F2P Mage and range underpowered

[Zaaps1]

Ok. To summarise what we've been saying--

 

 

 

Range- Sucks at low levels, average at medium levels, totally destroys the other two styles at high levels.

 

 

 

Melee- Not too good at low levels, average at medium levels, better than mage but worse than range at high levels, but the top-notch levels melee rules.

 

 

 

Mage- Destroys at low levels, not really good at medium levels, incredibly crappy at high levels, dies even to melee.

 

 

 

See a problem yet? Range is constantly improving in power, melee is more or less at the same level, but mage becomes weaker at higher levels!! Then what do you train mage for then? To die a worse death?

 

 

 

How do you recommend changing this without giving mage even more power at lower levels? That's one of my big concerns. If you just give mage wave spells, then mage will just get stronger at low levels. All you'd do is delay when mage sucks by 10 levels.

 

 

 

I'd say, give f2p mage some spells that are equal/slightly more powerful than the wave spells, but they are of a higher level, maybe lvl 75 or so to lvl 90 or so. This will reward those who train mage to high levels, without making it overpowered at low levels. Also, give them snare, and maybe some better armor (don't tell me RC robes for god's sake. I don't see range or melee needing 50 crafting or smithing respectively to wear certain armor). Which fits sees_all's contemporary spellbook and quest almost perfectly except that that spellbook might be a bit "fluffy" with some teleports, skill boosting spells and other stuff.

 

 

 

That's the best plan. Sees_all's idea is the easiest, if not most obvious fix.

 

 

 

Although snare and better robes is really all that's needed, that spellbook would give a boost, not a bump.

 

 

 

Main concern now is convincing members who don't want this change.

[llamster]

That plan would make mage quite overpowered at 40-50 combat.

 

 

 

I think the best solution actually would be do ditch the set max hits and give conventional mage spells a strength bonus, like melee or range. It should be around the same as the level requirement.

 

 

 

Barrages, on the other hand, should have a bonus of like 80. Don't want 99 magers hitting upper 30s lol.

[Zaaps1]

That plan would make mage quite overpowered at 40-50 combat.

 

 

 

I think the best solution actually would be do ditch the set max hits and give conventional mage spells a strength bonus, like melee or range. It should be around the same as the level requirement.

 

 

 

Barrages, on the other hand, should have a bonus of like 80. Don't want 99 magers hitting upper 30s lol.

 

 

 

What would the point be?

 

 

 

Think about it. If air strike gives +10 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 2 max. Then water strike gives +14 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 4 max. Nothing would be solved, you'd only make equipment play a slightly bigger role, and the small bonus the equipment gives probably won't get higher than 4 or 5.

[quelmotz]

You can still be at a very low combat level even with an extremely high mage level. I think that mage should be given wave spells, but it should require a staff that has an attack and strength requirement, maybe 40 or 50. They should also be given splitbark armor but that should require 40 defense and maybe 60 mage.

 

 

 

This is dumb. You're basically making mages have to train melee, and who will be dumb enough to do that? Seriously, what's the point? How will this stupid 40-50 attack/strength requirement cause mages not to be as powerful? It won't add to their combat level, instead hassle and annoy mages, etc etc. Rangers don't need mage to use the "magic" shortbow, melee doesn't need range to use chainmail, so why should mages be treated unfairly?

[Youmu]

Maybe Range should not have the "Rapid" option? That's all I can think of to balance ranged.

 

They should replace "Rapid" to "Hard-fire", which hits higher numbers than "Accurate" does but less accurate. It's basically like the ranger's "Strength" training.

 

"Accurate" should be more accurate than this "Hard-fire", but hits lower numbers.

 

"Long-ranged" should fire even further than before. And keep the current Ranged + Defence XP training.

 

 

 

So, what I mean is to replace "Rapid", to prevent so much fast hits, to that thing I have mentioned above. THEN we can consider yew bows/rune arrows.

 

 

 

The whole point of range is to hit fast hits. Tbh I think range and melee are equal. Melee just gets power slower than ranged does, that's why ranged dominates at first. I think you all are stretching when melee gets stronger than ranged. Really, after 60-70 combat range loses its advantage. So if anything, you'd need to lower how much it hits, not its speed.

 

 

 

If you're trying to balance out the combat triangle at all levels, then you have a lot of work ahead of you. The best idea to to just get mage a small boost. That's the one I can see happening, not a total revamp of the combat system.

 

 

 

Well, the "fast hits" are already with the darts/knives, why should shortbow get their speed?

 

If anything, longbows should get a boost, they are used for nothing.

 

I disagree with the lower hits though. Those range training in F2P will have a disadvantage to them if all arrows are nerfed.

 

And, as I already stated, ranged is weak but fast. That's why Est0rrath pointed out that Range has no KO.

[Zaaps1]

Maybe Range should not have the "Rapid" option? That's all I can think of to balance ranged.

 

They should replace "Rapid" to "Hard-fire", which hits higher numbers than "Accurate" does but less accurate. It's basically like the ranger's "Strength" training.

 

"Accurate" should be more accurate than this "Hard-fire", but hits lower numbers.

 

"Long-ranged" should fire even further than before. And keep the current Ranged + Defence XP training.

 

 

 

So, what I mean is to replace "Rapid", to prevent so much fast hits, to that thing I have mentioned above. THEN we can consider yew bows/rune arrows.

 

 

 

The whole point of range is to hit fast hits. Tbh I think range and melee are equal. Melee just gets power slower than ranged does, that's why ranged dominates at first. I think you all are stretching when melee gets stronger than ranged. Really, after 60-70 combat range loses its advantage. So if anything, you'd need to lower how much it hits, not its speed.

 

 

 

If you're trying to balance out the combat triangle at all levels, then you have a lot of work ahead of you. The best idea to to just get mage a small boost. That's the one I can see happening, not a total revamp of the combat system.

 

 

 

Well, the "fast hits" are already with the darts/knives, why should shortbow get their speed?

 

If anything, longbows should get a boost, they are used for nothing.

 

I disagree with the lower hits though. Those range training in F2P will have a disadvantage to them if all arrows are nerfed.

 

And, as I already stated, ranged is weak but fast. That's why Est0rrath pointed out that Range has no KO.

 

 

 

That's true, I suppose you're right.

[howbadisbad]

You could just nerf all other forms fo combat so mage is equal. :thumbsup:

[alcoolj]

Range tanks are the most powerful of critters in F2P PvP these days hands down.

 

 

 

Magic still takes down full rune, although not with the regularity that it should considering the 'triangle'.

[quelmotz]

Range tanks are the most powerful of critters in F2P PvP these days hands down.

 

 

 

Magic still takes down full rune, although not with the regularity that it should considering the 'triangle'.

 

 

 

It takes a VERY highly skilled mage to take down a meleer once the mage and meleer are both level 60+. I repeat VERY HIGHLY SKILLED, or just plain lucky. The only way for mages above level 80+ to actually kill anyone is to work in a team against the same number of meleer enemies

[quelmotz]

You could just nerf all other forms fo combat so mage is equal. :thumbsup:

 

 

 

Why don't you take a shot at facing the rants forums then? :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[howbadisbad]

You could just nerf all other forms fo combat so mage is equal. :thumbsup:

 

 

 

Why don't you take a shot at facing the rants forums then? :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

 

 

Because I was being sarcastic. :roll:

[quelmotz]

You could just nerf all other forms fo combat so mage is equal. :thumbsup:

 

 

 

Why don't you take a shot at facing the rants forums then? :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

 

 

Because I was being sarcastic. :roll:

 

 

 

Why don't you just shut up. I don't need a post count booster or free bumping. I would be flaming you to get out of my thread if a mod hadn't just sent me a pm.

[llamster]

That plan would make mage quite overpowered at 40-50 combat.

 

 

 

I think the best solution actually would be do ditch the set max hits and give conventional mage spells a strength bonus, like melee or range. It should be around the same as the level requirement.

 

 

 

Barrages, on the other hand, should have a bonus of like 80. Don't want 99 magers hitting upper 30s lol.

 

 

 

What would the point be?

 

 

 

Think about it. If air strike gives +10 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 2 max. Then water strike gives +14 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 4 max. Nothing would be solved, you'd only make equipment play a slightly bigger role, and the small bonus the equipment gives probably won't get higher than 4 or 5.

 

 

 

So that magic gets more powerful as you get higher level. I mean to say that magic strength should be equivalent to melee/range strength. Equipment shouldn't give any bonus, like range.

 

 

 

At 99 you could probably hit 10+ with 10 strength bonus.

 

 

 

You can still be at a very low combat level even with an extremely high mage level. I think that mage should be given wave spells, but it should require a staff that has an attack and strength requirement, maybe 40 or 50. They should also be given splitbark armor but that should require 40 defense and maybe 60 mage.

 

 

 

This is dumb. You're basically making mages have to train melee, and who will be dumb enough to do that? Seriously, what's the point? How will this stupid 40-50 attack/strength requirement cause mages not to be as powerful? It won't add to their combat level, instead hassle and annoy mages, etc etc. Rangers don't need mage to use the "magic" shortbow, melee doesn't need range to use chainmail, so why should mages be treated unfairly?

 

 

 

Unfairly? Giving them wave spells with no other conditions would make low level magic ridiculously overpowered, while giving no reason to train magic/combat any higher. The latter is why I prefer my mage strength suggestion, which would keep mage competitive at higher levels.

[Quelmotz1]

That plan would make mage quite overpowered at 40-50 combat.

 

 

 

I think the best solution actually would be do ditch the set max hits and give conventional mage spells a strength bonus, like melee or range. It should be around the same as the level requirement.

 

 

 

Barrages, on the other hand, should have a bonus of like 80. Don't want 99 magers hitting upper 30s lol.

 

 

 

What would the point be?

 

 

 

Think about it. If air strike gives +10 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 2 max. Then water strike gives +14 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 4 max. Nothing would be solved, you'd only make equipment play a slightly bigger role, and the small bonus the equipment gives probably won't get higher than 4 or 5.

 

 

 

So that magic gets more powerful as you get higher level. I mean to say that magic strength should be equivalent to melee/range strength. Equipment shouldn't give any bonus, like range.

 

 

 

At 99 you could probably hit 10+ with 10 strength bonus.

 

 

 

You can still be at a very low combat level even with an extremely high mage level. I think that mage should be given wave spells, but it should require a staff that has an attack and strength requirement, maybe 40 or 50. They should also be given splitbark armor but that should require 40 defense and maybe 60 mage.

 

 

 

This is dumb. You're basically making mages have to train melee, and who will be dumb enough to do that? Seriously, what's the point? How will this stupid 40-50 attack/strength requirement cause mages not to be as powerful? It won't add to their combat level, instead hassle and annoy mages, etc etc. Rangers don't need mage to use the "magic" shortbow, melee doesn't need range to use chainmail, so why should mages be treated unfairly?

 

 

 

Unfairly? Giving them wave spells with no other conditions would make low level magic ridiculously overpowered, while giving no reason to train magic/combat any higher. The latter is why I prefer my mage strength suggestion, which would keep mage competitive at higher levels.

 

 

 

Then do as I said. Increase the level required for wave spells, forcing mage to train to higher levels to get it. You are really oxymoronic. You say that mages will be ridiculously overpowered at low levels and will have no incentive to train magic any higher, when your idea doesn't even INCREASE THE MAGE's FREAKING COMBAT LEVEL or OFFER ANY INCENTIVES FOR MAGES TO TRAIN THEIR MAGIC LEVEL ANY HIGHER.

[howbadisbad]

Why don't you just shut up. I don't need a post count booster or free bumping. I would be flaming you to get out of my thread if a mod hadn't just sent me a pm.

 

At least my suggestion would work and is much simpler than anything you have talked about.

 

Also, this is the rants forum. There will always be people you don't like. Get over it.

 

 

 

 

 

That plan would make mage quite overpowered at 40-50 combat.

 

 

 

I think the best solution actually would be do ditch the set max hits and give conventional mage spells a strength bonus, like melee or range. It should be around the same as the level requirement.

 

 

 

Barrages, on the other hand, should have a bonus of like 80. Don't want 99 magers hitting upper 30s lol.

 

 

 

What would the point be?

 

 

 

Think about it. If air strike gives +10 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 2 max. Then water strike gives +14 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 4 max. Nothing would be solved, you'd only make equipment play a slightly bigger role, and the small bonus the equipment gives probably won't get higher than 4 or 5.

 

 

 

So that magic gets more powerful as you get higher level. I mean to say that magic strength should be equivalent to melee/range strength. Equipment shouldn't give any bonus, like range.

 

 

 

At 99 you could probably hit 10+ with 10 strength bonus.

 

 

 

You can still be at a very low combat level even with an extremely high mage level. I think that mage should be given wave spells, but it should require a staff that has an attack and strength requirement, maybe 40 or 50. They should also be given splitbark armor but that should require 40 defense and maybe 60 mage.

 

 

 

This is dumb. You're basically making mages have to train melee, and who will be dumb enough to do that? Seriously, what's the point? How will this stupid 40-50 attack/strength requirement cause mages not to be as powerful? It won't add to their combat level, instead hassle and annoy mages, etc etc. Rangers don't need mage to use the "magic" shortbow, melee doesn't need range to use chainmail, so why should mages be treated unfairly?

 

 

 

Unfairly? Giving them wave spells with no other conditions would make low level magic ridiculously overpowered, while giving no reason to train magic/combat any higher. The latter is why I prefer my mage strength suggestion, which would keep mage competitive at higher levels.

 

 

 

Then do as I said. Increase the level required for wave spells, forcing mage to train to higher levels to get it. You are really oxymoronic. You say that mages will be ridiculously overpowered at low levels and will have no incentive to train magic any higher, when your idea doesn't even INCREASE THE MAGE's FREAKING COMBAT LEVEL or OFFER ANY INCENTIVES FOR MAGES TO TRAIN THEIR MAGIC LEVEL ANY HIGHER.

 

 

 

Um, mage would still be a lower combat since you can have 99 mage (with decent hp) around 60ish.

 

If fire wave needed 99 mage they would be hitting accurate 20's while melee is struggling to hit inaccurate 16's with their slow 2h.

[Sir_Kurity]

Inaccurate 16's?

 

 

 

People hit 18's with 2h at my level, and thats level 40-50, an extra 10 levels could easily push up 2h's hits to over 20, and scimmys hits to 15-17...

 

 

 

Plus, less HP is not necessarily an advantage.

[Quelmotz1]

Why don't you just shut up. I don't need a post count booster or free bumping. I would be flaming you to get out of my thread if a mod hadn't just sent me a pm.

 

At least my suggestion would work and is much simpler than anything you have talked about.

 

Also, this is the rants forum. There will always be people you don't like. Get over it.

 

 

 

 

 

That plan would make mage quite overpowered at 40-50 combat.

 

 

 

I think the best solution actually would be do ditch the set max hits and give conventional mage spells a strength bonus, like melee or range. It should be around the same as the level requirement.

 

 

 

Barrages, on the other hand, should have a bonus of like 80. Don't want 99 magers hitting upper 30s lol.

 

 

 

What would the point be?

 

 

 

Think about it. If air strike gives +10 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 2 max. Then water strike gives +14 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 4 max. Nothing would be solved, you'd only make equipment play a slightly bigger role, and the small bonus the equipment gives probably won't get higher than 4 or 5.

 

 

 

So that magic gets more powerful as you get higher level. I mean to say that magic strength should be equivalent to melee/range strength. Equipment shouldn't give any bonus, like range.

 

 

 

At 99 you could probably hit 10+ with 10 strength bonus.

 

 

 

You can still be at a very low combat level even with an extremely high mage level. I think that mage should be given wave spells, but it should require a staff that has an attack and strength requirement, maybe 40 or 50. They should also be given splitbark armor but that should require 40 defense and maybe 60 mage.

 

 

 

This is dumb. You're basically making mages have to train melee, and who will be dumb enough to do that? Seriously, what's the point? How will this stupid 40-50 attack/strength requirement cause mages not to be as powerful? It won't add to their combat level, instead hassle and annoy mages, etc etc. Rangers don't need mage to use the "magic" shortbow, melee doesn't need range to use chainmail, so why should mages be treated unfairly?

 

 

 

Unfairly? Giving them wave spells with no other conditions would make low level magic ridiculously overpowered, while giving no reason to train magic/combat any higher. The latter is why I prefer my mage strength suggestion, which would keep mage competitive at higher levels.

 

 

 

Then do as I said. Increase the level required for wave spells, forcing mage to train to higher levels to get it. You are really oxymoronic. You say that mages will be ridiculously overpowered at low levels and will have no incentive to train magic any higher, when your idea doesn't even INCREASE THE MAGE's FREAKING COMBAT LEVEL or OFFER ANY INCENTIVES FOR MAGES TO TRAIN THEIR MAGIC LEVEL ANY HIGHER.

 

 

 

Um, mage would still be a lower combat since you can have 99 mage (with decent hp) around 60ish.

 

If fire wave needed 99 mage they would be hitting accurate 20's while melee is struggling to hit inaccurate 16's with their slow 2h.

 

 

 

Your suggestion is crap. Don't waste my time crapping out crap suggestions. Just shut up.

 

 

 

Seriously what the .... are you talking about. What mage would still be a low combat level, what the ....? I'm not supporting his freaking idea, I'm saying its a stupid idea.

 

 

 

Mage hitting "accurate" 20s at level 99? Get your ....... facts straight before talking crap. Melee "struggling" to hit "inaccurate" 16s? Mages would be averaging 17-18s at 99 mage if fire wave required 99 mage. Melee would be comfortably smashing down 17s or so and a few inaccurate but devastating 22+s.

[howbadisbad]

Why don't you just shut up. I don't need a post count booster or free bumping. I would be flaming you to get out of my thread if a mod hadn't just sent me a pm.

 

At least my suggestion would work and is much simpler than anything you have talked about.

 

Also, this is the rants forum. There will always be people you don't like. Get over it.

 

 

 

 

 

That plan would make mage quite overpowered at 40-50 combat.

 

 

 

I think the best solution actually would be do ditch the set max hits and give conventional mage spells a strength bonus, like melee or range. It should be around the same as the level requirement.

 

 

 

Barrages, on the other hand, should have a bonus of like 80. Don't want 99 magers hitting upper 30s lol.

 

 

 

What would the point be?

 

 

 

Think about it. If air strike gives +10 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 2 max. Then water strike gives +14 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 4 max. Nothing would be solved, you'd only make equipment play a slightly bigger role, and the small bonus the equipment gives probably won't get higher than 4 or 5.

 

 

 

So that magic gets more powerful as you get higher level. I mean to say that magic strength should be equivalent to melee/range strength. Equipment shouldn't give any bonus, like range.

 

 

 

At 99 you could probably hit 10+ with 10 strength bonus.

 

 

 

You can still be at a very low combat level even with an extremely high mage level. I think that mage should be given wave spells, but it should require a staff that has an attack and strength requirement, maybe 40 or 50. They should also be given splitbark armor but that should require 40 defense and maybe 60 mage.

 

 

 

This is dumb. You're basically making mages have to train melee, and who will be dumb enough to do that? Seriously, what's the point? How will this stupid 40-50 attack/strength requirement cause mages not to be as powerful? It won't add to their combat level, instead hassle and annoy mages, etc etc. Rangers don't need mage to use the "magic" shortbow, melee doesn't need range to use chainmail, so why should mages be treated unfairly?

 

 

 

Unfairly? Giving them wave spells with no other conditions would make low level magic ridiculously overpowered, while giving no reason to train magic/combat any higher. The latter is why I prefer my mage strength suggestion, which would keep mage competitive at higher levels.

 

 

 

Then do as I said. Increase the level required for wave spells, forcing mage to train to higher levels to get it. You are really oxymoronic. You say that mages will be ridiculously overpowered at low levels and will have no incentive to train magic any higher, when your idea doesn't even INCREASE THE MAGE's FREAKING COMBAT LEVEL or OFFER ANY INCENTIVES FOR MAGES TO TRAIN THEIR MAGIC LEVEL ANY HIGHER.

 

 

 

Um, mage would still be a lower combat since you can have 99 mage (with decent hp) around 60ish.

 

If fire wave needed 99 mage they would be hitting accurate 20's while melee is struggling to hit inaccurate 16's with their slow 2h.

 

 

 

Your suggestion is crap. Don't waste my time crapping out crap suggestions. Just shut up.

 

 

 

Seriously what the .... are you talking about. What mage would still be a low combat level, what the ....? I'm not supporting his freaking idea, I'm saying its a stupid idea.

 

 

 

Mage hitting "accurate" 20s at level 99? Get your ....... facts straight before talking crap. Melee "struggling" to hit "inaccurate" 16s? Mages would be averaging 17-18s at 99 mage if fire wave required 99 mage. Melee would be comfortably smashing down 17s or so and a few inaccurate but devastating 22+s.

 

 

 

And the mage would deplete the Melee's Health faster still since you can cast spells faster than you can swing a 2H.

 

Have you ever noticed how mages have lower combat than meleers (@)_(@)' #-o

[Quelmotz1]

[hide=]

Why don't you just shut up. I don't need a post count booster or free bumping. I would be flaming you to get out of my thread if a mod hadn't just sent me a pm.

 

At least my suggestion would work and is much simpler than anything you have talked about.

 

Also, this is the rants forum. There will always be people you don't like. Get over it.

 

 

 

 

 

That plan would make mage quite overpowered at 40-50 combat.

 

 

 

I think the best solution actually would be do ditch the set max hits and give conventional mage spells a strength bonus, like melee or range. It should be around the same as the level requirement.

 

 

 

Barrages, on the other hand, should have a bonus of like 80. Don't want 99 magers hitting upper 30s lol.

 

 

 

What would the point be?

 

 

 

Think about it. If air strike gives +10 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 2 max. Then water strike gives +14 mage strength, let's say it can hit a 4 max. Nothing would be solved, you'd only make equipment play a slightly bigger role, and the small bonus the equipment gives probably won't get higher than 4 or 5.

 

 

 

So that magic gets more powerful as you get higher level. I mean to say that magic strength should be equivalent to melee/range strength. Equipment shouldn't give any bonus, like range.

 

 

 

At 99 you could probably hit 10+ with 10 strength bonus.

 

 

 

You can still be at a very low combat level even with an extremely high mage level. I think that mage should be given wave spells, but it should require a staff that has an attack and strength requirement, maybe 40 or 50. They should also be given splitbark armor but that should require 40 defense and maybe 60 mage.

 

 

 

This is dumb. You're basically making mages have to train melee, and who will be dumb enough to do that? Seriously, what's the point? How will this stupid 40-50 attack/strength requirement cause mages not to be as powerful? It won't add to their combat level, instead hassle and annoy mages, etc etc. Rangers don't need mage to use the "magic" shortbow, melee doesn't need range to use chainmail, so why should mages be treated unfairly?

 

 

 

Unfairly? Giving them wave spells with no other conditions would make low level magic ridiculously overpowered, while giving no reason to train magic/combat any higher. The latter is why I prefer my mage strength suggestion, which would keep mage competitive at higher levels.

 

 

 

Then do as I said. Increase the level required for wave spells, forcing mage to train to higher levels to get it. You are really oxymoronic. You say that mages will be ridiculously overpowered at low levels and will have no incentive to train magic any higher, when your idea doesn't even INCREASE THE MAGE's FREAKING COMBAT LEVEL or OFFER ANY INCENTIVES FOR MAGES TO TRAIN THEIR MAGIC LEVEL ANY HIGHER.

 

 

 

Um, mage would still be a lower combat since you can have 99 mage (with decent hp) around 60ish.

 

If fire wave needed 99 mage they would be hitting accurate 20's while melee is struggling to hit inaccurate 16's with their slow 2h.

 

 

 

Your suggestion is crap. Don't waste my time crapping out crap suggestions. Just shut up.

 

 

 

Seriously what the .... are you talking about. What mage would still be a low combat level, what the ....? I'm not supporting his freaking idea, I'm saying its a stupid idea.

 

 

 

Mage hitting "accurate" 20s at level 99? Get your ....... facts straight before talking crap. Melee "struggling" to hit "inaccurate" 16s? Mages would be averaging 17-18s at 99 mage if fire wave required 99 mage. Melee would be comfortably smashing down 17s or so and a few inaccurate but devastating 22+s.

[/hide]

 

 

 

And the mage would deplete the Melee's Health faster still since you can cast spells faster than you can swing a 2H.

 

Have you ever noticed how mages have lower combat than meleers (@)_(@)' #-o

 

 

 

Are you [developmentally delayed]? Meleers can easily hit 14s-15s or so on average with scimitars at that level you're talking about. And FYI, scimitars are faster than mage. Even with my melee stats (60+ strength and 60+ attack), I comfortably hit 12s-13s. So do you think a higher leveled meleer can't hit that? And have you ever heard of "switching weapons"? 2hs are only used for kos, which are the "22+s" I'm talking about.

[howbadisbad]

and with 60 In all the melee stats you would be well over the level of someone with 99 mage.

[Sir_Kurity]

Actually, 150 combined attack and str is equivalent in combat levels (roughly) to 99 mage or range.

 

 

 

Defence is a multiclass skill.

[howbadisbad]

Actually, 150 combined attack and str is equivalent in combat levels (roughly) to 99 mage or range.

 

 

 

Defense is a multiclass skill.

 

 

 

ummmm no.

 

Look at my combat (91 without summoning)

 

My brother has 78 attack and 70 str (same def) and he is 4 levels higher than me

 

 

 

also, mage does not need def in f2p since robes don't give def bonuses

[Sir_Kurity]

Um, i don't get what your trying to say.

 

 

 

Dose your brother have more defense, or HP, or prayer?

 

 

 

Either of those could push the combat level up.

 

 

 

And you didn't mention mage anywhere in your post, and thats what i was trying to compare it to.

[howbadisbad]

Um, i don't get what your trying to say.

 

 

 

Dose your brother have more defense, or HP, or prayer?

 

 

 

Either of those could push the combat level up.

 

 

 

And you didn't mention mage anywhere in your post, and thats what i was trying to compare it to.

 

 

 

we have same def and he has 8 more prayer and I have 8 more hp than him

 

 

 

8 hp gives much more cb than 8 prayer ( I think?)

 

 

 

I mentioned that mage didn't need defense since robes don't have a def requirement (excluding fog robes)

[Sir_Kurity]

And this has what to do with my above quote?

 

 

 

I said 150 combined attack and str is rougly equavalent to 99 mage/range, you never mentioned that anywhere in your post.