Storm of Armadyl

[enfield]

You;re calculating wrong =P. The min on slay tasks is already 300+ (with fero). With the equilibrium aura the min would be 450+ (because the max is 597-599 regularly with the b staff of armadyl).

 

Actually there is something not quite clear that would happen for the spell on slay tasks if you were using the aura because the min is > .5*max, meaning that when you apply the equilibrium aura you get a min hit that is greater than the maximum lolz. I dunno which value the game would take.

[Sir_Squab]

That's a terrible idea.

 

You have three melee stats to max as opposed to one magic.

 

If you made melee so prohibitively expensive:

1.) It would be useless pvm or not

2.) It it costed 10-20 times to recharge melee items then magic - then almost nothing would be profitable

 

That "feature" was not well planned and rather then balancing the game, it would probably just destroy it.

As for the prices, well everything would just become more expensive (base price) and hence more profitable. Maybe let smithing generate products which can be used to "repair" melee equipment free of charge: so smithing becomes to melee what runecrafting is to magic.

 

Why would it destroy it? You have to train melee 3 times? - Well What is the problem with that, why would it become useless, it still holds more dps than magic (mostly). And the costs would balance out quickly due to price rising (as obviously people have to ask much more to sustain profit). It would make equipment more expensive, yet at the same time it would mean smithing would be usefull again, and magic would become a pvm option too. (Due to more expensive prices and thus magic costs not too high anymore).

 

The more variety the better in my books.

 

It would destroy it for very simple reasons:

More cost = less people can afford to do pvm.

More cost also = harder to profit from pvm.

You say prices would go up as supply would be limited; but if people have less money and pvm is a more elite thing to do due to cost demand will bottom out as well. Thus creating a limbo where pvm isn't profitable because nothing will sell.

And it wouldn't create more variety, there's more than enough "variety" available its just people naturally go for the best options they can, if anything the added cost would jsut polarise things more so you had a greater bulk of players on the "cheap" level gear as they can't break through to the top end.

 

Personally I don't see the problem, melee is naturally the best choice by and large as it is not a consuming combat format. Its the same in nearly every game out there, people go for melee as it doesn't consume stuff (and in some cases mage for the games where u have mana/reload times opposed to some form of magical ammo)

You could argue range and mage should out dps melee to balance the cost; but then thats not good gameplay because it heavily favours the rich who can blow money on it. I always see these debates on the combat triangle but personally I don't see it being that unbalanced all 3 classes have max dps in similar region and all 3 have their uses and their failings. Just happens to be we don't have many pvm situations so far where there is a significant mage weakness to exploit (other than ice strykes, barrows and glacors), same as in dg there just happens to be very few monsters with a ranged weakness significant enough to warrant using it (as a general rule I know few exceptions with hexhunter etc.)

 

Essentially I think my point is: People always turn to blame the combat skills themselves when they each in their own work fine, it's just the monsters we currently have favour certain tactics. All we need is a few bosses with epic range n melee def and boom mage pvm works fine.

 

This. Most weapons have their niches. I can easily point out niches for all chaotic weapons, places where mage is useful and places where range is useful. It's just that more often then not, melee is more useful. Still wish mage was a bit cheaper for stuff like slayer tho. Tbh, I think the change for magic should come from improving RC so you simply make more runes (and preferably more exp.) As a random thought, what would it be like if all runes got the multiple rune bonus of air or fire runes, and you get exp per rune made instead of per ess used? Significantly increased RC production and exp.

[pal2002]

My q is...

Is there anything out there that you can use the dps on and not lose money? Other than staking...

 

Has anyonw tried bosses?

[Robert_R]

Has it even been confirmed that equilibrium and the staff stack?

 

 

My q is...

Is there anything out there that you can use the dps on and not lose money? Other than staking...

 

Has anyonw tried bosses?

PvP in wild but I guess that's kind of obvious.

[enfield]

It's good for glacytes. Also I really don't think the cost is too bad. I bought 1k arma runes today for 2200ea. That's only twice as much as fire surge per damage.

 

not cheap enough for most of us to use on all of our slayer tasks, but cheap enough for us to use it on the ones in which it makes the most difference I think. It might be the best thing to use at arma/zammy, though i don't really see the point.

[chuckangie]

This didn't really change anything; magic was already overpowered in PvP and now it's game-breaking. Magic is still worthless in PvM aside from niche uses like Rock Lobsters and a few slayer tasks. They need to make magic cheaper to use in PvM, and not any of this 10% cheaper crap either-- a LOT cheaper. They need a staff (obtainable in a similar manner as the ABS) that provides unlimited death or blood runes. To balance it, they could make it cause double the drain on your prayer points while wielding it.

 

 

That would make runecrafting a complete novelty skill (like smithing is now).

 

What should be done is make armour also expensive to use: make everything degrade and the prices about 10-20 times as high. But alas, runescapians hate it when a feature gets "nerfed" even if it would balance the game.

 

My idea would be to give all monsters in game some kind of elemental weakness that makes specific spells hit a % harder on them like Icestrykes already have with firesurge. Fire giants weak to water spells but resistant to fire spells, for example. If you can kill monsters by casting less spells, magic becomes economical for PVM without having to change anything else in game.

 

SoA seems like a powerful but unnecessary addition to magic. A powerful spell powered by an unusual rune. Zaros Rune pls...

[aspeeder]

This didn't really change anything; magic was already overpowered in PvP and now it's game-breaking. Magic is still worthless in PvM aside from niche uses like Rock Lobsters and a few slayer tasks. They need to make magic cheaper to use in PvM, and not any of this 10% cheaper crap either-- a LOT cheaper. They need a staff (obtainable in a similar manner as the ABS) that provides unlimited death or blood runes. To balance it, they could make it cause double the drain on your prayer points while wielding it.

 

 

That would make runecrafting a complete novelty skill (like smithing is now).

 

What should be done is make armour also expensive to use: make everything degrade and the prices about 10-20 times as high. But alas, runescapians hate it when a feature gets "nerfed" even if it would balance the game.

 

My idea would be to give all monsters in game some kind of elemental weakness that makes specific spells hit a % harder on them like Icestrykes already have with firesurge. Fire giants weak to water spells but resistant to fire spells, for example. If you can kill monsters by casting less spells, magic becomes economical for PVM without having to change anything else in game.

 

SoA seems like a powerful but unnecessary addition to magic. A powerful spell powered by an unusual rune. Zaros Rune pls...

But not everything is so elemental, what would elves be weak to for instance? Not to mention the insane number of monsters they'd have to go through, change, and catalog (Plus I don't think the people who handle the bestiary here would be too pleased). I suppose you could only add these weaknesses to monsters that "matter", ie bosses, monsters assigned for slayer tasks, killed for some secondary, etc. but it'd still be fairly obtuse.

[Leaf]

I've heard that Storm is better DPS than either Fire Surge or Rapier against Glacytes, but are worse than Fire Surge on Glacors.

 

Confirm plz?

[enfield]

^ yeah that's right. You would just want to change spells when the glacytes come out (or perhaps after you lure enduring with a fire surge).

[pulli23]

This didn't really change anything; magic was already overpowered in PvP and now it's game-breaking. Magic is still worthless in PvM aside from niche uses like Rock Lobsters and a few slayer tasks. They need to make magic cheaper to use in PvM, and not any of this 10% cheaper crap either-- a LOT cheaper. They need a staff (obtainable in a similar manner as the ABS) that provides unlimited death or blood runes. To balance it, they could make it cause double the drain on your prayer points while wielding it.

 

 

That would make runecrafting a complete novelty skill (like smithing is now).

 

What should be done is make armour also expensive to use: make everything degrade and the prices about 10-20 times as high. But alas, runescapians hate it when a feature gets "nerfed" even if it would balance the game.

 

My idea would be to give all monsters in game some kind of elemental weakness that makes specific spells hit a % harder on them like Icestrykes already have with firesurge. Fire giants weak to water spells but resistant to fire spells, for example. If you can kill monsters by casting less spells, magic becomes economical for PVM without having to change anything else in game.

 

SoA seems like a powerful but unnecessary addition to magic. A powerful spell powered by an unusual rune. Zaros Rune pls...

But not everything is so elemental, what would elves be weak to for instance? Not to mention the insane number of monsters they'd have to go through, change, and catalog (Plus I don't think the people who handle the bestiary here would be too pleased). I suppose you could only add these weaknesses to monsters that "matter", ie bosses, monsters assigned for slayer tasks, killed for some secondary, etc. but it'd still be fairly obtuse.

 

If this is the reasoning behind things, it is a sign your game is suffering from bad design, and getting too big to handle. - And a potential rewrite/new version is in stock if popularity is still high for the game:

-First of all no game would have all monsters individually "coded" you should be able to easily adress large groups of types (and sub-types etc). Ie "all vampyres" could be changed which itself is a subset of "all morytania/zammorak" monsters.

This way such changes would mean only groups have to be changed, and then on further (balancing) updates a more refined weakness system can be developped.

[LatinII]

Storm of Armadyl with the Armadyl battlestaff is more DPS than Melee on Bandos. It's also fater than Melee for Slayer.

[Assume Nothing]

I'm interested in some barrows calculations concerning the SOA against the melee brothers.

[Existent]

I'm interested in some barrows calculations concerning the SOA against the melee brothers.

I don't have any calculations but I went there for a few trips with it yesterday and I was dropping all the melee brothers in 4-5 hits consistently.

[LatinII]

I'm interested in some barrows calculations concerning the SOA against the melee brothers.

 

With max equipment it shouldn't take more than 3-4 casts on average.

[xSxqPowerx]

After a quick test in crappy gear (ahrims and verac helmet), it also seems to be better DPS than range on the armadyl gwd boss.

[AHappySeeker]

After a quick test in crappy gear (ahrims and verac helmet), it also seems to be better DPS than range on the armadyl gwd boss.

 

wat

 

Am I the only one who finds this hilarious, if true?

[totalpwnage]

After a quick test in crappy gear (ahrims and verac helmet), it also seems to be better DPS than range on the armadyl gwd boss.

 

wat

 

Am I the only one who finds this hilarious, if true?

It's not hilarious, its serious business.

Jk, and yeah, I lol'd. I might borrow my friends virtus again to try it there.

 

And Storm of Arma is by FAR the best spell to use on the Enduring Glacyte. It's incredible.

[Saradomin_Mage]

Isn't it wonderful how magic suddenly becomes so great when it finally gets hold for a Speed 6 spell? :P

Definitely need to get my hands on some runes now.

[Dragonlordjl]

The thing is, at GWD you get destroyed by melee minions in your mage robes.

[Assume Nothing]

If you kite Graar whilst flashing soulsplit, would this be superior to CR + Defender?

[pulli23]

If you kite Graar whilst flashing soulsplit, would this be superior to CR + Defender?

I think kiting will be a big slow down: the main advantage of this is the speed of casting... So kiting won't really work.