what ring?

[Bladewing]

Let's put it this way: while training slayer, even if warrior ring were to increase my accuracy to 100%, I'd still be getting more benefit from the berserker ring because I'm already that accurate.

 

If you're only getting 60k xp/hour at abyssal demons you're doing something wrong. Try using extremes, turmoil, and a whip and a defender.

 

--

 

AND I contradicted your data by showing how it's not statistically significant, so no conclusions can be drawn at ALL.

[1230abcz]

Actually, it seems that what's really easy is to snipe from the peanut gallery while providing nothing of any substance to contradict the data presented.

 

That's okay though -- it doesn't change anything.

 

 

Qeltar... I respect you... But I could've sworn I just refuted your data as being too inconsistent to prove anything at all... You haven't responsed

[Obtaurian]

I really have to agree with Bladewing. For the majority of slayer monsters, a berserker is going to be more beneficial than a warrior. I would switch to a dragonstone or onyx(i) for dragons, but that's about it.

[qeltar]

Let's put it this way: while training slayer, even if warrior ring were to increase my accuracy to 100%, I'd still be getting more benefit from the berserker ring because I'm already that accurate.

Um, that makes absolutely no sense.

 

Try using extremes, turmoil, and a whip and a defender.

Try actually READING the report you keep criticizing.

 

I've wasted enough time on you; your posts are little more than flaming and trolling. Bye.

[1230abcz]

I'd use Onyx(i) over berserker for almost everything... Why aren't you using it 24/7 if you have it, lol.

 

 

Edit @ Qeltar above: ... I kind of want a response, too... If you're ignoring my comments, then I could very well say you're trolling instead.

[Obtaurian]

I'd use Onyx(i) over berserker for almost everything... Why aren't you using it 24/7 if you have it, lol.

 

I don't have it (though I'm about halfway there <_< ), but I don't need the extra accuracy OR defense on most slayer monsters.

[qeltar]

Qeltar... I respect you... But I could've sworn I just refuted your data as being too inconsistent to prove anything at all... You haven't responsed

I believe the several hundred monsters killed should be enough to show that the berserker ring has a benefit over the warrior ring if it had one. That was what I was testing here: is the berserker ring worth 10x as much as the warrior ring? If after that many hours the data shows no benefit, there probably isn't one.

[langer]

I will agree with some that Qeltar's sample seems small, but I haven't seen any other analysis suggesting he's wrong. If he's wrong, then it just means his sample was the exception to the rule.

 

I would really be interested in Bladwing's bigger sample to see if his results are much different that Q's.

 

Either way, I trust statistics better than theory, I've seen too many claims that someone hitting 100% accurately should benefit more from berserker ring without data to back it up.

[Grimy_Bunyip]

I can understand that you're frustrated when nobody takes your data seriously after you put so much time and effort into it.

You're not exactly the only person that's performed research on RS, then get ignored.

granted maybe none of us are quite as dedicated as you.

 

But not everybody here is an idiot troll. It wouldn't hurt to treat us with a little more respect.

What was that post you made a while back about the golden rule?

 

anyways.

I'm perfectly willing to collect damage splat data when school ends and I find myself with some free time.

I'm rather interested in this information myself.

[1230abcz]

Qeltar... I respect you... But I could've sworn I just refuted your data as being too inconsistent to prove anything at all... You haven't responsed

I believe the several hundred monsters killed should be enough to show that the berserker ring has a benefit over the warrior ring if it had one. That was what I was testing here: is the berserker ring worth 10x as much as the warrior ring? If after that many hours the data shows no benefit, there probably isn't one.

 

Well... yea... Berserker ring isn't worth its cost, anyone could tell you that. It just seemed you were saying Atk Bonus >> Str Bonus in your report.

[willyd]

wow so i had no idea i would start such a disscusion i decided to go with the warrior ring for now due to the cheapness compared to the berserker if anyone cares that is lmao go on with the discussion :thumbup:

[Shelby_Polo]

Train MA and use diamond (i) at 100+ rating, dragon (i) at 200+ and, if you can get it, 300+ onyx (i), if you can buy an onyx ring/gem.

[SirIzenhime]

This might just be me...idk...but if I was making a help topic, I don't think I'd want to read through 2 and a half pages of people argueing their data to one another trying to find a final answer....

[zotto]

Queltar's sample isn't actually that small. In biology we often use much smaller datasets. Hence we usually are only interested in the 'bigger' effects.

 

Queltar's data so far clearly shows that apparently the effect of various rings is so small that the effect isn't really raised about the background noise created by the gaming engine.

 

That makes the conclusion that "strength bonus is obviously more important" an empty statement. The preliminary dataset shows that there is nothing obvious. Unless there is a second dataset we can use for comparison there isn't really much to say other then your opinion.

 

If you state that the method is flawed I would suggest providing in detail a new method. Maybe some of us could collect some data on it. Even small datasets could give an indication of the proper answer. Especially if the effect is 'obvious'. And then the answer could still be that warrior ring is best for certain monsters, berserker for others.

 

To test the method used you could of course do a control. We know that the effect of ferocious ring most be noticable. We could use queltar methods to test whether the method is ok, by comparing the ferocious ring with no ring, beserker and warrior. Needless to say that would have to be done on a slayer assignment which would make things a bit difficult.

 

If the ferocious ring pops up out of the dataset then the method is valid. That is, that the method can detect a 'major' effect. If not, then the method is flawed. Saying that the method is flawed without testing it, doesn't really make the method flawed.

 

Alternatively you could do the same test with another piece of equipment that gives a slightly stronger bonus in order to test the method.

 

Alternatively we could design a method that allows to detect minute advantages. But I am not sure it is possible.

[meb]

l2ferociousring

[qeltar]

Thanks again, zotto, for being a voice of reason (and experience).

 

FWIW, I did also compare the ferocious ring in one of my tests -- the dark beasts. The difference there was VERY noticeable and quite unambiguous: 13% faster than the other rings. This isn't enough data to be conclusive (or to publish) but it was a really obvious difference.

[gremmy]

Wealth. Ferocious when in Kuradal's cave.

[L0rdAki]

I love the fact that you guys are waiting time crafting arguments about efficiancy. Doesn't anyone see the irony? :P

 

If you feel like you're hitting accuratly, use a zerker. Feel you're not hitting enough, use a warrior. It's a game anyway - with the exception of major things, a player's going to go for what's subjectivly better.

 

Like has been brought up so many times, the bonuses are so small it's not worth getting foamed and trolled over. Like the meme says, irl is a waste of xps. If you're arguing about efficiancy, just forget it and play the damn game :P

 

OP: Fero in Kuras, whatever ring suits you outside. Rol if you lag, Row if you want like 5k extra a task, Zerker if you lack powah, Warrior if you miss as much as a drunk guy playing darts.