Activation rate of Goliath, Swift and Spellcaster gloves?

[Powerfrog]

Just curious if anyone has a rough idea what the chances are that the gloves will do their special effect.

 

I'd personally guess about 1/30 with swift gloves, but i do not have the other gloves and that is a very rough estimation based on less than 500 shots.

[enfield]

i tested with swifts for 1k+ shots but lost the data. if i recall it was close to 2/45.

 

For spell caster gloves I would say it is similar..

[sants5]

I did a fast test on corp, results are pretty rough: 135 hits - 16 specs, some specs took like 20+ hits to activate some only 1, so it's really random

[Leon S]

Spellcaster gloves have had their activation rate increased with the last update. Based on 211 casts, the activation rate turned out to be around 1/10.

[Powerfrog]

I did a fast test on corp, results are pretty rough: 135 hits - 16 specs, some specs took like 20+ hits to activate some only 1, so it's really random

Wow, that's way higher than i expected. Awesome if it's an accurate representation.

 

(Do we know if there are any conditions for the special activating. Such as hitting above 0 etc..?)

[Leon S]

I don't think so. I've had swfit gloves activations that hit 0-0 and spellcaster gloves activations that splashed.

[Powerfrog]

I don't think so. I've had swfit gloves activations that hit 0-0 and spellcaster gloves activations that splashed.

I've also had 0-0 swift hits, but I've never seen a Goliath glove spec without dealing damage, which is especially important seeing as it's generally used on high defense creatures such as corp.

I'm sure it's the same as the other gloves though, just waiting for some confirmation.

[Leon S]

I don't think goliath gloves can hit 0 on activation. The gloves deal their own damage when it activates (around 1-150 or so?) and there is no combat icon to display what kind of damage it does.

[sants5]

Goliath glove spec always hits unblockable damage, swifts however can have 0 - 0 specs

[Hedgehog]

There is a difference between hitting a 0 and missing. You hit a 0 when your strength roll is 0 and your attack roll is still higher than your opponent's defense roll. A miss is when your opponent's defense roll is higher than your attack roll.

 

We haven't proven that it's even possible to hit a 0 yet, although there is a lot of evidence that makes us believe that it is, in fact, possible.

[Alg]

We haven't proven that it's even possible to hit a 0 yet, although there is a lot of evidence that makes us believe that it is, in fact, possible.

I recall reading about using the SGS spec for that years ago: If you hit a 0 and the healing effect happened, it was a hit zero, if it didn't it was a miss.

Or something. Was years ago. Likely to have changed with the HP change.

[Hedgehog]

We haven't proven that it's even possible to hit a 0 yet, although there is a lot of evidence that makes us believe that it is, in fact, possible.

I recall reading about using the SGS spec for that years ago: If you hit a 0 and the healing effect happened, it was a hit zero, if it didn't it was a miss.

Or something. Was years ago. Likely to have changed with the HP change.

Yep, but there aren't any screenshots of it afaik. Even then, it doesn't really prove anything.

 

We also know that the bugs in the lumbridge caves can hit 0s after the hp update, but not before. Someone on the accuracy formula claimed that 99 def had a slight advantage over 99 attack as well.

[Powerfrog]

We haven't proven that it's even possible to hit a 0 yet, although there is a lot of evidence that makes us believe that it is, in fact, possible.

I recall reading about using the SGS spec for that years ago: If you hit a 0 and the healing effect happened, it was a hit zero, if it didn't it was a miss.

Or something. Was years ago. Likely to have changed with the HP change.

Yep, but there aren't any screenshots of it afaik. Even then, it doesn't really prove anything.

 

We also know that the bugs in the lumbridge caves can hit 0s after the hp update, but not before. Someone on the accuracy formula claimed that 99 def had a slight advantage over 99 attack as well.

Surely that would be very easy to find out by creating a 1 strength account and very low strength bonus and then using another account with the same attack level and equipment and seeing the 'accuracy' difference. If the higher strength account is more accurate, it's clear that the 1 strength one was hitting 0's. If they're similar, you can't hit lower than 1.

 

Wouldn't take very long to find a notable difference.

[Hedgehog]

There are a lot of ways to test it. The only problem is that no one has :P

[Crossed_Body]

There are a lot of ways to test it. The only problem is that no one has :P

 

When they multiplied the damage by 10, they mentioned that you now cannot hit 0's. The minimum is 1.

 

The blog isn't up anymore, but here's a mirror:

http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Update:Blog_-_Hit_Marks:_Damage_Control_(August_2010)

[Hedgehog]

There are a lot of ways to test it. The only problem is that no one has :P

 

When they multiplied the damage by 10, they mentioned that you now cannot hit 0's. The minimum is 1.

 

The blog isn't up anymore, but here's a mirror:

http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Update:Blog_-_Hit_Marks:_Damage_Control_(August_2010)

That page is blank as well. Either way, I'm not inclined to trust what Jagex says lol

[Crossed_Body]

That page is blank as well. Either way, I'm not inclined to trust what Jagex says lol

The HTML link didn't pick up the last ')'. Here's a quote:

 

"With the current hit marks system, a 0 can depict one of two things - either you missing your opponent, or hitting them but causing 0 damage (save for magic, which has a different 'squib' animation for a miss). In these cases, I went through many, many files to update them so that with the new hit marks system, you will either 'miss' your opponent or cause a minimum of 1 damage. While this isn't groundbreaking, it means the system shouldn't 'lie' anymore, it's more informative. A hit will always mean damage is inflicted and a miss is you missing the chance in the first place."

[Hedgehog]

That page is blank as well. Either way, I'm not inclined to trust what Jagex says lol

The HTML link didn't pick up the last ')'. Here's a quote:

 

"With the current hit marks system, a 0 can depict one of two things - either you missing your opponent, or hitting them but causing 0 damage (save for magic, which has a different 'squib' animation for a miss). In these cases, I went through many, many files to update them so that with the new hit marks system, you will either 'miss' your opponent or cause a minimum of 1 damage. While this isn't groundbreaking, it means the system shouldn't 'lie' anymore, it's more informative. A hit will always mean damage is inflicted and a miss is you missing the chance in the first place."

This leads me to believe they just didn't update it for things like bugs. All the other data was pre-update.

 

We'd still need actual data to prove anything, though.

[Powerfrog]

That page is blank as well. Either way, I'm not inclined to trust what Jagex says lol

 

It's awfully depressing that this is the case >.>

 

Not only do most MMOs not lie/be wrong about everything and anything they ever say, they actually give in depth gameplay mechanics and statistics, even drop rates, to the players by default, instead of leaving everyone in the dark for no clear reason.

 

This thread has gotten a little side tracked. Anyone out there willing to do a little testing with the gloves? :)

[Hedgehog]

That page is blank as well. Either way, I'm not inclined to trust what Jagex says lol

 

It's awfully depressing that this is the case >.>

 

Not only do most MMOs not lie/be wrong about everything and anything they ever say, they actually give in depth gameplay mechanics and statistics, even drop rates, to the players by default, instead of leaving everyone in the dark for no clear reason.

 

This thread has gotten a little side tracked. Anyone out there willing to do a little testing with the gloves? :)

Ya >.< They give us so much false/misleading information.

 

Look at this:

 

http://services.runescape.com/m=rswiki/en/Black_mask

 

The Black mask is a magical mask, which is worn by Cave horrors. It increases your Attack and Strength when fighting Slayer-assigned monsters by 15%.

 

I fixed up the dragon pick page though ;D

[Th e Doctor]

As soon as I access them I'll go about helping test them. Just started dt today so it should be around next weekend.

[enfield]

you know what that makes me think - xp waste should give out 'grants' for research proposals :mrgreen:.

 

if only there was a larger community i think it could work.

[Powerfrog]

Well i have goliaths now and I've done a little bit of testing (About 1k hits) and the current spec to hit rate is 5.24%, which is about 1/19 hits are a special

 

(This is at waterfiends using extremes piety and typical max strength gear except body and legs, in case it's actually effected by that stuff)

 

I plan on testing them at corp using both max strength with gano, and then again with very low strength and accuracy and brewed down stats, to determine if the special is effected by accuracy and strength (I'm guessing no for accuracy, possibly for strength)

[Hedgehog]

you know what that makes me think - xp waste should give out 'grants' for research proposals :mrgreen:.

 

if only their was a larger community i think it could work.

 

We've tried creating incentives for research in the past, but we don't have anything to give.

[enfield]

A lot of people like gp. I guess not enough people were willing to contribute to such a fund. and i guess there are problems with that - like people fudging data for money :P.

 

thanks for the data powerfrog.