Closed.

[Veritas94]

I did. Pray tell, where is the statement that says 'thou shalt not disagree with the original poster's point of view'?

 

 

 

Nowhere to be found. I disagree with what you say, but you have every right to say it.

 

 

 

This thread has now reached 200 posts. Obviously I'm doing something right, or at least provoking some thought on this most magical of subjects.

 

 

 

Any Tipiter worth his/her forum account knows that the rants forum is for people to post their qualms and for other people to tear them a new one using logic and/or superior knowledge. Traditionally, and for all intents and purposes, this is a debate forum.

 

 

 

Logic and superior knowledge, eh?

[compfreak847]

Gratz on 3.7k posts.

 

 

 

I used to think magic was underpowered but now I just realized its expensive.

 

 

 

Yeah, didn't even realize I hit that :lol:

 

 

 

Don't pay much attention to it besides the biggies like 1k.

 

 

 

Anyway, I do seem to remember arguing with you about mage - Yes, quite a few people are disillusioned due to improper usage, as evidenced by this thread :? Hopefully I can convince a few of them otherwise...

 

 

 

@Elusefelier: Are you giving up and spamming, or what? Don't let my argument fade into the static then come back in 5 pages proclaiming about how you proved me wrong =D>

[Veritas94]

I haven't been spamming. I've already said I've addressed those same points in the past, and you keep re-posting them as if they're something new.

 

 

 

Don't falsely accuse me, please.

 

 

 

Congratulating yourselves on your post count in the rants forum isn't spam, right? You're making huge fools of yourselves.

[pureprayer]

I haven't been spamming. I've already said I've addressed those same points in the past, and you keep re-posting them as if they're something new.

 

 

 

Don't falsely accuse me, please.

 

If you already said you answered them answer them again.

[compfreak847]

I haven't been spamming. I've already said I've addressed those same points in the past, and you keep re-posting them as if they're something new.

 

 

 

Don't falsely accuse me, please.

 

 

 

Congratulating yourselves on your post count in the rants forum isn't spam, right? You're making huge fools of yourselves.

 

Feel free to point out the page number where you responded to my latest argument as posted on Page 10. I would be glad to continue the argument.

 

 

 

As for spamming, I can include whatever I want along with legitimate post responding to you, including 2 lines of text near the beginning about my post count.

[Veritas94]

Feel free to point out the page number where you responded to my latest argument as posted on Page 10. I would be glad to continue the argument.

 

 

 

 

 

Just to clear up something. You seem to think that I want to continue debating with you. This isn't the case.

 

 

 

Thanks,

 

E.

[compfreak847]

Feel free to point out the page number where you responded to my latest argument as posted on Page 10. I would be glad to continue the argument.

 

 

 

 

 

Just to clear up something. You seem to think that I want to continue debating with you. This isn't the case.

 

 

 

Thanks,

 

E.

 

Then why are you pretending to have responded to my posts? One posts you say 'I responded, your wrong, your refusing to respond to mine' then the next post you say 'I don't want to debate'. Point out the page number where you 'responded' to my post on page 10, or stop yammering about how you've already responded to it.

 

 

 

Wow, a lot of responds :?

[Veritas94]

Just answer this question. How can the meleer win, when he NEVER gets a chance to hit the mage ONCE.

 

 

 

Use d'hide, get good defense, train magic for that lovely extra magic resistance, and use protect prayers.

 

 

 

Alright, I said I wouldn't respond to your posts, but here it is. A gift from me to you, since I'm bored and have nothing to do.

 

 

 

I'm not pretending to have responded.

 

 

 

Dragonhide, prayer, and good defenses cause splashes (Freezing = mages' only defense), do they not? Let's assume both players are maxed out in everything:

 

 

 

The Meleer is protect magic praying, wearing black dragonhide armor, and has tons of extra magic resistance from his 99 magic.

 

 

 

The Mage is protect melee praying, wearing the only flimsy mage armor he can, and does not have tons of "slash/stab/chop/hack" resistance from training HIS strength & attack.

 

 

 

I say that the mage will be in a VERY tough spot and be VERY hard pressed to defeat such a meleer, especially since the mager's freezes are hardly landing. Yes, from my extensive experience, a meleer will reach a mage (or ambush one with d-claws that can rip through magic defenses so easily) for a substantial enough time to get the K-O. Even if he doesn't, it's not like the mage has the actual power to prevent the meleer from running to the nearest bank (There's a delay after freezes). In most 1v1 situations, not only are you both near a bank, but you're also surrounded by tons of people who can PJ you. Why is this significant for mages? I'll tell you: Because while the mage is trying to farcast the meleer, the mage is exposing himself completely to others. It's happened to me countless times, and it makes farcasting extremely difficult! Do you have any idea how much people disdain farcasting? I love it, but people will go specifically out of their way to attack you and call you a "farcasting noob," which only adds to the mounting difficulty of playing a mage.

 

 

 

 

 

Let's examine the second case, maxed everything Mage vs. Ranger:

 

 

 

Ranger is protect mage praying, wearing full black dragonhide/karils, has tons of extra magic resistance from his 99 magic.

 

 

 

Magers is protect ranged praying, wearing flimsy magic armor, and may or may not have extra resistance to ranged attacks based on the fact that he too is 99 ranged (Do you gain ranged resistance from training ranged?)

 

 

 

The Mager in this case might as well go AFK because he stands no chance.

 

 

 

Why am I comparing these two scenarios? Because in one scenario, you have the Mage & Meleer and the meleer has a slight advantage, but for this purpose let's let it be an "equal" fight.

 

In the second scenario, the mage gets totally wrecked by the ranger. So, why do the two fights the mage has to go through be both so uphill? Shouldn't the mage completely wreck the warrior no matter what the warrior is wearing? Or shouldn't the mage be able to adapt and bend to the triangle by wearing plate armor himself? Shouldn't the mage gain resistance to slash/stab/(insert random melee attack style) attacks by training attack and strength? Shouldn't the mage get a special attack to finish the meleer? Shouldn't the mage be allowed to attack faster so the meleer can't out-eat the slowly dished out magic damage so easily? Shouldn't the mage beat meleer just as bad as the ranger beats the mager? Shouldn't Jagex make magic more powerful and appealing so there isn't a disproportionate amount of meleers and rangers?

 

 

 

My scenarios don't include the Staff of Zuriel, which you desperately cling to. That's because it's rare and expensive, and that the majority of mages don't have it. A majority of meleers, though, will have d'hide, a decent weapon, some magic levels, defense levels, and prayer.

 

 

 

I don't know what compels me to keep arguing with you. Perhaps it's the hope that someday, someone from Jagex will stumble upon this post, since they do like to know what goes on in their fansites (Example: Keylogger outbreak on another fansite was posted on runescape.com to warn players) and say, "Hey, maybe this Elusefelier guy is right, and we should help mages out a bit." Although unlikely, this is my hope. I don't want you to think that I'm a powerhungry maniac or anything like that. I'm doing this because the people I know laugh at Magic combat, and they don't find it practical or fun. I want to work toward changing this.

 

 

 

I'm sorry if you feel you don't agree with me, but this is the view I will hold.

[compfreak847]

You realize, in the setup I described earlier, the mage has +250 slash - GREATER then the meleer in full rune? He can melee the meleer without any of his 'mage powers' and STILL come out on top. Add to the mix all of the spell effects and he's out hitting the meleer by FAR. PJing is only an issue in major world PKing - the spot where a kill is almost never scored except by a PJer with claws. The majority of real death fights are fought away from there, be it in the wildy or a training spot. A ranger is also at a big disadvantage - a black d hide top simply does not provide enough defence. The mager can farcast him as well, hitting quite well through d hide - in my outfit, I generally hit more often on a ranger then he hits on me, and when he's frozen I can stay out of his range and heal off of him. There's really no comparison, ahrims are extremely overpowered with melee defence.

[Veritas94]

You're comparing P2P magic armor with F2P melee armor. That doesn't hold any merit, and also makes no sense in the context of this situation. The meleer won't be using full rune. Also, I doubt you hit rangers more often than they hit you. This has definitely not been my experience. What spell effects were you referring to, when you mentioned the mage fighting the meleer? Also, the majority of death fights occur away from the banks, but the majority of fights occur near the banks. We're not talking about death fights, but rather fights which take place near banks, in which case PJ-ing makes life extremely difficult for mages. Also, d-claw pjing occurs in very populated worlds, too. I know this from painful experience. How will the mage finish the meleer if the mage is hitting so slowly? What will stop the meleer from teleporting away, considering the mage doesn't have a special to kill him in time? Rangers can also use long ranged attacks if you try any farcasting shananigans. And it's not even practical to farcast rangers - look at what they're wearing. I don't understand what you're trying to say.

[compfreak847]

Almost all meleers level 90-110 are in rune. I was referring to poison, 35% reduced attacks, healing, and halved attack speed. You said it yourself - the majority of kills are away from a bank. Hence why mages don't fight there; what's the point of funning only to have your opponent tele away at the end? Same problem as with melee and range, and the mager can hit the tab just as easily as the meleer. It's very practical to farcast rangers - what don't you understand about that? A good mage bonus will smash through a d hide top, leaving the mager free to farcast.

[Veritas94]

But the scenario I mentioned does not include 35% reduced attack speeds, and for valid reasons (Read what I wrote in my gigantic post on this page). By death fights I meant 1v1 to the death, not fights where people are killed. Plenty of people are killed near banks because rangers and meleers have sufficient Koing power. A mage should not have to be restricted to pvping away from the scary pjers, and it's Jagex's responsibility to implement mechanics which fix this. If the mage had a good chance to finish the meleer with a special attack, he wouldn't need to be burdened go to remote locations that are away from bank just to pvp. I also don't understand what you don't understand about not being able to farcast rangers. Rangers have a "long ranged" mode on their weapons, don't they. Could they not use this mode to avoid being farcasted, and don't they have bolts they can use to heal themselves on impact? Can't they also use a seercull to lower magic levels (I've seen it hit 12s, hehe)? And in my scenario, the mager is fighting a ranger who is in full ranged gear, not just a dragonhide top. Where did I say he was wearing anything other than dragonhide? Also, meleers can apply poison to their weapons to poison their enemies, too. It still seems certain that the mages have significant disadvantages which can be fixed by simple changes in game mechanics.

[compfreak847]

By death fights I meant 1v1 to the death, not fights where people are killed.

 

Ah, that clears it up. You mean fights to the DEATH, not fights where people are KILLED. Wait...

 

 

 

Rangers long range mode, for the few who switch to it, is slightly slower then mage - allowing the mage to hit and run getting hit at most once every 3 rounds. Very few rangers actually try to PK in full gear; those that do can be swiftly dispatched by a whip thanks to their slow attacks and your fairly large range defence (in the 150 range). It still seems certain that the mages have significant advantages which can be fixed by simple changes in game mechanics.

[Veritas94]

We're not talking about switching attack styles or using staff of Zuriel, and I already mentioned why in my gigantic post on this page. When you switch the types of attacks your using, you're not a mage anymore. You're becoming a meleer wearing ahrims, which isn't what we're discussing. The majority of the places where mages get kills are places far away from the banks, but it's Jagex's responsibility to implement mechanics which fix this. They shouldn't be forced away from the PJers and be limited in the locations they can farcast. Also, we're not discussing very few or very little rangers, but we're discussing the situation where a ranger in good gear beats a mage in good gear. I originally placed this scenario in my giant post on this page because I wanted to compare it to the really close fight between a meleer and a mage, and to further prove my point that fights that happen between magers and rangers as well as fights that happen between magers and meleers are both very uphill battles for the mage. Also, a ranger's long range mode can be accompanied by first hitting the mage with a seercull to lower their magic level (Seercull costs what, 75k?)l, or using onyx bolts which heal the ranger per every hit. Rangers are capable of hitting 50+ per hit with a variety of bolts, and this includes long range mode, so I wouldn't say that the slowing down of their attack speed is a valid argument. Rangers beat magers badly. This is the way it's meant to be. But meleers can also give mages a very hard time if they take a few simple measures. The mage should be able to consistently and confidently face meleers and take them down, and I hope I've made it clear that this isn't the case.

[Obtaurian]

We're not talking about switching attack styles or using staff of Zuriel, and I already mentioned why in my gigantic post on this page. When you switch the types of attacks your using, you're not a mage anymore. You're becoming a meleer wearing ahrims, which isn't what we're discussing. The majority of the places where mages get kills are places far away from the banks, but it's Jagex's responsibility to implement mechanics which fix this. They shouldn't be forced away from the PJers and be limited in the locations they can farcast. Also, we're not discussing very few or very little rangers, but we're discussing the situation where a ranger in good gear beats a mage in good gear. I originally placed this scenario in my giant post on this page because I wanted to compare it to the really close fight between a meleer and a mage, and to further prove my point that fights that happen between magers and rangers as well as fights that happen between magers and meleers are both very uphill battles for the mage. Also, a ranger's long range mode can be accompanied by first hitting the mage with a seercull to lower their magic level (Seercull costs what, 75k?)l, or using onyx bolts which heal the ranger per every hit. Rangers are capable of hitting 50+ per hit with a variety of bolts, and this includes long range mode, so I wouldn't say that the slowing down of their attack speed is a valid argument. Rangers beat magers badly. This is the way it's meant to be. But meleers can also give mages a very hard time if they take a few simple measures. The mage should be able to consistently and confidently face meleers and take them down, and I hope I've made it clear that this isn't the case.

 

 

 

I believe the Crystal Bow is the only bow that can hit a mage while the mage is attempting to farcast. Switching attack styles and armors are one in the same. You're hybriding either way, so they're both relevant points and can be used in this debate. Seercull is extremely inaccurate, and even it were to get a lucky shot in, a good PK'er will have super restores.

 

 

 

If a WARRIOR straps on RANGE armor, is he not hybriding? If a MAGE straps on a WARRIOR weapon, is he not hybriding? You can't put limits on the argument to favor your opinion, especially without giving a reason.

[compfreak847]

Exactly. Mage has a huge advantage in that his robes give hm a big boost - he can wield an alternate weapon, and using the threat + spell effects of mage, tear apart a meleer or range. A mage in mage armor with a whip is no different then a melee in range armor with a whip.

[Sir_Kurity]

I love how people say mage is expensive.

 

 

 

In a PVP situation, i would rather carry around 100 of various runes, a 50k staff and a dds than a godsword/whip.

 

 

 

We're not talking about switching attack styles or using staff of Zuriel, and I already mentioned why in my gigantic post on this page. When you switch the types of attacks your using, you're not a mage anymore. You're becoming a meleer wearing ahrims, which isn't what we're discussing. The majority of the places where mages get kills are places far away from the banks, but it's Jagex's responsibility to implement mechanics which fix this. They shouldn't be forced away from the PJers and be limited in the locations they can farcast. Also, we're not discussing very few or very little rangers, but we're discussing the situation where a ranger in good gear beats a mage in good gear. I originally placed this scenario in my giant post on this page because I wanted to compare it to the really close fight between a meleer and a mage, and to further prove my point that fights that happen between magers and rangers as well as fights that happen between magers and meleers are both very uphill battles for the mage. Also, a ranger's long range mode can be accompanied by first hitting the mage with a seercull to lower their magic level (Seercull costs what, 75k?)l, or using onyx bolts which heal the ranger per every hit. Rangers are capable of hitting 50+ per hit with a variety of bolts, and this includes long range mode, so I wouldn't say that the slowing down of their attack speed is a valid argument. Rangers beat magers badly. This is the way it's meant to be. But meleers can also give mages a very hard time if they take a few simple measures. The mage should be able to consistently and confidently face meleers and take them down, and I hope I've made it clear that this isn't the case.

 

 

 

I believe the Crystal Bow is the only bow that can hit a mage while the mage is attempting to farcast. Switching attack styles and armors are one in the same. You're hybriding either way, so they're both relevant points and can be used in this debate. Seercull is extremely inaccurate, and even it were to get a lucky shot in, a good PK'er will have super restores.

 

 

 

If a WARRIOR straps on RANGE armor, is he not hybriding? If a MAGE straps on a WARRIOR weapon, is he not hybriding? You can't put limits on the argument to favor your opinion, especially without giving a reason.

 

 

 

Nope, dark bow can outrage (or at least match the range) of mages to, which is why i always combine a dark bow with mage. Anyway, though i think the magic defence is dodgy, after reading most of comp's posts and experimenting myself i have found mage to be very powerful.

 

 

 

Oh, and comparing a maxed out meleer to a maxed out mage make DOSENT work, A mage with 99 magic is the combat equivalent to 140 combined attack and str (more or less), basically its a whip and 70 str.

[Veritas94]

 

I believe the Crystal Bow is the only bow that can hit a mage while the mage is attempting to farcast. Switching attack styles and armors are one in the same. You're hybriding either way, so they're both relevant points and can be used in this debate. Seercull is extremely inaccurate, and even it were to get a lucky shot in, a good PK'er will have super restores.

 

 

 

If a WARRIOR straps on RANGE armor, is he not hybriding? If a MAGE straps on a WARRIOR weapon, is he not hybriding? You can't put limits on the argument to favor your opinion, especially without giving a reason.

 

 

 

A warrior who straps on ranged armor is a warrior. The type of damage he is dealing is melee damage. A mage using a warrior weapon is not hybriding. He's switching the type of damage he's doing, so he's actually a warrior wearing mage armor. The thing that separates the three classes is the unique way each of them assaults their enemies. Their armor is there simply to aid them in some way.

 

 

 

By switching to melee, magic once again becomes the very thing it shouldn't become - a support skill. Magic users should be viable against melee users either by: having meleers' melee stats be impeded by the use of dragonhide or magic users should have defenses/armor that can withstand melee attacks appropriately and not subtract from their magic attack bonus (No, I don't consider Ahrims adequate defense). I know, this doesn't simply involve allowing mages to wear rune, because then rangers would have a hard time with mages; if a comprehensive rework of the types of damage done by each class is required, then so be it.

[Veritas94]

Oh, and comparing a maxed out meleer to a maxed out mage make DOSENT work, A mage with 99 magic is the combat equivalent to 140 combined attack and str (more or less), basically its a whip and 70 str.

 

 

 

Of course it works. It's not my fault that Jagex chose to make require more training from Meleers. If you're saying that because melee has train more, they should be more powerful, then I would say to you, "Let mages train the equivalent of 99 attack and strength in order to become just as powerful." This would be fair, after all, wouldn't it?

 

 

 

I require sleep to further fuel my rant. I'll be back tomorrow.

[Obtaurian]

 

I believe the Crystal Bow is the only bow that can hit a mage while the mage is attempting to farcast. Switching attack styles and armors are one in the same. You're hybriding either way, so they're both relevant points and can be used in this debate. Seercull is extremely inaccurate, and even it were to get a lucky shot in, a good PK'er will have super restores.

 

 

 

If a WARRIOR straps on RANGE armor, is he not hybriding? If a MAGE straps on a WARRIOR weapon, is he not hybriding? You can't put limits on the argument to favor your opinion, especially without giving a reason.

 

 

 

A warrior who straps on ranged armor is a warrior. The type of damage he is dealing is melee damage. A mage using a warrior weapon is not hybriding. He's switching the type of damage he's doing, so he's actually a warrior wearing mage armor. The thing that separates the three classes is the unique way each of them assaults their enemies. Their armor is there simply to aid them in some way.

 

 

 

Why exactly does the type of damage indicate the class being used? If someone is using two classes of weaponry and armor, that someone is a hybrid. You're bending rules to fit your argument.

 

 

 

By switching to melee, magic once again becomes the very thing it shouldn't become - a support skill.

 

 

 

By that logic, all combat styles are "support skills" when used in conjunction with any other style.

 

 

 

Magic users should be viable against melee users either by: having meleers' melee stats be impeded by the use of dragonhide or magic users should have defenses/armor that can withstand melee attacks appropriately and not subtract from their magic attack bonus (No, I don't consider Ahrims adequate defense).

 

 

 

It has already been shown that a mage wouldn't even have to switch to melee armor. An opponent wouldn't be able to get close enough to use melee weaponry. Furthermore, it should be noted that Ahrim's has higher slash defense than Karil's.

 

 

 

I know, this doesn't simply involve allowing mages to wear rune, because then rangers would have a hard time with mages; if a comprehensive rework of the types of damage done by each class is required, then so be it.

 

 

 

That's not required. We're fine where we are.

[Sir_Kurity]

No as in assume someone has 99 str and 99 attack, 99 defence, 99 hp, 99 everything.

 

 

 

He would be level 126, i'm not going to include summoning.

 

 

 

Now assume someone has 99 mage and range, with 70 attack and 78 str (sorry its 148 combined str and attack, i was wrong) str and 99 hp and everything else.

 

 

 

He would be level 109. Comparing a level 109 to a level 126, well there isnt much to compare, you have to bring them down to the same level.

 

 

 

God, how thick are you?

[compfreak847]

 

Of course it works. It's not my fault that Jagex chose to make require more training from Meleers. If you're saying that because melee has train more, they should be more powerful, then I would say to you, "Let mages train the equivalent of 99 attack and strength in order to become just as powerful." This would be fair, after all, wouldn't it?

 

 

 

I require sleep to further fuel my rant. I'll be back tomorrow.

 

You just don't get it. A mage is SUPPOSED to be against a meleer with 70s stats - unable to even wield a godsword! Yet mage can effectively take down a maxed combat player - equivalent to a level 95 player vs. a 138!

[Sir_Kurity]

I agree =D.

[Veritas94]

No as in assume someone has 99 str and 99 attack, 99 defence, 99 hp, 99 everything.

 

 

 

He would be level 126, i'm not going to include summoning.

 

 

 

Now assume someone has 99 mage and range, with 70 attack and 78 str (sorry its 148 combined str and attack, i was wrong) str and 99 hp and everything else.

 

 

 

He would be level 109. Comparing a level 109 to a level 126, well there isnt much to compare, you have to bring them down to the same level.

 

 

 

 

 

God, how thick are you?

 

 

 

I was talking about both of them having 99 in everything, you twit. Having both the meleer and mage at level 126 provides us with a comparison of class balance rather than levels.

 

 

 

God, how thick are you?

[Sir_Kurity]

But a mage with 99 mage and non maxed melee will only be level 109, but a maxed meleer will be level 126.

 

 

 

??? Your argument still makes no sense, mage uses less levels, so melee should be brought down to the levels a mage would have.

 

 

 

There is a reason level 138's can't attack level 20's in pvp worlds, now give me a melee build with 148 in attack and str and maxed everything else that will beat a mage build with 70 attack and 78 str, and maxed everything else.

 

 

 

Then they will be the same combat level, and there will be a real comparison.

 

 

 

If jagex suddenly makes 99 mage give the same combat levels as 99 attack and str, we can compare a maxed mage to a maxed meleer.

 

 

 

Until then, good luck.

 

 

 

(lol ive edited this like 5 times now)