Guide to the Labyrinth - Relocated

[IraTheSquire_1457591]

There truly is no need for such tests Ira. The more you test, the more you'll realize this guide accurate on everything. I understand you are relatively new to this and that it can be hard to trust what others say without any proof or support, but sometimes you just need to trust what others say. The ones who contributed to this guide have a lot of experience and know what they're talking about. They have authority on the subject. There's a lot of knowledge to acquire in life overall, and if you put everything back into question, you'll be a slow learner. As an easy example, most people could not explain why we know (from simple observation) that the earth rotates around the sun, and no one has actually SEEN the earth rotate around the sun. Yet, everyone believes that the earth rotates around the sun. We trust the authorities in place on that subject, and you got to do the same thing with this guide.

First of all, the heliocentric model of the solar system (which is the example you've given here) is the conclusion after rigorous observations and tests by many people before it is accepted as "fact". The scientists who held authority on such matters are trust not because they are "authority", but because as scientists they are supposed to reach their conclusions via conducting rigorous experiments. The same "tests" is not really done here, as it is reliant on the "feeling" or "I think this and this" as opposed to "tested this. The probability is such and such higher/lower".

(FYI: there's no absolute point in the universe, and so when scientists say "the earth rotates around the sun" the truth is that that model is just the simplest one to describe the motion of the sun and the earth. You can actually make the earth as the point of reference and say that the sun moves around the earth, it is just that describing the motion of the other planets becomes far more complicated. A scientific model is just a description used to predict what happens under identical circumstances)

Secondly, while I trust people in good faith that does not mean that their conclusions are not affected by their biases and flaws in the human memory etc. We want this guide to be useful, right? How can it be useful if the information in it isn't as accurate as possible? I've seen guides for online browser-based MMO incorporating even more complex maths than the one that I just did (they included variance, which is far as statistics goes is quite insane). As someone who is actually doing a materials PhD right now (yeah, I really shouldn't be wasting my time and finish writing my thesis) it's something that I can't just let past. While I do believe what people say I prefer to have it backed up with concrete evidence as well. (And it's not like those tests are detrimental or anything. I'm just recording my encounters anyway. My tactics is still based on this guide)

Thirdly, wouldn't it be great to 1) confirm what the people have been saying is right and 2) know exactly how much more/less it really is when they say "this and this is more/less likely"?

Finally, it's not like people have done tests as this guide has hard numbers on the power of the bosses. It's just that when dealing with probability the tests becomes more complicated. And it's not like I'm not willing to do it (Yay! Science experiment!).