Jump to content
Michael

Efficiency

Recommended Posts

Is there a point to playing an multiplayer game if people don't stop once in a while to smell the roses? Players like to chat and that does not make them inefficient, its just their own choice. They're not idiots or noobs or anything like that. They just play the way they want to. I would also not advise making assumptions that the majority of players aren't skilled or smart to do PVP or boss kill. Again many choose not to. I would also suspect that many of these got over their puberty a long time ago so they've no need to prove their manhood.

Can't they chat while they are skilling? That's what clan chats and private chats are for. Heck, even public chat if they're in the same area. Possibly also stuff like MSN or even on the phone if you really want to go that far.

 

And that was also the point of my other post. Some people may choose not to do certain methods because it doesn't suit them, for whatever reasons. But in some cases it's also they don't have the skills/knowledge to do so, so practicality is lost there.

 

And this has nothing to do with getting over your manhood, what are you on with?

 

It has gotten to a point where people resort to cussing in an attempt to win an argument that really isn't worth arguing.

 

And he's operating under the assumption that all efficient players don't talk, and call others 'idiots/noob'. Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has gotten to a point where people resort to cussing in an attempt to win an argument that really isn't worth arguing.

 

And he's operating under the assumption that all efficient players don't talk, and call others 'idiots/noob'. Seriously.

Well, I still think it's worth arguing because there are many different definitions and contexts of "efficiency". We're not necessarily trying to "win", it's a discussion. Opinions, opinions, opinions. We just "choose" to word our opinions in a way that it becomes flamebait, because it fosters more heated discussion, therefore it's a more "efficient" way to gain post count.

 

No. That's not what this thread is made for.

 

It's made for DISCUSSION. We're not flaming each other for no reason. We're doing so because there are points that we disagree on each other.

 

And I don't see how jrhairychest called anybody an idiot or noob... he's just saying people aren't what they are because they CHOOSE to be inefficient. People have different play styles - if you choose to be inefficient, that's fine. I don't care, as long as you don't shove it in my head.

 

The efficient players aren't trying to shove their opinions onto you, either. They're just stating what good, reliable methods you should be using, and what you should be avoiding.


douvdFX.jpg


 


Blog


Trimmed | Master Quester | Final Boss


Boss pets: Bombi | Shrimpy | Ellie | Tz-Rek Jad | Karil the Bobbled | Mega Ducklings


120s: Dungeoneering | Invention

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I wouldn't but we are talking about a game not dogs. And you agree with my point that it would be a complete disregard for fun. So I don't train that way. Simple.

Please don't disregard the entire rest of my sentence just because i made an analogy about dogs...

 

You should stop defining efficiency so narrowly.

As you can see from this thread, none of the efficiency supporters on this thread actually think efficiency is what you think it is.

so what's the point of saying your own personal definition of efficiency is the "efficiency" of the runescape community.


Naaxi.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

According to some being efficient comes first and the fun is negligible

quote please

 

Done so already, read further back.

 

I being more efficient for training 2 skills

Wrong, you are operating under the assumption that you have a finite number of skills you can do. you imply that if i buy magic logs to burn, i cannot go woodcutting later. you are implying that if i buy my ores to train smithing i cannot go mining later. you are implying that if i buy herbs to train my herblore i cannot go farming later

time is the constraint, not the number of skills you can train

 

You have incorrectly quoted me on here so please quote accurately as I have not made such a blasé statement. I am implying that simply buying your way to a 99 may be fast for that 99 but may not positively influence other skills. Most players think this way in the game because theyre desperate for 99s but my personal preference is not to do it that way.

Of course you can do any skill you want in any fashion you choose but do not assume that your own way is the correct way or the most efficient way either because theyre neither here or there if the players choice doesnt suit it. Nobody implied that you couldnt do one skill then the other, YOU did. Im illustrating that trying to bludgeon your way to single 99s without making use of other related skills may not necessarily be that efficient, and for me certainly, not fun, and its not costing me a penny to do it. Thats MY choice, you know for me, moi, so Im not wrong.

 

 

Define the term "Efficient" and we'll go from there. No point arguing in circles. Sometimes I define it as 'Whatever makes me happy', or 'A rational decision' as being 'efficient'. Sometimes I define it as 'To make best use of 'x' amount of time for a given goal'. "I am going to kill goblins for 5 hours because I love killing goblins" would be a rational decision, and 'efficient' in the sense that it is fun for you, and you will do it for 5 hours. (repeating what I said a few posts before)

Youre talking about subjectivity, not efficiency.

 

In the strict sense of efficiency, to obtain a goal within 'x' amount of time, it's wrong to say that spending cash is inefficient because of one simple thing; Time = Money. To waste time would be the same as wasting money, depending on how you value time. Currently, I don't have an account so I can't really say. But for a player like bladewing (Stringcheze), time would be 3m+/h.

Is it really so efficient to buy 99 smithing, then go for mining, or buy firemaking then go for WC? Youre right, time = money but what if youre compensating with money on skills that you dont yet have or train side by side? Why would I want to buy a skill when I can train it, make profit from it and actually enjoy the time I spend doing it knowing Id done it by myself? Oh yes, because its MY choice.

Youre also ignoring that many players dont buy into this philosophy of making £££ per hour because they want to train the way they want to train in the game. .

 

Training 2 skills at once is fine, but ignoring the fact that you can use the Grand Exchange as a much faster, easier alternative is simply ignorance. By spending time making bowstrings, you're losing potentially making 10 times more at Green dragons, or Frost Dragons.

Is it ignorant to ignore my other skills for the sake of one? I dont think so. In fact, IMO, it strikes me as short term thinking with disregard of the longer term.

 

Fun is very subjective, so that factor can't really be argued. Hell, for some, dying with 2b risk in PvP is 'fun' and 'thrilling' (although I struggle to grasp that concept)

Whilst being inefficient (in a time = money sense) isn't morally wrong or right, it really isn't your business to go about claiming that efficiency is bad and whatever. It's a silly generalisation to claim that efficient people call others 'noobs/idiot' (which in itself isn't even offensive) and other names. There is a feature on RuneScape called an 'Ignore List'. It works by filtering any messages they say, and not showing in your chatscreen, or above their heads on your screen. It's a very useful feature, try using it. It's also funny, because 'according to some', efficiency is stupid and everyone should play the game slowly because it's 'more fun' (which is actually subjective).

At no point have I argued that efficiency is bad. You find a quote on here that says I have otherwise. No idea where you have got that from unless you havent read the post fully because I have posted that every player makes their own choices what is right for them and have made the points that people who are inefficient arent idiots.

 

Skillcapes itself are just a status symbol, a jumble of pixels arranged in a fashion that shows you have spent some time on RuneScape, dedicated to training a skill. There isn't really much to show for any skillcape, really. Oh, and this is the last post I'm making before I go to bed, so don't expect a reply any time soon =/.

Used as an example. After all we are talking about efficiency here arent we so training skills is a good example of it.

 

Edit - What bladewing said. Illogical arguments are illogical

I agree, it tends to happen a lot with those who have a blinkered approach. Edit - If its illogical to play my own way, do my own thing, actually relate skills together in some way, and actually enjoy getting my levels one at a time then I'n happy to be illogical.

 

efficiency, in its most basic definition, is the quality of acquiring desirable items, or goals, with the last waste.

What is desirable, and what is waste, is not specified. You say "that's not efficiency, that's subjectivity".

But the fact of the matter is, efficiency is subjective.

 

I mean sure, the form of efficiency that you defined, if used with complete disregard for fun, is simply bad.

But you really shouldn't focus on a single subset of efficiency.

 

would you say all dogs are 300 pound beasts based on your interpretation of a few great danes?

 

 

Very true. Most of the time, efficiency is implied and inferred as being one of several things: Fastest gp/hr, fastest xp/hr, best gp/xp ratio, and best gp/time ratio, among other things. All of these things can be figured out with basic math. However, if one factors in fun, time constraints, etc, then it becomes even more diverse.

 

EG: I could get more dag kings/hr if my trips only lasted 100 minutes each. However, since I only have time for around a 120 minute trip, I plan on getting slightly fewer kills/hr, but more kills/trip. In this case, IRL factors trump pure outcome to input in RS.


Stonewall337.png
[hide=Drops]Araxxor Eye x1 Leg pieces x2
GWD: 5000 Addy bar Steam B Staff x3 Z Spear x6 Sara. Hilt x2 Bandos Hilt x2 (LS, Solo)SS x6 (1 LS)
Tormented Demons: Shard x6 Slice x5 Claws x9 Limbs x3
DKS: Archer x21 Warrior x31 Berserker x30 Axe x51[/hide]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You implied that it's impossible to train them individually, therefore you are wrong. And there is something called a 'Comparison'. It means taking two things, and trying to illustrate a relationship between the two. Read, please.

 

You show me where I have implied this is impossible to do. I have implied it is not my preferred method where possible but at no point have I stated otherwise. Please ensure you quote me properly and not make things up to try and win your argument.

Not exactly sure where youre trying to go with the having fun is efficient. According to some being efficient comes first and the fun is negligible and therefore calling players noob/idiot and all other names . That was the point I was making in an earlier post, in case you missed it. Durrrr.

 

Secondly, your example may be true, but its also flawed. I could spin the 500 flax and use it for Fletch therefore am I being more efficient for training 2 skills and saving cash on bowstrings later? Or player A decides they want a fletch cape so therefore they buy the materials for 99, which is quick, but has no additional effects to Woodcutting or Crafting skills. Isnt that inefficient and, IMO, much less fun to do? Spending money isn't saving money if there's no real positive effect and you've a cape that you spent 'x' amount on but very little else to show for it.

 

I obtained 99 craft by making jewellery and battlestaves. I got everything myself and it had a positive effect on my thieving (gems), Mining and Smithing (gold), Crafting (orbs) and Mage (orb charging, alcing jewellery). So in the end I become more skilled and profit well. Most importantly, I had fun doing it.

underlined where you said it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with players being efficient, I have problems with those efficiency players pushing THEIR requirements onto other players. If I want to take my time Dungeoneering, and don't think that the Shadow Silk Hood is God's gift to Dungeoneering, doesn't make me bad at dung at all. I'd rather just ENJOY it.

 

Sometimes I do enjoy being efficient - but I always strive for a balance.

 

But then again, the fun lovers, per se, simply exact the same toll on us. We are ruining the spirit of the game, when we think they are. I strive to be as efficient as I possibly can. It gives me a sense of accomplishment, and that is why I play. It's merely an opinion on how to play the game, and yet the efficiency minded are always put as the bad guy.

 

 

Well, I'm sorry if I don't like the pistachio ice cream tastes, I will go the stockades now.


I have all the 99s, and have been playing since 2001. Comped 4/30/15 

My Araxxi Kills: 459::Araxxi Drops(KC):

Araxxi Hilts: 4x Eye (14/126/149/459), Web - (100) Fang (193)

Araxxi Legs Completed: 5 ---Top (69/206/234/292/361), Middle (163/176/278/343/395), Bottom (135/256/350/359/397)
Boss Pets: Supreme - 848 KC

If you play Xbox One - Add me! GT: Urtehnoes - Currently on a Destiny binge 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Efficiency and how you do it are two different things. When you start to push them onto other people as I already see on these boards, that's practically forcing them to be out of their comfort zone.

 

During the past two years or so there has been a giant push by Jagex to force players to become more efficient with the way they train. Two of them I know of, Drumgun and Zarfot in particular, try to maximize being efficient in the shortest time possible and that is why they are tops in XP. As I recall by the older generation, I often ran into players such as Zezima and The Old Nite who actually did a bit of running around and doing various activities that weren't XP based (Castle Wars, Duel Arena, etc), neither did they have a mini-game hiscore. When I smelt ore at the furnace with just my default clothes, there is a message telling me, "If you had worn your Varrock armor you could of smelt 2 bars at the same time". That's Jagex persuading me to be a little more efficient with how I train, that I can do it quicker than I already can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jrhairychest

Hmmm lots of replies so I’ll do each one in turn:

 

@ Sonikku

I agree that people chat when they’re doing something, including myself using skype. But standing around in a bank talking is entirely up to the players. Who dictates what you do? Would you like me to dictate how you play your game? Of course not, you do your own thing and make your own decisions. If people want to sit around in a bank and chat, I say let them. If it doesn’t detract from the game for them then it cannot be wrong. Sorry, the manhood joke got lost there somewhere. Never mind.

 

I’m particularly impressed with your last post on the subject. A decent approach to understanding the word ‘debate’.

 

@Not_trolling and Bladewing

As you both are in each other’s pockets I’ll answer you both on the same subject. I think Blade is the organ grinder in this case so I’ll deal with his comments. You show me where I have categorically stated it’s ‘impossible’ to train individual skills exclusively. If I had said this how would I explain my 99 agility? Your underlined comments simply show I train differently and link the skills together so I’d rather do that where possible. Why would I want to fletch and no positive effects on other skills and waste a lot of money doing it? Just because you disagree with me doesn’t either of us wrong or right, its the way we do it. To be honest, I think you’re fixed in the mindset that skills must be trained independently that you only see one at a time? You have no concept of linking and if I’m so wrong then how come Jagex have started even started linking skills together, such as thieving and agility? You decide you train your skills as you so fit, and so do I. If I decide your way is not for me, I’ll view it as that so get used to it.

 

@Grimy_bunyip

I didn’t disregard it. There was no more to say on the matter. I’m not defining efficiency narrowly, I actually bother to give examples where others don’t. If you want to elaborate on this please do and enlighten us all instead of not bothering or giving the many definitions of efficiency and put it into some sort of context.

 

I have never said my own personal definition of efficiency is the "efficiency" of the runescape community. Where did I state this and where did I state that this is respective to the whole RS community? Every player has the right to choose I think is what you will find.

 

This is excellent. I had no idea that if you did things differently if would provoke such a reaction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are asserting that training skills together is intrinsically superior to training separately

 

which is false

 

you are right you never said it is impossible

 

--

 

the reaction (or at least mine) is not so much because what you do is different

 

it is that you assert that it is superior when it is likely not

 

it's like the guy in H&A who says that a DFS is better to buy than 85 herblore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assumptions, implications and opinions stated as fact. I can see where this is going.

 

At least, define efficient before talking about efficiency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assumptions, implications and opinions stated as fact. I can see where this is going.

 

At least, define efficient before talking about efficiency.

 

"You're slower/lower level than me so therefore, you are inefficient."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can play the game however you want, as long as you enjoy it, and i like to play the game efficienty as i find playing runescape boring otherwise


Ejaz.png

Ejaz.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what

 

since when did this become a debate over calling people noobs

 

that's what noob means, right?

 

They mad 'cause they ain't got no skill.

 

On topic; Seems like we're echoing each other's posts and arguing in circles, hmm. People play their own way, deal with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn’t disregard it. There was no more to say on the matter. I’m not defining efficiency narrowly, I actually bother to give examples where others don’t. If you want to elaborate on this please do and enlighten us all instead of not bothering or giving the many definitions of efficiency and put it into some sort of context.

 

I have never said my own personal definition of efficiency is the "efficiency" of the runescape community. Where did I state this and where did I state that this is respective to the whole RS community? Every player has the right to choose I think is what you will find.

Firstly, I did not give a bunch of definitions of efficiency.

I gave one definition of efficiency, and I gave several examples of different subsets of efficiency, to show that efficiency is subjective.

I never gave more than one definition of efficiency.

 

If your own personal definition of efficiency isn't that of the runescape community, then your definition is trivial.

And since your argument is based entirely on your own personal definition of efficiency, your entire argument is trivialized as well.

 

no, you did not say it was respective to the RS community.

I was just assuming that it was, and that you were not talking about some imaginary community.

 

You made an obvious statement that X is Y.

But since X doesn't exist in the real world. Your statement is pointless.

Why don't we also say that dinosaur flatulence promotes global warming.

I mean, I'm sure it it would. If dinosaurs weren't extinct.

 

ultimately, your statement is true.

But is not relevant.


Naaxi.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hairy, I gave numerous examples of the more common uses for the term efficiency: Fastest Gp/hr, Fastest xp/hr, Best gp/xp/time ratio, as well as potential xp/hr or gp/hr (saved time, where a more expensive training method in the end saves enough time to justify the gp increase: think frost bones VS d bones.)


Stonewall337.png
[hide=Drops]Araxxor Eye x1 Leg pieces x2
GWD: 5000 Addy bar Steam B Staff x3 Z Spear x6 Sara. Hilt x2 Bandos Hilt x2 (LS, Solo)SS x6 (1 LS)
Tormented Demons: Shard x6 Slice x5 Claws x9 Limbs x3
DKS: Archer x21 Warrior x31 Berserker x30 Axe x51[/hide]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I rarely take highest efficiency into consideration. For example, I got 99 Slayer without ever using a cannon, 99 Woodcutting with yews (note: pre-ivy), 99 Agility at advanced gnome, and prefer abyss Runecrafting as opposed to using graahks. That's all I can remember off of the top of my head. I'm sure there's more. Most of the most efficient methods aren't very fun to me, and if I'm not having fun, I have no motivation to play.


100523232837.png

Are you winning The Game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what

 

since when did this become a debate over calling people noobs

 

that's what noob means, right?

 

You would rather debate over choosing fun versus rank on a high scores table?

 

This thread goes on because some people will never learn the difference between effective and efficienct, because it would put a butthurt on their egos.


Exclusive Legacy Mode Player

 

Golvellius.png


He just successfully trolled you with "courtesy" and managed to get a reaction out of you. Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what

 

since when did this become a debate over calling people noobs

 

that's what noob means, right?

 

You would rather debate over choosing fun versus rank on a high scores table?

 

This thread goes on because some people will never learn the difference between effective and efficienct, because it would put a butthurt on their egos.

 

Some so called "efficient" training methods make me laugh, fast exp for a few minutes, till your wrist dies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what

 

since when did this become a debate over calling people noobs

 

that's what noob means, right?

 

You would rather debate over choosing fun versus rank on a high scores table?

 

This thread goes on because some people will never learn the difference between effective and efficienct, because it would put a butthurt on their egos.

non sequitur

 

i was responding to someone defining "efficient as: 'you are slower/lower level than me'"

 

--

 

i do not play this game for ranks, i play it because i enjoy it - i think that applies to everyone here

 

prove to me that i do not fun; prove to me that how i play is not fun to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what

 

since when did this become a debate over calling people noobs

 

that's what noob means, right?

 

You would rather debate over choosing fun versus rank on a high scores table?

 

This thread goes on because some people will never learn the difference between effective and efficienct, because it would put a butthurt on their egos.

Of course, effective is saving your money in a savings account until you retire, efficient is putting it into a Roth, or some other form of investment vehicle, so that it grows far more. The efficient get more done. In fact, anything which grants XP is, technically, effective. You are trying to save fact, and miserably failing, by your blatant misuse of terms.

 

You see, effective means: "Producing the intended or expected result". Sure, you can fletch yew longs for 99 fletching, it will get you there, but it will take far longer, and cost more, then fletching addy arrows.

 

Effective is arriving at your destination, efficient is getting there the fastest/cheapest/most enjoyable way, a ratio of all three of these.


Stonewall337.png
[hide=Drops]Araxxor Eye x1 Leg pieces x2
GWD: 5000 Addy bar Steam B Staff x3 Z Spear x6 Sara. Hilt x2 Bandos Hilt x2 (LS, Solo)SS x6 (1 LS)
Tormented Demons: Shard x6 Slice x5 Claws x9 Limbs x3
DKS: Archer x21 Warrior x31 Berserker x30 Axe x51[/hide]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what

 

since when did this become a debate over calling people noobs

 

that's what noob means, right?

 

You would rather debate over choosing fun versus rank on a high scores table?

 

This thread goes on because some people will never learn the difference between effective and efficienct, because it would put a butthurt on their egos.

Of course, effective is saving your money in a savings account until you retire, efficient is putting it into a Roth, or some other form of investment vehicle, so that it grows far more. The efficient get more done. In fact, anything which grants XP is, technically, effective. You are trying to save fact, and miserably failing, by your blatant misuse of terms.

 

You see, effective means: "Producing the intended or expected result". Sure, you can fletch yew longs for 99 fletching, it will get you there, but it will take far longer, and cost more, then fletching addy arrows.

 

Effective is arriving at your destination, efficient is getting there the fastest/cheapest/most enjoyable way, a ratio of all three of these.

 

And the the most enjoyable way to do something is a free variable, and cannot be accounted for in any calculations you may see. Which should be obvious, but some people refuse to see it.


pere_grin.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jrhairychest

@ bladewing

On the contrary, I didnt say training skills separately was superior. I said it works for ME and I view it as better for myself because any related skills also rise. Why should I do something I personally dont like to do, and come to detest each skill? You view training each skill individually by throwing money at it as efficient, correct? Well, I dont. It seems like an alien concept to you that I dont batter each skill individually and kill myself trying to do it. Why is this so?

 

@Grimy_bunyip

You gave several subsets so in fact trying to give multi versions of efficiency. Again you dont actually put any context to what youre saying. Michael has stated "You're slower/lower level than me so therefore, you are inefficient." so I am going off his context which Ive at least had a go at. Some relevant in-game context please.

 

@stonewall337

Agreed. You did and yes most view those things to be measured by efficiency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what

 

since when did this become a debate over calling people noobs

 

that's what noob means, right?

 

You would rather debate over choosing fun versus rank on a high scores table?

 

This thread goes on because some people will never learn the difference between effective and efficienct, because it would put a butthurt on their egos.

Of course, effective is saving your money in a savings account until you retire, efficient is putting it into a Roth, or some other form of investment vehicle, so that it grows far more. The efficient get more done. In fact, anything which grants XP is, technically, effective. You are trying to save fact, and miserably failing, by your blatant misuse of terms.

 

You see, effective means: "Producing the intended or expected result". Sure, you can fletch yew longs for 99 fletching, it will get you there, but it will take far longer, and cost more, then fletching addy arrows.

 

Effective is arriving at your destination, efficient is getting there the fastest/cheapest/most enjoyable way, a ratio of all three of these.

 

And the the most enjoyable way to do something is a free variable, and cannot be accounted for in any calculations you may see. Which should be obvious, but some people refuse to see it.

Enjoyability isn't as black and white as that- the majority of people feel the taste of things and see colours in the same way, and if we assume something for this majority, it is generally true. Most people find the same things to be fun, so if efficiency is generally fun, we don't usually have to take it into account for calculations.


First to 99 Farming on 27. September, 2005.

First to 3766 Port Score on 20. March, 2014.

First to 4664 Port Score on 2. March, 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[hide]

what

 

since when did this become a debate over calling people noobs

 

that's what noob means, right?

 

You would rather debate over choosing fun versus rank on a high scores table?

 

This thread goes on because some people will never learn the difference between effective and efficienct, because it would put a butthurt on their egos.

Of course, effective is saving your money in a savings account until you retire, efficient is putting it into a Roth, or some other form of investment vehicle, so that it grows far more. The efficient get more done. In fact, anything which grants XP is, technically, effective. You are trying to save fact, and miserably failing, by your blatant misuse of terms.

 

You see, effective means: "Producing the intended or expected result". Sure, you can fletch yew longs for 99 fletching, it will get you there, but it will take far longer, and cost more, then fletching addy arrows.

 

Effective is arriving at your destination, efficient is getting there the fastest/cheapest/most enjoyable way, a ratio of all three of these.

 

And the the most enjoyable way to do something is a free variable, and cannot be accounted for in any calculations you may see. Which should be obvious, but some people refuse to see it.

[/hide]

Enjoyability isn't as black and white as that- the majority of people feel the taste of things and see colours in the same way, and if we assume something for this majority, it is generally true. Most people find the same things to be fun, so if efficiency is generally fun, we don't usually have to take it into account for calculations.

I am not sure I agree. Yes, people do generally find the same things fun. But these things are just general things. An example would be playing Runescape. I think that the majority of people posting on here find this fun. But comparing training method X with training method Y and determining which is more fun is not as easy. For example, I find graahking natures to be more fun then using the abyss. And someone else who recently posted on here prefers the abyss.

 

Also, trying to quantify fun is difficult. Saying: "you will have exactly 2.4x more fun training slayer while farming in between tasks then you will soloing TDs, which brings the net profit of slayer up to rival that of TDs."* does not make much sense. And fun is also affected by outside forces, such as internet connection, health, and attitude. For example, Dungeoneering with friends, on a good world, may indeed be enjoyable. But, dungeoneering on w117, over dial up, with a food hog team, while you are suffering from food poisening in real life, is perhaps not so much fun. But it is theoretically possible to achieve the same xp/hr rate in either dungeoneering circumstance. One is just more advisable then the other.

 

And, rather then say "efficiency is generally fun" I would perhaps say "fun is generally efficient" Because if you are having fun doing X action, then you are using your time more efficiently then doing Y action, which you detest. Now sometimes the result of doing something you detest is worth it. Hence why I jumped ~600k woodcutting ranks in about 18 hours. Finishing Grim Tales outweighed the detest I have for training woodcutting. Normally though, training woodcutting is inefficient for me, because I hate it that much. Some people seem to enjoy woodcutting (e.g. PuppyKing/Minergoo), and for them it is an efficient way to use their time.

 

Therefore, I do not think that fun can be added into calculations because it is unquantifiable, and depends on circumstances outside of what you are calculating. Also, if you are calculating anything, it tends to be very specific, so trying to apply a generality into a specific case does not work out. Calculations are not normally done to find out what is generally better to do,b ut rather they are done to find out exactly how much better one thing is then another.

 

 

tl;dr version: Fun is not quantifiable, and can change depending on outside forces. Also, fun is a general term, and calculations are for finding specific details, not what is "generally" better.

 

 

 

*Slayer and TDs were used purely for example purposes, and not because TDs actually do make 2.4x more then slayer+farming


pere_grin.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.