so not only is that integral overkill, it's wrong.

http://[Censored - Don't use a URL shortner]/i41Goc

Scroll to the middle of the page of this and click on the picture

Goodfight

1.) That page is for the March 2010 Bonus XP weekend.

2.) If you had read the article for that weekend, you would know how, although that formula was supposed to work, in practice it failed and gave different xp rates for that weekend.

3.) All of my numbers are from the devblog for the March 2011 event which, unless jagex is pulling a big switcheroo on us again, are the values that will be used for the event.

For reference, the way to calculate is to sum up the rates for each half hour, and divide by the total number of them, since each rate is for the same time period.

This gives (2.7+2.55+2.4+2.25+2.1+2+1.9+1.8+1.7+1.6+1.5+1.45+1.4+1.35+1.3+1.25+1.2+1.175+1.15+1.125)/20=1.695.

Yeh or you could find the exact by doing this

http://[Censored - Don't use a URL shortner]/fdf4jW

inb4 math nerd

Except that's not right. Since the bonus rate changes every half hour exactly, simply averaging them suffices. If the rate changed continuously based on some function, then, yes, the integral would be the exact value but in this case it does not change continuously, so not only is that integral overkill, it's wrong.

http://[Censored - Don't use a URL shortner]/i41Goc

Scroll to the middle of the page of this and click on the picture

Goodfight

1.) That page is for the March 2010 Bonus XP weekend.

2.) If you had read the article for that weekend, you would know how, although that formula was supposed to work, in practice it failed and gave different xp rates for that weekend.

3.) All of my numbers are from the devblog for the March 2011 event which, unless jagex is pulling a big switcheroo on us again, are the values that will be used for the event.

I know the first bonus xp weekend failed because it went to 1.1x in 7 hours. Just because Jagex failed on that part doesn't mean that the function itself is flawed. And there is a good chance that they are just approximating the numbers for the recent blog and in reality still sticking to the same formula. Both of our calculations came out to about 1.7x, which is too small of a difference to make it a flawed function (such as the 3 hour flaw that occurred on the original). Again, Jagex messed up implementing the function, not the function itself and I believe that the function is still correct. We can agree to disagree I guess since I really don't want to spam up this thread with math about bonus xp weekend lol sorry guys for all this spam didn't know someone was going to go devil's advocate on me >.<

I'll just leave that there.

I c wut u did ther

Looks like a piecewise function Jagex is stating, you'd have to do separate integral for each section instead of finding one overall function, no?

The only two pieces are from 0 to 10 hrs and 10 and beyond and the only relevant piece is 0 to 10 cause from 10 on its just 1.1x lol

Looks like a piecewise function Jagex is stating, you'd have to do separate integral for each section instead of finding one overall function, no?

Or just use the trapezium rule =)

^ lol XD

What makes that different from taking the separate areas under each of the regions, then averaging the total amount (I believe that this was suggested earlier).

It's all about the right/left hand approximation skill.

But seriously, I'm positive that integrating it would get the most accurate result (~1.69259x) because from 0 to 10 it's constantly changing. I'm betting Jagex just posted each rate in increments of 30 minutes or whatever because if they posted Calc II concepts most of the people who read it would be like hi im 12 and wat is this. The only valid arguement muu had against me is that it was from 2010, but I seriously doubt they would take the effort to change the actual equation itself.

Well, let's agree that Jagex should more explicitly stated how it should have worked (piecewise vs. continuous) and that most likely it still won't go to plan. :P

It's all about the right/left hand approximation skill.

But seriously, I'm positive that integrating it would get the most accurate result (~1.69259x) because from 0 to 10 it's constantly changing. I'm betting Jagex just posted each rate in increments of 30 minutes or whatever because if they posted Calc II concepts most of the people who read it would be like hi im 12 and wat is this. The only valid arguement muu had against me is that it was from 2010, but I seriously doubt they would take the effort to change the actual equation itself.

no

 

the multiplier function is defined piecewise and is not continuous

Yeah haha knowing Jagex anything can happen at this point XD

It's all about the right/left hand approximation skill.

But seriously, I'm positive that integrating it would get the most accurate result (~1.69259x) because from 0 to 10 it's constantly changing. I'm betting Jagex just posted each rate in increments of 30 minutes or whatever because if they posted Calc II concepts most of the people who read it would be like hi im 12 and wat is this. The only valid arguement muu had against me is that it was from 2010, but I seriously doubt they would take the effort to change the actual equation itself.

no

 

the multiplier function is defined piecewise and is not continuous

I'm only taking the piece 0 < x < 10 and I don't see any points of discontinuity within that interval

Maybe I'm missing something what are you trying to say

let M(t) be the xp multiplier at time t, in minutes

 

lim t->30- M(t) = 2.7

lim t->30+ M(t) = 2.55

 

that's a jump discontinuity. the entire graph is a stair like shape

 

you cite rs wiki for the xp multiplier formula. which is problematic because it is WRONG. here is the correct formula, from runescape.com.

 

http://services.runescape.com/m=devblog/view_post.ws?post_id=114

Uhh I'm assuming that they are going to use the equation (((x-10)/7.5)^2) + 1.1) as they did for the first and most likely the second one as well. You're assuming that the exact values for xp rates are what Jagex posted in the dev blog. This is a valid assumption too, as this is all speculation, however I speculate that they will use the aforementioned equation which is continuous on the interval 0 < x < 10, for which the best way to evaluate the average xp bonus per hour would be integrating as I did. Not saying your speculation is wrong, and I agree with you that yes if they stuck to the exact values on that table a different method would be required. (Really feeling guilty right now for all this math spam lol)

Uhh I'm assuming that they are going to use the equation (((x-10)/7.5)^2) + 1.1) as they did for the first and most likely the second one as well.

that equation was NOT used for either of the previous weekends.

Maybe this was the update to make slayer faster that drumgun was waiting for. Is it just miths that aren't cannonable atm?

 

And well done xen your list seems to have a pretty good balance between summoning and slayer.

Uhh I'm assuming that they are going to use the equation (((x-10)/7.5)^2) + 1.1) as they did for the first and most likely the second one as well.

that equation was NOT used for either of the previous weekends.

Wrong, it was included in the Developers Blog entitled "Bonus XP Weekend: Save The Date!, 26th February 2010 - Dev Blog - Mod Knox" but for some reason it is now removed from the dev blog archive. Other fan sites that also archive updates have a copy of this blog still, for example http://runescape.salmoneus.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=314498

that is what they SAID it would be. that is not what the ACTUAL multiplier function was.

 

http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Bonus_XP_Weekend/March_2010

 

there is listed the actual function used for the first weekend - which was NOT continuous and reduced by 0.2x or 0.1x every 45 minutes.

that is what they SAID it would be. that is not what the ACTUAL multiplier function was.

 

http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Bonus_XP_Weekend/March_2010

 

there is listed the actual function used for the first weekend - which was NOT continuous and reduced by 0.2x or 0.1x every 45 minutes.

I acknowledge that they dun goofed on the first one. However I recall the second one correctly lasting the 10 hours and therefore I have a right to assume that they will follow suit for the third?