Does "Attack" and "+Attack" actually make a difference?

[Zaaps1]

 

However, I see in person and such that people with only 60 Attack seem to hit more consistently than I do, even against people with higher defence, which brings me to my other point.

 

 

selective perception, if you have higher attack you will hit more often on average no level 60 attack has a chance against 99 attack in a successful attack contest (granted you may need a very large sample to tell how much more effective)

 

 

 

99 attack is like 12.7M more exp than 60 attack. The increase in effectiveness should be made much more noticeable.

 

 

 

It's not measured by xp, it's measured by levels. Although yes, there should be a noticeable difference.

 

 

 

However, the weaker the monster, the less noticeable the difference is.

[Torlen]

It's been a long time since I got 99 attack, but I notice a huge difference when I sip a super attack potion. That includes on people in Castle Wars.

[Veryhyper]

I've been doing a lot of thinking and some of you may have heard/seen me talk about it in my Vlogs on YouTube but I personally believe this:

 

 

 

 

Do you show off your sick tattoos in it? Because that's the only thing I care about.

 

 

 

 

 

Why don't you back up your theory with actual data instead of useless speculation? This is barely thread worthy.

[RoxSabre]

Then it would be the best monster to test out your theory no? If you are correct (You aren't.) 78 should hit just as much as 99. In reality, trying to kill Black dragons at level 78 attack is like trying to punch through a brick wall, you can do it yes, but it's going to take a while.

 

 

 

^^^^^^

 

 

 

 

 

Logic is flawed here...

 

 

 

In reality, enough strength determines how long it takes to punch through a brick wall... not attack.

 

 

 

In terms you just supported the theory of Strength being accuracy and damage.

 

 

 

To be honest I think Str Bonus has to do the most with how often you hit. If you wielded a whip that had no str bonus you'd most likely miss.

[Zaaps1]

Then it would be the best monster to test out your theory no? If you are correct (You aren't.) 78 should hit just as much as 99. In reality, trying to kill Black dragons at level 78 attack is like trying to punch through a brick wall, you can do it yes, but it's going to take a while.

 

 

 

^^^^^^^

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Logic is flawed here...

 

 

 

In reality, enough strength determines how long it takes to punch through a brick wall... not attack.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In terms you just supported the theory of Strength being accuracy and damage.

 

 

 

The analogy is not that literal.

[RoxSabre]

Besides I hit black dragons consistently enough with 75 atk. So even if it isn't to be taken literal..

[sadukar123]

Besides I hit black dragons consistently enough with 75 atk. So even if it isn't to be taken literal..

 

Compared to a person with 99 attack, you are hitting 0's constantly. Don't give examples you can't back up.

[Danqazmlp]

Then it would be the best monster to test out your theory no? If you are correct (You aren't.) 78 should hit just as much as 99. In reality, trying to kill Black dragons at level 78 attack is like trying to punch through a brick wall, you can do it yes, but it's going to take a while.

 

 

 

^^^^^^

 

 

 

 

 

Logic is flawed here...

 

 

 

In reality, enough strength determines how long it takes to punch through a brick wall... not attack.

 

 

 

In terms you just supported the theory of Strength being accuracy and damage.

 

 

 

To be honest I think Str Bonus has to do the most with how often you hit. If you wielded a whip that had no str bonus you'd most likely miss.

 

 

 

Err no, if you wielded a whip with no STR bonus, you'd hit the same # of times as with a regular whip, just at the damage you hit with punches.

 

 

 

Str has nothing whatsoever to do with accuracy.

[Monkeyanniee]

Yeah, ive realised this too.

 

99 Attack hasnt realy made a difference to me.

 

 

 

Attack is a skill that needs its uses explained a bit further.

[BBC3]

hard to believe no one has figured this out yet, STRENGHT, and its underated, even if you think you understand it you probably dont, especially if you made a topic like this

[Outsanity]

I can't remember the days when I didn't have 99 attack.. but when drinking a super attack potion, I notice a significant increase in accuracy when hitting.

 

 

 

So yes, attack does totally make a difference.

 

Serious? When I use super sets there doesn't seem to be ANY difference. :|

 

 

 

Either you're extremely unlucky with combat or you're in a mind trick, because potting helps leaps and bounds for me and the difference is very visable.

[CampbellMC]

Why is this even a thread? Seriously there is no discussion value here if you just use your brain for one second. Go kill a steel dragon with 60 attack, then go kill one with 99 attack. Case Closed.

[Zoov]

A simple explanation is just that the probably generator and programming for Runescape is not very precise/accurate.

[MstrMonopoly]

Yes. At 69 Attack and with the Dragon Scimitar, I hit far more zeroes than at 70 with the Abyssal Whip.

[Shadow93]

The difference between 99 attack and 90 attack in pvp is as distinct as using a Ring of Wealth on Black Dagons or not. Until Jagex releases their attack formula codes (which they never will) then this will only keep getting different oppinions due to pvp being so random.

[r4ngewarlord]

why would they make the skill useless past level 78 or whatever it makes no sense

[@Dan3HitU]

Why is this even a thread? Seriously there is no discussion value here if you just use your brain for one second. Go kill a steel dragon with 60 attack, then go kill one with 99 attack. Case Closed.

 

Against players and armours.

 

 

 

why would they make the skill useless past level 78 or whatever it makes no sense

 

Almost every other skills is useless past a certain level, not many have "99" benefits.

[sadukar123]

Why is this even a thread? Seriously there is no discussion value here if you just use your brain for one second. Go kill a steel dragon with 60 attack, then go kill one with 99 attack. Case Closed.

 

Against players and armours.

 

 

It's the SAME THING. Try hitting a max defence Torag's tank with 60 attack and 99 attack.

[langer]

Against players and armours.

 

 

 

Once you back up your claim or feeling, what you propose us is nothing but an empty theory.

 

 

 

A test at the duel arena will probably give you a good idea how selective perception has clouded your views.

[meister14]

Against players and armours.

 

 

 

Once you back up your claim or feeling, what you propose us is nothing but an empty theory.

 

 

 

A test at the duel arena will probably give you a good idea how selective perception has clouded your views.

 

 

 

But it's the famous 3 hit U ... he can't be wrong... can he? :?

[i_D_r]

Attack isn't favored in pvp like strength is, albeit important, it only takes a few lucky hits to ko someone- 75 att can do it as well as 99. Obviously higher attack is more likely to do it though.

 

 

 

It is absolutely out of the question to say that attack levels make no difference.

[n00bfiterpk6]

how about this, anyone with 70 attack and 99 str get in the same gear as me while i use my 99 attack and well see the difference :D

[r4ngewarlord]

Why is this even a thread? Seriously there is no discussion value here if you just use your brain for one second. Go kill a steel dragon with 60 attack, then go kill one with 99 attack. Case Closed.

 

Against players and armours.

 

 

 

why would they make the skill useless past level 78 or whatever it makes no sense

 

Almost every other skills is useless past a certain level, not many have "99" benefits.

 

okay how many combat skills do that then?

[sadukar123]

Why is this even a thread? Seriously there is no discussion value here if you just use your brain for one second. Go kill a steel dragon with 60 attack, then go kill one with 99 attack. Case Closed.

 

Against players and armours.

 

 

 

why would they make the skill useless past level 78 or whatever it makes no sense

 

Almost every other skills is useless past a certain level, not many have "99" benefits.

 

okay how many combat skills do that then?

 

By his faulty logic, Strength is useless after 78 too. :roll:

[n64jive]

I think the quesion the OP is trying to ask is in terms of PVP where you're combat level determines the level of your opponent, is it worth the combat levels of gaining 99 attack, or is it more beneficial to just stop at 80ish attack.

 

 

 

For instance, if I have 99 80 99, I should get beat by someone who has 99 99 99...however will 99 80 99 beat 93 93 93?

 

 

 

maybe thats not what he's asking, but I'm sure 100 post in a row of 99 attack > 60 attack was getting redundant.