Something doesn't seem to add up...

[ShadowTwisted]

I'm a person who enjoys having a balanced character, however it seems redundant to train def and atk. Why? Well, it seems like strength is the only melee stat that has a visible effect on combat. When using a weapon to train different styles, they have different descriptions. Attack xp is usually denoted by "accurate", so as my attack goes up, I should see less 0s, right? But it doesn't seem to do that. As with defence, I had noticed certain monsters having a max hit listed in the Bestiary, regardless of your defence level. Shouldn't a high defence have a clearly visible reduction to something's max hit? In an example, let's say 2 players face off head to head. Both have the same attack level, but the one has 75 str and 25 def, while the other has 75 def and 25 str. The one with the higher str level will probably win, because they'll hit harder, even though it should, in theory, be even.

 

 

 

I'm sure that compfreak will probably come along and post the detailed stats, tho.

[purfishx]

Won't it all come down to the equipment the persons are wearing?

 

 

 

:-s

[ShadowTwisted]

You'd think that, but you'd be surprised how often it seems to fail to matter.

[Ravenkana]

All I can say is that this is one of the many flaws of the Runescape combat system and will probably never be fixed. The games just to advanced to change something this fundamental.

[Zierro]

Yes, it's very easy to spot the benefits of high Strength compared to Attack and Defence.

 

 

 

[Ratio of successful hits] + [Ratio of 0's you take] V.S. [Max hit]

 

 

 

Which side is easier to keep track of?

[compfreak847]

Couple of interesting points. Not to worry, I can argue against all of them \

 

 

 

First off, you say that iit 'doesn't seem' like your attack level rising is resulting in you hitting fewer zeros. Wrong. It obviously does. Try making a level 3 with 1 attack, and try to hit a 99 defence player in barrows. Defence doesn't affect hit, it affects how often you get hit. No, it shouldn't reduce the max hit. Attack > strength > defence for PVP, as you hit less then 50% of the time. However, defence applies when ranging and maging; something that attack and strength don't. Hence why defence has less effect on combat then strength or attack (combat formula, anyone?).

[DieselX]

PVP is all about the KO factor. You want strength to KO your opponent before he can eat, or in a non-food duel, before he KOes you. Someone with high def in PVP can't KO the other person, so they lose.

[compfreak847]

PVP is all about the KO factor. You want strength to KO your opponent before he can eat, or in a non-food duel, before he KOes you. Someone with high def in PVP can't KO the other person, so they lose.

 

I beg to differ. The only time the KO factor is reasonable is in eating PVP; by far in the minority in RS. For all the safe RS, and mostly for PVP, damage per minute is what matters. A pure with 60 attack\99 strength isn't going to land a single dd++ spec on someone with high defence and torags. He would do much better, and could train faster, at 80 attack\80 strength.

[ShadowTwisted]

I'm glad to see that you didn't disappoint me. Although I'm a little shocked you didn't quote my line about your inevitable appearance. It is also why I said "seem", as in it could be different, but maybe not as noticeable. After all, I wasn't arguing it as a fact, just as an observation that the effects of the other stats don't seem to be as apparent as the increase in max hit. Also, your example plays a big part with extremes. Obviously when you look at the extreme opposites of the spectrum, you get a clear-cut difference. When you play a little closer to the middle, though, things get a little more fuzzy.

[compfreak847]

I'm glad to see that you didn't disappoint me. Although I'm a little shocked you didn't quote my line about your inevitable appearance. It is also why I said "seem", as in it could be different, but maybe not as noticeable. After all, I wasn't arguing it as a fact, just as an observation that the effects of the other stats don't seem to be as apparent as the increase in max hit. Also, your example plays a big part with extremes. Obviously when you look at the extreme opposites of the spectrum, you get a clear-cut difference. When you play a little closer to the middle, though, things get a little more fuzzy.

 

That's exactly why you have to look at the ends so you can see a difference. You can then scale it down for more accurate results. Example: Say your trying to find the mass of an average bean, for simplicity's sake we'll say it's 1g. You mass 4 beans, and their average is .91 grams. Does that mean the average of all beans of that type is .91? No! Now say you mass 10,000 beans and get an average of .9995. Does that mean the average of all beans of that type is .9995? Not necessarily, but it's heck of a lot closer then the results of 5. You have to look at the opposite ends of a spectrum to determine results near the middle accurately. And I didn't feel the need to quote that time, too much of a cross referencing post :P

[Reztral]

I've been working on combat recently, and I've noticed that I'm lasting longer on my slayer assignments as my defence and attack go up, so there is something going on. The problem is it's harder to keep track of how many times you are getting hit and how many times your are dealing damage than it is to keep track of your max hit.

[compfreak847]

I've been working on combat recently, and I've noticed that I'm lasting longer on my slayer assignments as my defence and attack go up, so there is something going on. The problem is it's harder to keep track of how many times you are getting hit and how many times your are dealing damage than it is to keep track of your max hit.

 

Not really, I do tests by entering each hit into a spread sheet while fighting. And its very obvious; just go verse someone with straight 99s or 1s, and tell me how often they hit\get hit. There's really no argument about if attack\defence do anything; it was just a careless remark dropped by the OP.

[The_Maddest]

Bear in mind, I am F2P and am referring to solely my F2P experiences

 

 

 

I must agree, strength is FTW! In no armour fights there is no comparison really -- strength comes out on top and attack and defence are rendered useless because they are based around armour.

 

 

 

Even in armour fights, strength seems to come out on top. I defeated Y Guy 4 Life who is 98 attack and low str/def with my medium atk/high str/low def in a full armour DM

[compfreak847]

Bear in mind, I am F2P and am referring to solely my F2P experiences

 

 

 

I must agree, strength is FTW! In no armour fights there is no comparison really -- strength comes out on top and attack and defence are rendered useless because they are based around armour.

 

 

 

Even in armour fights, strength seems to come out on top. I defeated Y Guy 4 Life who is 98 attack and low str/def with my medium atk/high str/low def in a full armour DM

 

Different stats do different things. If you have low attack, you'll still do fine against someone with low defence. But if you tried to use that low attack on someone in high defence with GOOD armor, you would fail miserably.

[Smapla]

it seems that attack and defence do matter, it's just that jagex messed up when implementing armour and weapons. let's say attack boosts your probability to hit someone, by some factor n. the boost from weapon bonuses could be 10n, for instance. high enough that the attack level matters, but not very much. same with defence.

 

 

 

it probably seemed okay when they last messed with the combat system, but that was a long time ago, before these new weapons and armours with incredibly high stats came into play. it may have seemed a little off when it was made, but that small unbalance has become a big problem as weapons have developed.

[The_Maddest]

Bear in mind, I am F2P and am referring to solely my F2P experiences

 

 

 

I must agree, strength is FTW! In no armour fights there is no comparison really -- strength comes out on top and attack and defence are rendered useless because they are based around armour.

 

 

 

Even in armour fights, strength seems to come out on top. I defeated Y Guy 4 Life who is 98 attack and low str/def with my medium atk/high str/low def in a full armour DM

 

Different stats do different things. If you have low attack, you'll still do fine against someone with low defence. But if you tried to use that low attack on someone in high defence with GOOD armor, you would fail miserably.

 

Tell me, how does that relate to what I said? I said:

 

- In no armour fights, strength comes out on top, no comparison

 

- In full (rune) armour fights, strength STILL comes out on top, even against someone with a high attack.

 

 

 

Maybe you didn't understand my example. I fought Y Guy, both using full rune and an inventory of tuna. I ran his food supply out and killed him with around 7-8 food still left. I KNOW this is only just one example but its not as if I only just beat him, there was a very clear margin.

[compfreak847]

Bear in mind, I am F2P and am referring to solely my F2P experiences

 

 

 

I must agree, strength is FTW! In no armour fights there is no comparison really -- strength comes out on top and attack and defence are rendered useless because they are based around armour.

 

 

 

Even in armour fights, strength seems to come out on top. I defeated Y Guy 4 Life who is 98 attack and low str/def with my medium atk/high str/low def in a full armour DM

 

Different stats do different things. If you have low attack, you'll still do fine against someone with low defence. But if you tried to use that low attack on someone in high defence with GOOD armor, you would fail miserably.

 

Tell me, how does that relate to what I said? I said:

 

- In no armour fights, strength comes out on top, no comparison

 

- In full (rune) armour fights, strength STILL comes out on top, even against someone with a high attack.

 

 

 

Maybe you didn't understand my example. I fought Y Guy, both using full rune and an inventory of tuna. I ran his food supply out and killed him with around 7-8 food still left. I KNOW this is only just one example but its not as if I only just beat him, there was a very clear margin.

 

Or perhaps you forgot to read my post before responding to it. He had low defence\high attack - you had medium attack, low defence. His high attack didn't provide that much of an advantage, due to your low defence, but his low defence suffered terribly due to your high strength and medium attack. If you tried to face someone with high defence\medium strength\low attack, you would fail miserably with your defence. A balanced character would do the best in a variety of situations.

[ShadowTwisted]

There's really no argument about if attack\defence do anything; it was just a careless remark dropped by the OP.

 

 

 

I knew that they had to have some effect on combat, my point was that whatever effect it was, wasn't as clear cut as the difference in max hit. Obviously, people are going to be able to tell their strength is getting better as their max hit gets bigger, but noticing a few extra 0s on yourself and a few extra red splats against your opponent aren't so easy to pick up on. Especially if you're focused on kill count, such as for Slayer. Main reason I posted this was to find out what the effect was, because I couldn't really tell for sure. I knew you would know, as you seem to be the guru of RuneScape facts and stats.

[basiliko]

It is like Cold War arm-race. If you slow down on building up nuclear power, you lose.

[compfreak847]

It is like Cold War arm-race. If you slow down on building up nuclear power, you lose.

 

Umm.. Excuse me, but what?

[HOSTiLE_KAi]

Well, it seems like strength is the only melee stat that has a visible effect on combat.... so as my attack goes up, I should see less 0s, right? But it doesn't seem to do that. As with defence, I had noticed certain monsters having a max hit listed in the Bestiary, regardless of your defence level. Shouldn't a high defence have a clearly visible reduction to something's max hit? In an example

 

 

 

Well, you do need quite a lot of strength levels to see 1 more damage, also don't forget you do need a lot of attack and def levels to see a cutting edge difference. Defence level does little help against monsters, its the armor bonuses that increase your odds of taking less damage/ avoid it. By saying odds, its dependent upon its attack style (ranged/ mage/ melee(crush slash stab)) and the attack's odds against the armor you're wearing. (that's where prayer comes in handy). So that means 99 def isn't 99% damage deduction but better odds in combination of armor.

 

 

 

For pvp you would wear the armor that gives you best odds against another, so obviously they would do the same.

[ShadowTwisted]

It is like Cold War arm-race. If you slow down on building up nuclear power, you lose.

 

 

 

But my cold-fusion powered armor and weapons aren't ready yet. Great, I'm gonna die!

 

 

 

 

Well, you do need quite a lot of strength levels to see 1 more damage, also don't forget you do need a lot of attack and def levels to see a cutting edge difference. Defence level does little help against monsters, its the armor bonuses that increase your odds of taking less damage/ avoid it. By saying odds, its dependent upon its attack style (ranged/ mage/ melee(crush slash stab)) and the attack's odds against the armor you're wearing. (that's where prayer comes in handy). So that means 99 def isn't 99% damage deduction but better odds in combination of armor.

 

 

 

For pvp you would wear the armor that gives you best odds against another, so obviously they would do the same.

 

 

 

Pretty much the point already covered by compfreak, and more or less what I wanted out of this topic. It would be nice to have a more visible, easily measured effect, tho. I don't always count the times I deal damage over how many times I get hit, etc. So failing to notice the subtle changes in that respect is a little more understandable. I know it takes a while to see that number on your max hit go up, but it's still easy to see when it does. Keeping track of damage dealt vs. damage taken, gets a little more involved then I would like just to be able to tell something changed.

[compfreak847]

For pvp you would wear the armor that gives you best odds against another, so obviously they would do the same.

 

 

 

Pretty much the point already covered by compfreak, and more or less what I wanted out of this topic. It would be nice to have a more visible, easily measured effect, tho. I don't always count the times I deal damage over how many times I get hit, etc. So failing to notice the subtle changes in that respect is a little more understandable. I know it takes a while to see that number on your max hit go up, but it's still easy to see when it does. Keeping track of damage dealt vs. damage taken, gets a little more involved then I would like just to be able to tell something changed.

 

But what were you looking for? Me saying that attack\strength have an effect on your combat? :?

[The_Maddest]

Bear in mind, I am F2P and am referring to solely my F2P experiences

 

 

 

I must agree, strength is FTW! In no armour fights there is no comparison really -- strength comes out on top and attack and defence are rendered useless because they are based around armour.

 

 

 

Even in armour fights, strength seems to come out on top. I defeated Y Guy 4 Life who is 98 attack and low str/def with my medium atk/high str/low def in a full armour DM

 

Different stats do different things. If you have low attack, you'll still do fine against someone with low defence. But if you tried to use that low attack on someone in high defence with GOOD armor, you would fail miserably.

 

Tell me, how does that relate to what I said? I said:

 

- In no armour fights, strength comes out on top, no comparison

 

- In full (rune) armour fights, strength STILL comes out on top, even against someone with a high attack.

 

 

 

Maybe you didn't understand my example. I fought Y Guy, both using full rune and an inventory of tuna. I ran his food supply out and killed him with around 7-8 food still left. I KNOW this is only just one example but its not as if I only just beat him, there was a very clear margin.

 

Or perhaps you forgot to read my post before responding to it. He had low defence\high attack - you had medium attack, low defence. His high attack didn't provide that much of an advantage, due to your low defence, but his low defence suffered terribly due to your high strength and medium attack. If you tried to face someone with high defence\medium strength\low attack, you would fail miserably with your defence. A balanced character would do the best in a variety of situations.

 

On the contrary, I find the balanced characters do the worst. Pick out your average newbie -- they will have average stats yet they suck at PvP (even with good equipment).

 

 

 

I think another example is in order :o

 

I fought:Svander, stats 99/71/99

 

with my stats: 86/92/80

 

in a full armour deathmatch. I must say, I got rather lucky and beat him by ~5-10hp. If I tried again I'd probably lose but it would still be quite close. Still, at 5 combats lower than him and considering h e has 2 melee 99s and I have none, it just goes to show how overpowered strength is in combat.

 

 

 

I would also love to hear any experiences that show that Strength is on par with Attack and Defence.

[compfreak847]

Bear in mind, I am F2P and am referring to solely my F2P experiences

 

 

 

I must agree, strength is FTW! In no armour fights there is no comparison really -- strength comes out on top and attack and defence are rendered useless because they are based around armour.

 

 

 

Even in armour fights, strength seems to come out on top. I defeated Y Guy 4 Life who is 98 attack and low str/def with my medium atk/high str/low def in a full armour DM

 

Different stats do different things. If you have low attack, you'll still do fine against someone with low defence. But if you tried to use that low attack on someone in high defence with GOOD armor, you would fail miserably.

 

Tell me, how does that relate to what I said? I said:

 

- In no armour fights, strength comes out on top, no comparison

 

- In full (rune) armour fights, strength STILL comes out on top, even against someone with a high attack.

 

 

 

Maybe you didn't understand my example. I fought Y Guy, both using full rune and an inventory of tuna. I ran his food supply out and killed him with around 7-8 food still left. I KNOW this is only just one example but its not as if I only just beat him, there was a very clear margin.

 

Or perhaps you forgot to read my post before responding to it. He had low defence\high attack - you had medium attack, low defence. His high attack didn't provide that much of an advantage, due to your low defence, but his low defence suffered terribly due to your high strength and medium attack. If you tried to face someone with high defence\medium strength\low attack, you would fail miserably with your defence. A balanced character would do the best in a variety of situations.

 

On the contrary, I find the balanced characters do the worst. Pick out your average newbie -- they will have average stats yet they suck at PvP (even with good equipment).

 

 

 

I think another example is in order :o

 

I fought:Svander, stats 99/71/99

 

with my stats: 86/92/80

 

in a full armour deathmatch. I must say, I got rather lucky and beat him by ~5-10hp. If I tried again I'd probably lose but it would still be quite close. Still, at 5 combats lower than him and considering h e has 2 melee 99s and I have none, it just goes to show how overpowered strength is in combat.

 

 

 

I would also love to hear any experiences that show that Strength is on par with Attack and Defence.

 

First of all, a single deathmatch is completely and utterly meaningless. I've 3 hit level 138s without taking any damage in a single deathmatch. Does that mean my stats are far superior to theirs? No, it means that 3 of my hits were better then theirs Even admitting you 'got lucky' in a deathmatch means you don't really know what would normally have happened; how do you know it would still be 'quite close'? PVP tends to be quite random; hence why I've gotten owned by 100- players many times before. I've had my fair share of PVP combat experience, with over 150 hours logged in castle wars and 700 hours and 1.4m tokul in fight pits, ~140 hours in clan wars, and several different PVP accounts in the old wilderness. If you hit your opponent less then 50% of the time, attack is more important then strength; simple mathematics.