Combat Triangle? Equilateral or Isosceles?

[madillamon]

Please take my thoughts lightly, they arent meant to annoy anyone, just to make you think and form your own opinion. I would also like to hear your point of view.

 

 

 

 

 

This would be the easiest thread to start with an idiom. Dragon Claws, huh! Or : Armadyl Godsword, huh! It seems the Combat Triangle theory is slowly fading away to nothing. When i started the game, back in around 2005, i tried a little PK-ing. Needless to say, since most of you might not know my name I was not very good at all. But i could see the combat triangle very obviously. I would see the F2p mager easily finishing off his melee-based target. If I were to talk a few more squares away I could see a ranger killing the hopeless mage, and a kid with full rune and a scimitar K0-ing a ranger. But this was before such items as Dragon Claws, Godswords, and , well thats just the thing, i cant honestly think of a truly dominant mage or ranger weapon.

 

I know you are sitting there wondering about ancients or the dark bow. But have you ever truly seen a mage in combat winning with pure ancients not far-casting, or a dark bow starting and finishing the fight?

 

If you cant tell I am saying that i think that Melee has become far superior to both other styles. This isn't to say that range or mage cannot be a good center for a pker, just not as effective.

 

 

 

This is just my opinion, and i'd like to hear yours.

[SanNo1]

D claws aren't really used after the specs(I think) so the aren't really dominant weapons by your definition :P. Anyway, IMO rangers still have a decent chance in pvp, but mage is only usefull for support ( vengeance, or ancients for rushing) so you won't see a lot of mage only fighters in pvp. Mage being used for support with melee sort of ruins the triangle, but it would be really hard to restore the triangle, as an update could overpower mage very quickly.

[Sir_Kurity]

Who needs a normal attack when you can just switch to whip after your 2 specs.

[mmmcannibalism]

I would note that a mage using farcasting is normal combat, they were given freezing for a reason.

[demby123]

I would note that a mage using farcasting is normal combat, they were given freezing for a reason.

 

Although farcasting is fine and all,I wish the combat system could be updated so it could become a bit more practical.

 

Right now all you need to do to harass or pj a mage is click attack. :wall:

[mmmcannibalism]

I would note that a mage using farcasting is normal combat, they were given freezing for a reason.

 

Although farcasting is fine and all,I wish the combat system could be updated so it could become a bit more practical.

 

Right now all you need to do to harass or pj a mage is click attack. :wall:

 

 

 

agreed, but only for pvp so its not too effective.

[Yomyth105]

in f2p maybe... in members i really dont think so... because ice barrage for magers, godswords for melee, and dark bow from a distance seems equal...

 

 

 

but u need combinations anyway...

[kdtaereo]

Well, Melee really got advantages in pvp, but ranged and mage still got their power imo. With Ranged (if you're ranged based) you can make nice combos and easily take out an meleer of your combat lvl. Mage too, you can slay if you are experienced. Oh but melee really is overpowered.

[0bl1v10nmage]

I've seen many of these mage is underpowered threads. I respectfully disagree. You ask whether I have ever seen an ancient mage win without farcasting. The thing is, ancient magic was meant to farcast with. A meleer in the typical metal armor is actually at a huge disadvantage against a mage that can freeze them and continue hitting them very accurately. Usually the meleer has to resort to magic prayer and hides. If the triangle was truly imbalanced, why would meleers need to switch armor and pray? The truth is, magic does beat a pure meleer. A meleer wearing hides is more of a hybrid than a pure meleer, since they are relying on their ranged skill as well. The truth is, mages > pure melee and hybrids > pure mage since they cover the other corners of the triangle. To answer the question of why you never see mages in single combat, it's simple. Because a mage is not built to take direct hits, they have no choice but to farcast. In a 1v1 situation, there are pkers everywhere that would love nothing more than to interfere. It doesn't help that the pk community at large hates farcasters. As for melee being superior to ranged, doesn't the triangle state that melee > ranged? I'd have to say the triangle is indeed an equilateral triangle.

[hihihi727]

I've seen many of these mage is underpowered threads. I respectfully disagree. You ask whether I have ever seen an ancient mage win without farcasting. The thing is, ancient magic was meant to farcast with. A meleer in the typical metal armor is actually at a huge disadvantage against a mage that can freeze them and continue hitting them very accurately. Usually the meleer has to resort to magic prayer and hides. If the triangle was truly imbalanced, why would meleers need to switch armor and pray? The truth is, magic does beat a pure meleer. A meleer wearing hides is more of a hybrid than a pure meleer, since they are relying on their ranged skill as well. The truth is, mages > pure melee and hybrids > pure mage since they cover the other corners of the triangle. To answer the question of why you never see mages in single combat, it's simple. Because a mage is not built to take direct hits, they have no choice but to farcast. In a 1v1 situation, there are pkers everywhere that would love nothing more than to interfere. It doesn't help that the pk community at large hates farcasters. As for melee being superior to ranged, doesn't the triangle state that melee > ranged? I'd have to say the triangle is indeed an equilateral triangle.

 

 

 

BUt if a meleer wears dragonhide, he gets protection from ALL three sides of the combat triangle with no attack penalties

[pureprayer]

I've seen many of these mage is underpowered threads. I respectfully disagree. You ask whether I have ever seen an ancient mage win without farcasting. The thing is, ancient magic was meant to farcast with. A meleer in the typical metal armor is actually at a huge disadvantage against a mage that can freeze them and continue hitting them very accurately. Usually the meleer has to resort to magic prayer and hides. If the triangle was truly imbalanced, why would meleers need to switch armor and pray? The truth is, magic does beat a pure meleer. A meleer wearing hides is more of a hybrid than a pure meleer, since they are relying on their ranged skill as well. The truth is, mages > pure melee and hybrids > pure mage since they cover the other corners of the triangle. To answer the question of why you never see mages in single combat, it's simple. Because a mage is not built to take direct hits, they have no choice but to farcast. In a 1v1 situation, there are pkers everywhere that would love nothing more than to interfere. It doesn't help that the pk community at large hates farcasters. As for melee being superior to ranged, doesn't the triangle state that melee > ranged? I'd have to say the triangle is indeed an equilateral triangle.

 

 

 

BUt if a meleer wears dragonhide, he gets protection from ALL three sides of the combat triangle with no attack penalties

 

But if the mager pulls a whip/claws out he will crush the meleer.

 

 

 

The combat triangle is scalene. Mage>range>melee

[compfreak847]

The combat triangle: Mage > range > melee < Mage

 

 

 

It's a fact. Post on some of the other threads I've argued this on if you want further proof, I'm not going through it again on a whole other thread.

[josh181830]

Scalene, any way you look at it :lol:

[Zaaps1]

Scalene, any way you look at it :lol:

 

 

 

I would've said the same thing. Range and mage aren't equal in power.

[Owned_Nex]

For "mains" its a line. Melee>Range>Magic.

 

 

 

Melee has AGS and claws, which are amazing k0 weapons. Claws can EASILY do 99 damage if not eating/prayer. Range tanks are fine. If you farcast, you'll get killed by 1 itemers/rushers, or D bowers.

[Zaaps1]

For "mains" its a line. Melee>Range>Magic.

 

 

 

Melee has AGS and claws, which are amazing k0 weapons. Claws can EASILY do 99 damage if not eating/prayer. Range tanks are fine. If you farcast, you'll get killed by 1 itemers/rushers, or D bowers.

 

 

 

99 damage in 2 hits - yes. But not in a single hit.

[3hitm4g3u]

Ranged is pretty equal with melee, it can hold its own.

 

 

 

You don't need to hybrid to be succesful with ranged by itself or with melee by itself.

[warrior5024]

The triangle is fine. The only problem I see with Magical combat is that, if you farcast, you get PJ'ed. But then again, you're gonna get PJ'ed anyways. I can easily take on, and out, groups of meleers and rangers, using only Magic.

[llamster]

The thing is, the combat formula is very heavily biased towards rangers and mages. A maxed out range/mage tank is around 100 combat. Unless they go into deep wild a level 100 mage or ranger will dominate any meleer.

 

 

 

But that doesn't really matter since a level 100 mage/ranger is superior to a level 130 meleer. Just shows how underpowered melee is in PvP.

 

 

 

Melee has the epic spec weapons, for sure. But range and magic's regular hits are far more devastating than melee's. Magic hits 56 and the meleer will never touch them. Range hits 40s with morrigan's javelins with amazing accuracy and speed close to or equal to a whip, or up to 60 with dragonstone bolt special.

[Sir_Kurity]

The combat triangle: Mage > range > melee < Mage

 

 

 

It's a fact. Post on some of the other threads I've argued this on if you want further proof, I'm not going through it again on a whole other thread.

 

 

 

Personally, i think its Range>Mage>Melee

 

 

 

Rangers beat mages in DPS, and arent that easy to farcast if they have good armor + dark bow or long range attack.

 

 

 

Oh yea, forgot miasmic spells.

 

 

 

Personally, i think 99 mage or 99 range should = 99 attack and str in terms of combat levels, and give them a slight buff.

 

 

 

At the moment, melee uses more combat levels than range and mage ???

[demby123]

The combat triangle: Mage > range > melee < Mage

 

 

 

It's a fact. Post on some of the other threads I've argued this on if you want further proof, I'm not going through it again on a whole other thread.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At the moment, melee uses more combat levels than range and mage ???

 

I always wondered if it would be a good idea to make separate skills for magic and ranged,just as attack and strength make up melee skills.

 

Will for magic and er..

 

strength or something for ranged?(obviously something else but idk what to suggest) :?

[llamster]

^And consequently severely nerf range's effectiveness? Besides, a separate skill for magic makes absolutely no sense.

[thesearcher]

The combat triangle: Mage > range > melee < Mage

 

 

 

It's a fact. Post on some of the other threads I've argued this on if you want further proof, I'm not going through it again on a whole other thread.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At the moment, melee uses more combat levels than range and mage ???

 

I always wondered if it would be a good idea to make separate skills for magic and ranged,just as attack and strength make up melee skills.

 

Will for magic and er..

 

strength or something for ranged?(obviously something else but idk what to suggest) :?

 

 

 

I quite like this idea, but what would you do with the existing skills? Grant someone with 80 ranged, say, 80 ranged and 80 vision? It seems a little...odd...

[demby123]

I know,thats why it was only a thought.