The Combat triangle=Unbalanced?

[Bloodveld]

The triangle might be unbalanced, but hey, ancient mages are paying 2k per shot at that ice barridge. Why shouldn't they own? :P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The strongest weapon in melee costs around 3 mil. The armors cost even more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An MSB and full black d-hide cost a very minute amount compared to the prices above. And you can get back 80% of those rune arrows.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't get why they shouldn't get the short end of the stick. :?

If they had the option to use more pricey but stronger weapons/attacks but they didn't, then I see where you are coming from, but they don't. If mages wanted to save money, they easily could.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

btw bloodveld, its "definately" i know youve misspelled it a few times and i thought id be nice to help ya out a little

 

 

 

err, off topic, but it's actually "definitely"

:lol:

[Karvinen]

Mages are definitely underpowered on f2p. They can only hit 16 slowly and have no armour. A high level warrior can beat a high level mage easily.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F2P "triangle":

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

warrior beats mage

 

 

 

warrior beats ranger

 

 

 

ranger beats mage

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mages are only useful in teams but if they are attacked, they die quickly.

[sk8ermaster]

magic definetly does not need specials..

 

 

 

anchients are amazing enough

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

anyway i dont care for "unbalanced triangle" topics

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

since you can just train the strongest class you think..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

or train all three so in case new things come out your prepared

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

example, ive got max stats,99range, 95mage(training to 99 atm)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

already prepared for any new combat updates

[cotamatias]

earlier was posted that a meleer with full dharok and 80 str cna hit 50's. This is true. But please tell me, when in the name of (your god here) will a person go that low when pking!?!? Thats like 10 hp or lower! come on, think about what your saying people.

[bedman]

A lot of things said here are true, however there is much discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is because there are so many factors to take care with:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are we talking about low lvls or not?

 

 

 

=> low lvls: mage owns

 

 

 

=> mid lvls: range owns

 

 

 

=> high lvl: melee owns.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(for f2p)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are we talking about members or not?

 

 

 

=> members: mage "overpowered" cause of ancient magicks

 

 

 

=> f2p: mages (and rangers also, but thats logic) havent got any chance against melee at higher lvls (80+ combat)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are we talking about rich players or not?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=> if you are rich: ancient magicks, whips, veracs, ...

 

 

 

=> if you're not: dragon dagger, dlong, ranger, ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(i know the last one is stuipd. one who takes teh biggest risks deserves the best chances)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Etc...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My opinion however is:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rangers are certainly underpowered in p2p. They have much trouble killing mages, and they're supposed to be strong against them. Whereas warriors havent got problems beating rangers, and mages beating warriors.

 

 

 

On the other hand, people are complaining that a rangers loot is worthless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So i think Jagex should introduce a new ranged armour, with a big magic defense. However, this new armour should have NEGATIVE melee-attack bonus, to prevent it getting used by warriors, who would get an unfair advantage against mages, their weakness.

 

 

 

EDIT: this armour should cost a lot, so its worth it to kill a ranger.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another problem is that rangers in p2p cant do a "finishing blow". Therefore I think the double spec should get back. The chance of hitting 20 20 20 20 is still very slim, but at least there is a chance for a 40+ attack. (just as warriors have a nice chance for 40+ (combined) damage). Mages dont need this high damage hit, cause they can bind their enemies, preventing them to escape + teleblock.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now f2p.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not going to talk about "finishing blows", cause they dont exist there, and never will.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A few things I have experienced (I am f2p)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1) At the very low lvls (1-40/50), mages own. Rangers are also very strong, but one thing is sure: warriors get totally owned.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2) At the mid lvls (40/50-60/70), warriors are (relatively) getting stronger, mages are just as strong as they would have been lvl 40 (only a bit more hp, but they still hit 16s), and rangers are now having upperhand. They are now able to his 10-14s, and they hit those very fast, and quite accurate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3) At the high lvls (80+), warriors are obtaining their real power. They wear full rune, hit 20s with rune scimmy (prayer + pot). They have a natural advantage on rangers, and those are now almost maxed out. The only bad side of the story is that they have to kill other melee'ers to get a decent loot.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At 100+ combat, a ranger is almost worthless since he could have had 99 ranged at lets say 85 combat. The only thing he can get is def, but that isnt so effective. But, an combat 85 ranger with 99 ranged could have a great chance of beating a warrior of the same lvl. So I feel safe to say rangers are getting useless after 100 combat.

 

 

 

However, they are still owning mages, like they should. Negative point: they get bad loot from mages.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mages are still only hitting 16s, and the only thing they can train is hits and def. However, with a def bonus of 10 (dfire shield), that doesnt make much difference.

 

 

 

Summarised: mages are getting weaker (relatively) once they reach 50 combat. The stay still quite to very strong untill 70 combat. After that its going downards. At 80+ combat they are only good for chasing people, meaning the other people is loosing and this is hard to achieve, since a mage is weaker. The only chance thus for a mage to own is to meet someone weaker (either lower lvl, or low on food).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

my 2 (big) cents

[kwimbob]

So i think Jagex should introduce a new ranged armour, with a big magic defense. However, this new armour should have NEGATIVE melee-attack bonus, to prevent it getting used by warriors, who would get an unfair advantage against mages, their weakness.

 

 

 

Exactly!!! That right there is exactly on....

[blacklink8]

Ancients aren't really hard to beat as a ranger wearing Karil's. I mean, I can kill them with bronze arrows in castle wars...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But they can still hit high and run away. They can also cast ancients on me while i can't hit them with a MSB since they are far away.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't know...range just needs a little boost maybe.

[dutycalls5609]

Mage is so powerful on its own, you don't need special. By the time the Excalibur wielding guy gets over to you with his heavy, magic defence killing rune armor, he's dead!

[Cashguy1]

as if ppl being albe to stop you dead and hit 30s on you isnt enough

[kudos6969]

a decent ranger owns a mage i dnt see what the problem is, melee is most over powered with an easy ko using dragon dagger and the constant high damage from whip where you just eat eat and eat.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

rangers can range for rapid high damge on a mage, and then try for a ko using a bow.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

where as mages splash alot on hide when there not eating and have no way to ko unless you run out of food. unless your multi mages shouldnt get kills.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

best way is to do both wearing robes casting ice blitz or barrage using dragon dagger and whip. dsnt get any better than that.

[mrah]

Mages pay enuff to hit hard. What does a ranger cost to pk? Hardly anything. Just some arrows, food and black hide that basicly cost nothing. So you dont loose anything when u die.

 

 

 

Do a ice barrage and it will cost u 2.5k each shot. Compare that to the rune arrows price of like 400 ea + you can pick up quite a bit that dont get destroyed.

 

 

 

Melee basicly only costs food and pots. Armour is the only thing that can get quite expensive for it, altho they got the ability to wear black hide which is decent armour for a low cost.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So basicly, range is the cheapest form of pking. Ice barrage a ranger and you will spend more on runes then the ranger pk will get u in drops lol.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Imo the ones that pay the most to pk should have the upperhand slightly. Atm thats they way it is, so its quite even looking at it cashwise.

[jessy87]

Mages pay enuff to hit hard. What does a ranger cost to pk? Hardly anything. Just some arrows, food and black hide that basicly cost nothing. So you dont loose anything when u die.

 

 

 

Do a ice barrage and it will cost u 2.5k each shot. Compare that to the rune arrows price of like 400 ea + you can pick up quite a bit that dont get destroyed.

 

 

 

Melee basicly only costs food and pots. Armour is the only thing that can get quite expensive for it, altho they got the ability to wear black hide which is decent armour for a low cost.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So basicly, range is the cheapest form of pking. Ice barrage a ranger and you will spend more on runes then the ranger pk will get u in drops lol.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Imo the ones that pay the most to pk should have the upperhand slightly. Atm thats they way it is, so its quite even looking at it cashwise.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

your rite, beg jagex for better bows that are double the alch price of magic shorts, then beg them for white dhide that required 85 ranged to wear with more the blk dhide to ranged attack and make it super hard to get... like, must kill the king black dragon type of hard.

[Potter_Pkr]

To summarise: the pking triangle is very unfair. Mages are too weak while warriors are over powered. What if mage armour had very high melee def but really low melee attack?

[Lowgravity]

I think the triangle works, the only problem is some archers are better than warriors at low level, but other than that I think it's very well done.

[monkeyboo2]

the triangle is not good

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

dhide and kharils needs melee negative bonuses cos i cant count the times ive lost millions in the duelling arena (the real place for cash) over some noob pulling out full black dhide/ kahrils and a whip.

 

 

 

Most spells just splash so its all down to trying to cause a much damage as possible before they get close and then trying to beat a meleer at his own game with a dds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ancient mage everybody gets in a fuss about. You can take out 6 ppl at a time...What difference does that make in the duelling arena? dhide agen or we have to sacrifice our own armour...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Melee falls to often to range. Its speed is crazy and against pray, the odd fireblast ere and there (pures =noobs-mains=ownage) soons finishes anyone off.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A duel with no armour is terrile for mage. A seercull comes straight out and takes 22 of ur mage levels away. (no pots)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I see the rnagers speed along with mage combo the ultimate thing in the cb triangle because pure range fals to a good well aromured whipper.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Despite saying all this. I think i have learnt. Pray owns. Only veracs can deal with it but an ice burst here and there deals with and veracs. If they mage pray u whip out dagger and use combos. not just the protect prays destroy but the underestimated power of ultimate stre and incredible reflexes provail. My well duelled for cash rests safely for now...

[niknik]

Mage is over powered already. Ancients hit through hides better then melee wiith whip does :roll:

[pure_fett]

A lot of things said here are true, however there is much discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is because there are so many factors to take care with:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are we talking about low lvls or not?

 

 

 

=> low lvls: mage owns

 

 

 

=> mid lvls: range owns

 

 

 

=> high lvl: melee owns.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(for f2p)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are we talking about members or not?

 

 

 

=> members: mage "overpowered" cause of ancient magicks

 

 

 

=> f2p: mages (and rangers also, but thats logic) havent got any chance against melee at higher lvls (80+ combat)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are we talking about rich players or not?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=> if you are rich: ancient magicks, whips, veracs, ...

 

 

 

=> if you're not: dragon dagger, dlong, ranger, ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(i know the last one is stuipd. one who takes teh biggest risks deserves the best chances)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Etc...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My opinion however is:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rangers are certainly underpowered in p2p. They have much trouble killing mages, and they're supposed to be strong against them. Whereas warriors havent got problems beating rangers, and mages beating warriors.

 

 

 

On the other hand, people are complaining that a rangers loot is worthless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So i think Jagex should introduce a new ranged armour, with a big magic defense. However, this new armour should have NEGATIVE melee-attack bonus, to prevent it getting used by warriors, who would get an unfair advantage against mages, their weakness.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another problem is that rangers in p2p cant do a "finishing blow". Therefore I think the double spec should get back. The chance of hitting 20 20 20 20 is still very slim, but at least there is a chance for a 40+ attack. (just as warriors have a nice chance for 40+ (combined) damage). Mages dont need this high damage hit, cause they can bind their enemies, preventing them to escape + teleblock.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now f2p.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not going to talk about "finishing blows", cause they dont exist there, and never will.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A few things I have experienced (I am f2p)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1) At the very low lvls (1-40/50), mages own. Rangers are also very strong, but one thing is sure: warriors get totally owned.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2) At the mid lvls (40/50-60/70), warriors are (relatively) getting stronger, mages are just as strong as they would have been lvl 40 (only a bit more hp, but they still hit 16s), and rangers are now having upperhand. They are now able to his 10-14s, and they hit those very fast, and quite accurate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3) At the high lvls (80+), warriors are obtaining their real power. They wear full rune, hit 20s with rune scimmy (prayer + pot). They have a natural advantage on rangers, and those are now almost maxed out. The only bad side of the story is that they have to kill other melee'ers to get a decent loot.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At 100+ combat, a ranger is almost worthless since he could have had 99 ranged at lets say 85 combat. The only thing he can get is def, but that isnt so effective. But, an combat 85 ranger with 99 ranged could have a great chance of beating a warrior of the same lvl. So I feel safe to say rangers are getting useless after 100 combat.

 

 

 

However, they are still owning mages, like they should. Negative point: they get bad loot from mages.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mages are still only hitting 16s, and the only thing they can train is hits and def. However, with a def bonus of 10 (dfire shield), that doesnt make much difference.

 

 

 

Summarised: mages are getting weaker (relatively) once they reach 50 combat. The stay still quite to very strong untill 70 combat. After that its going downards. At 80+ combat they are only good for chasing people, meaning the other people is loosing and this is hard to achieve, since a mage is weaker. The only chance thus for a mage to own is to meet someone weaker (either lower lvl, or low on food).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

my 2 (big) cents

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THANK YOU!! you took the words right out of my mouth, if we are talking about pures, after 45 combat mage start to lose their worth,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

max mage att in f2p is 25+ ( we havent had any new items sence rs2 came out! and the only thing we got sence rs2 is TB and tangles (btw, bind in f2p is pointless unless your in multi and with a big team))

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

also! this is with the blue robes that means NO DEF to like anything,

 

 

 

to recap, mage gets a nagitive attack for useing any other armor, except a wood shield, also range gets this but considering just a metal plate takes like 20 mage attack away and the max mage attack in the first place is only 25+ this slaughters mages

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, green hide vambs and chaps dont take any def to wear! maken them the best option for pures to wear, so now the mages dont just have to worry about the rangers that wear the hides to acually range in them but they also have to worry about the melees that use them for there slight advantage in def + and that pretty mage def,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

it goes on with, just the rune simmy, gives 49+ for slash right? (doing this from memory so corect me if im wrong) the staffs give 10+ for mage att! wait, are you saying that 1 item is 2 times the max mage + FOR THE ENTIRE MAGE SET? this seems intirely unfair.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and yes this post is regarding f2p only,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i do beleive that 1 def mages should be able to wear mystic bottems and gloves just because rangers get to wear their!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~psy~