User talk:Saftzie

__NOINDEX__

"Delete extra newline"
Hey there, could you please refrain from using "delete" in the edit summary of all those edits you are making to the templates, it is spamming out the CVN. Thanks, 10:16, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Penguin locations
Heh, I wasn't really thinking of it in terms of luring. I just saw 12 locations and thought "Hey, aren't there only 11?" I guess that does make more sense, and we can protect it if it happens again. 11:30, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

Events notice
It isnt actually restricted to just the ET as far as i know, and thanks for updating it btw ^_^ I was out today and forgot to come change it... :o/ - 06:25, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

Updated with new information
There's a penguin hiding in Seer's village where the anvils are. It's disguised as a rock!


 * The Feldip, Jiggig, and Witchaven penguins have wide roaming areas that include Seers' village. However, not only are exact locations different on every world, the wiki only reports their spawn points. -- 18:45, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

RE:UrnCapacity
Hey, I'm calling it a day as well, so I won't be creating any more templates or adding the tables to pages until I return from school the next day. If I find more of the tables, I'll keep making the templates (If others haven't done so already). Your format is fine, and I'm really just copying it to different places to reduce page sizes. 09:50, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Event
Hmmm, sure ill have a think about it and link the other Et members to it. Here are a few points im thinking about currently:

1. Yeah, low enough. Most people would have the levels or would be able to get them relatively easily if they hear of a free escort through a harder part of the quest.

2. Yes, fair enough. Its a safe trip to a new and decently difficult boss for low levels. But i really don't think anyone will be in it for a trip through the chaos tunnels to a slayer task or a certain monster. Its just too small a thing to wait for an event to do, even if its a few hours away. Despite what many people think, most worlds are empty in low-level wilderness and the chances of being attacked by someone in your level range before getting to a rift is tiny.

Most players kill bork daily for his generous charm and gem drops, they aren't really going to find much of an advantage taking the long circuitous route which will require extra items such as anti poison and dragon breath protection.

So that pretty well leaves out most high levels and with that i doubt most low levels would be brave enough to venture into a dangerous area which is a hair's breadth from the wilderness. Even with reassurances that its hard to get lured into.

3. All fine here, even chaos teleports are only a couple rooms away and its easy to make up ground against a large group. Safety shouldn't be an issue, we'll have enough "volunteer :P" high levels to bless and stay with the grave or head back to the statue for an escort. I doubt we'd make more than a single trip, as i said, people who are in it for a certain monster are going to stick there and anyone going bork will most likely teleport away.

4. Not a chance >_>

Sorry to be so negative but my main job is poking holes in event ideas :P not sure how i missed GOP...

But tell me, how does this sound? We turn it into a monthly or bi-monthly "Quest" event. We pick a different quest each time, ones with difficult parts that would be easier with team mates (e.g. Dessert treasure, What lies below, the Fremmenik isles), difficult or confusing quests that are easier with people to chat to that are doing the same quest (e.g. Elemental workshop 3, Mournings ends part 2, Legend's quest) and ofcourse quests that need a partner (Shield of arrav and Heroes quest). We could have a small section on the RS:ET page dedicated to what quest we are doing next, allowing people to get the reqs or hold out on doing it until the event is on. I just feel that narrowing it down to just the chaos tunnels wouldn't be as good as making it an event for all quests? Hmmm?

- 14:09, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, i was referring to running past the trolls. I did it at a low level and found the run pretty difficult even with protection prayers and decent food. And i thought the hunt for surok was part of the quest as i did them together :P
 * I meant we should use the wiki as a medium to connect people that need opposite gang partners to complete the quests but are having trouble finding them. Idk, maybe we should run another basic minigame event at the same time for people that have already done it. We cant really ignore everyone else for a whole week, in this case having a split event shouldnt negatively affect each events turnout much - 06:31, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

Custodian
I've granted you custodian rights, per your request. You can now move pages without restrictions, move files, and may suppress redirect creation when doing so. Be sure to clear out any red links resulting from these actions. Dtm142 20:45, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

Battered key
Are you sure it's no longer required to open the door in the anvil house? 04:21, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Did the quest last night. I didn't have the key and walked right in. -- 04:28, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

HnS
Hey, dont worry about people cutting in line :3 If we were deciding who hides like that then keeping the sign-ups open wouldnt have much of a point. Want to know how im planning to pick my selection of hiders? Close eyes, scroll wheel, point at screen! :D - 05:14, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Artisans Workshop
what reason then? There is absolutely no reason (imo) to use variables and expressions for numbers that never change, and could as well be like what I had. 20:00, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * The numbers are calculated, based on assumptions that may not be true. It's better to let the computer do the math. -- 20:04, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * I let the computer do the maths indeed. I just took those very numbers the computer generated, and if the calculation seems to be incorrect, I am prepared to change them all manually. This method you are using costs much more pageload time, so it's better to use the plain text instead of the calculation. 20:08, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the cost of misinformation from typographical errors is higher. -- 20:12, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * There are no typos, as I used substituting (so would be  and while the first one would stay a "template" on the page, the second one turns in the actual text. As I substituted all of the vars, vardefines and expressions, it is 100% sure it is the actual result of the calculation. There can't be any typos in that. 20:19, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * In that case, how about this: I'm reworking the table. Please don't change out from under me. Okay? Also, it's expected that there will be other changes as we learn more about the workshop and how xp works. -- 20:23, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Dude, your numbers are wrong. As I explained, the article is under construction. Information is going to change. -- 20:45, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * If my numbers are wrong, your calculation is also wrong, so there's nothing better about your calculation. If you got the correct calculation, you can place back the variable fuss and calculations, but until then, please don't place it back. It is very hard to understand for new users(so they won't be able to edit it, and you said it was under construction, so they should be able to edit it too) and it doesn't help the slightest. 20:51, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, the original numbers were mine, as well. One more time... It's under construction. Now I have better info, and I changed the numbers. It's a wiki. It's editable. -- 20:55, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * I compared your numbers, not a SINGLE one is other than the version I have. You don't have better info, didn't change numbers, and yes. it is editable. But we still prefer the best, easiest editable, less pageload costing version. Which is mine. There's no difference in the final numbers, just a difference in the code. Which is a lot longer for your version which is TOTALLY useless and just makes editing harder. Yes, it is a wiki, and it is editable, but for people who don't understand vars, you are making the entire table uneditable. That's just what you said. It should be editable. Which it isn't for your version. Please don't use your version, as it is just useless code. Oh and the table columns with "# of (ore/coal)" are just unclearer than my version. 21:03, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * After I updated the table, they were all different. -- 21:05, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * All the break-evens, anyway. That was the point of the table in the first place. -- 21:09, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * It's useful for seeing the amount of xp you get, to see if you want to do it or not. 21:17, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * One more time, again. The break-even numbers were updated based on new info. The old info was wrong. -- 21:40, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * I redid them all, with the updated calculations... 21:41, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * But you put the old numbers in, the ones that don't take the 20% bonus into account. So I put the new numbers back in. -- 21:43, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * "In addition, players appear to get 20% bonus experience for smithing a sword at 100% performance." but, as the break-even is not 100% performance, they don't have the 20% bonus... 21:45, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's actually what I was saying... They don't get the 20% bonus, as they are not 100% performance. 21:51, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * One more time, again. The break-even numbers were updated based on new info. The old info was wrong. -- 21:40, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * But you put the old numbers in, the ones that don't take the 20% bonus into account. So I put the new numbers back in. -- 21:43, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * In excruciating detail (kind of why the exprs are better, imo):
 * Iron sword as stated by Jagex: 3242 xp (includes 20% bonus)
 * Iron sword without 20% bonus: 3242/1.2 = 2701 (about)
 * Iron smithing outside: 2812.5
 * Break-even: 2812.5/2701 = 104% (not realistic, so the bonus is necessary) -> 100%
 * Or
 * Steel sword as stated by Jagex: 4538 xp (includes 20% bonus)
 * Steel sword without 20%: 4538/1.2 = 3781 (about)
 * Steel smithing outside: 2200
 * Break-even: 2200/3781 = 58.1 or 59%
 * HTH -- 21:52, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Who says the 20% bonus is included in Jagex's statement? What is the source? And in the 2nd example, with the steel sword, you showed there is indeed no such thing as a 20% bonus in the break-even point. 21:55, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * The calculation for steel uses the Jagex number with the 20% removed, because the 20% would not be awarded or prorated for players who get less than 100% performance. Who says this? Players who are actually smithing. It would be great if Jagex explained in their game guide how their game works, rather than requiring players to reverse-engineer the game, but there it is. I don't really know how to explain the math to you more simply. -- 22:01, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Despite what I just said, let me try one more thing to help explain. Say a player is smithing iron swords. For 100% performance, they get 3242 xp. For 99% performance, they get 2674 xp. For 98% performance, they get 2647 xp. Suppose they're doing steel. At 100% performance, they get 4538 xp. At 99% performance, they get 3743 xp. At 98%, they get 3705 xp. HTH -- 22:12, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * It's okay. Just don't add the variables and stuff again until you got another calculation for it, and if you do, please leave me another message so I can put the raw numbers instead of the calculations(or if you want to do that, add subst:#vardefine subst:#var or subst:#expr for all of those instead of without subst:) 22:17, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Re:TT mods
Ive got 4 people who are going "Ill probably be there, but im not making any promises". And im planning to round some randoms up a couple hours before the event and fill them in on what to do. Me and stew are just the only two who are confirmed so far. I think ill go remove them as to not confuse people... So, is this just curiosity or are you volunteering to moderate a spot? - 04:22, April 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm volunteering. I can guarantee I'll be there. -- 06:37, April 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thanks. Could you hop on IRC so i can give you your clue/location? - 06:49, April 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Give me 5 or 10 min for IRC. -- 06:53, April 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * A little feedback off the project page, since I was a mod this time.
 * Sorry for announcing the 2nd clue in-chat. I thought that that was an intended change from the first time to counter the fact that the first person to the first checkpoint got a lead to all the others with only an ever-widening margin. We don't want to facilitate jumping the checkpoints, though.
 * But what about that ever-widening advantage? Maybe when the first person makes it to checkpoint N, then clue N-2 could be announced publicly. It gives people at least some hope of catching up. On the downside, it might give an unfair disadvantage to people already at checkpoint N-3, which might be quite far from checkpoint N-2. Some people also really wanted to do the whole thing as a matter of personal pride, not to be given charity assistance.
 * Also, I have no idea how much running around you did right at the start, but it certainly seemed like it sucked to be you for a while. Condolences. -- 04:02, April 20, 2011 (UTC)

Look, i had taken in to account the two opposing arguments and i feel that the rate at which i released answers was effective. People didn't fall miles behind but there was still a reward for those who attempted the questions themselves instead of waiting for the answers. Most people were a lot better behaved about not getting questions right because of this, especially compared to the last TT where people were swearing and being general douche bags if they fell 4-5 clues behind. The pace sped up a little at the end where people were getting more reckless and frustrated from not understanding the clues, but i still feel that the people who received rewards deserved them.

I did notice people were trying to complete the TT for the satisfaction alone, but i really cant accommodate them in this situation. Many of the moderators were asking to leave because it was getting late in their timezones and to be fair, they had been standing in one spot for hours with no reward anyway. All i can do is make the clues and answers public and hope that it satisfies them.

And yes, it was quite a rush at the beginning to get things sorted >_> I wanted to organise people beforehand but i was getting a lot of "I might be there, but don't count on it" so i didn't want to risk it.

I really did try to make it as efficient as possible and deal with all the possibilities but its not that easy :/ Thanks again for the help, i really couldn't have run it as smoothly without you. - 04:21, April 20, 2011 (UTC)


 * It's not a personal attack. I just remember the point was raised last time, but I don't recall it being resolved. (I wasn't there, in any case.) I certainly appreciate the effort you put into organizing the event, including finding last-minute mods. I'm not trying to downplay that at all. I did get the impression that people were generally pleased. -- 05:54, April 20, 2011 (UTC)

Et stuff
Hey, thanks for dealing with sitenotice/page and archiving the talk. I can never remember to do it when im not at the event :/ - 04:48, May 1, 2011 (UTC)