Unfair that it is only possible to do 1 spec when ranging?

[Ghost-Knigth]

I'm a tank pker (at least a bit). And when fighting other pkers I find it unfair that I as a ranger only have 1 spec in a row, while the melees have 4.

 

 

 

I remember back in the days when rangers also had 3 specs. Should it be changed back again?

 

 

 

EDIT: To all you spammers: I'm not complaining, I just think that it's unfair that rangers only have 1 spec against melees 4. :wall:

[84300zxturbo]

4 specs for rangers would completely own....so that would be unfair. Although, I do think it should be bumped to 2 specs :)

[wakka102]

they changed it because it was too powerful, I think its fine how it is now

[Ghost-Knigth]

I can't really see how it would be too powerful? Pures can hit 20+ twice in all 4 specs. That's unfair :P

[lazy_k]

"I remember back in the days when rangers also had 4 specs."

 

Rangers never had 4 specs, only 2. :roll:

[Ghost-Knigth]

"I remember back in the days when rangers also had 4 specs."

 

Rangers never had 4 specs, only 2. :roll:

 

Didn't they have 4 specs?

 

 

 

And dude, no need to be so sarcastic just because I can't remember right.

[lazy_k]

"I remember back in the days when rangers also had 4 specs."

 

Rangers never had 4 specs, only 2. :roll:

 

Didn't they have 4 specs?

 

 

 

And dude, no need to be so sarcastic just because I can't remember right.

 

I wasn't sarcastic, I quoted you and corrected you and added a roll-eye smiley because you wanted to sound old school and couldn't even remember the amount of specs the msb had.

[Ghost-Knigth]

"I remember back in the days when rangers also had 4 specs."

 

Rangers never had 4 specs, only 2. :roll:

 

Didn't they have 4 specs?

 

 

 

And dude, no need to be so sarcastic just because I can't remember right.

 

I wasn't sarcastic, I quoted you and corrected you and added a roll-eye smiley because you wanted to sound old school and couldn't even remember the amount of specs the msb had.

 

 

 

"Wanted to sound old school". Lol, I'm not that old school.. Well, I'm sorry for not being able to remember all details in a computer game.

[lazy_k]

Ooo, snappy comback, like that has never been said before. I just posted the way I did as you sounded like a moron with a topic so common it's banned in RuneScape's rant forum.

[i_D_r]

Dragon dagger accuracy - 50-70 depending on gear

 

 

 

msb (range) accuracy - around 150

 

 

 

 

 

That's why the specs are how they are :P Plus with MSB you don't need to be close range like melee to do a KOing double hit..

[Soulthresher]

it was 3 if i remember correctly

 

 

 

1 spec compared to 4 isnt a good match

 

 

 

even with the accuracy bonus u mite miss and ud be screwed. given 2 specs for msb would make it fair

[Rose_2_Pure]

At level 71, a pure ranger can hit CONSTANT 21s. Ranger's are overpowered. Constant 21s on full Rune? Rediculous. While Melee Specs require Attack and Strength to hit high. 71 Combat for a Pure Melee, maybe 25-26 with A DD spec. But the chance of us hitting double 15s, 30 Damage from a Spec is extremely rare. I was on my 75, who is 35 Defence, fighting a level 70 Ranger. He hit non-stop 18-21, and fast, then he speced 18-21 and nearly killed me. So aren't Meleers supposed to own rangers? Yes, well everyone is getting owned by Rangers now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rose

[darkblade986]

Lets put it this way...

 

 

 

Each Offense skill has it's weaknesses. To balance these strengths, more "brute" force is added.

 

 

 

 

 

Meleers have to be face to face (except halberds, but that's not much of a difference). In turn, they can hit very high in rapid succession.

 

 

 

Rangers can be at a varying distance, and as such they need to be weakened to give the others a chance. The potential for so much damage against a meleer requires a slightly weaker offense for the ranger, to counter-balance the area, even though Rangers are already inherantly weak against meleers.

 

 

 

Magers can be at varying distances too, but they have many assist spells. These spells are also reletively weak (note that Fire Wave barely hits 20), and no special attack is attached to them.

 

 

 

 

 

So while it may be true that Rangers only get one Special Attack, it was done in the best interest to balance the Combat Triangle. Besides, a double 13 is still plenty to get a nice jump on a Mage.

[Ghost-Knigth]

At level 71, a pure ranger can hit CONSTANT 21s. Ranger's are overpowered. Constant 21s on full Rune? Rediculous. While Melee Specs require Attack and Strength to hit high. 71 Combat for a Pure Melee, maybe 25-26 with A DD spec. But the chance of us hitting double 15s, 30 Damage from a Spec is extremely rare. I was on my 75, who is 35 Defence, fighting a level 70 Ranger. He hit non-stop 18-21, and fast, then he speced 18-21 and nearly killed me. So aren't Meleers supposed to own rangers? Yes, well everyone is getting owned by Rangers now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rose

 

 

 

Maybe rangers own at lower levels but now I've tried my luck twice against rune pures. I got hit for a 38 with a whip even though I'm 86 def.

 

To other replies: 2 specs in a row could be acceptable.:D

[frogmite]

it was two double shot special attacks, it took up 35% of the bar each and yes it should be changed back (you could actually time it to get 3 in a row). Range is pathetic as it is atm.

[Ghost-Knigth]

Lets put it this way...

 

 

 

Each Offense skill has it's weaknesses. To balance these strengths, more "brute" force is added.

 

 

 

 

 

Meleers have to be face to face (except halberds, but that's not much of a difference). In turn, they can hit very high in rapid succession.

 

 

 

Rangers can be at a varying distance, and as such they need to be weakened to give the others a chance. The potential for so much damage against a meleer requires a slightly weaker offense for the ranger, to counter-balance the area, even though Rangers are already inherantly weak against meleers.

 

 

 

Magers can be at varying distances too, but they have many assist spells. These spells are also reletively weak (note that Fire Wave barely hits 20), and no special attack is attached to them.

 

 

 

 

 

So while it may be true that Rangers only get one Special Attack, it was done in the best interest to balance the Combat Triangle. Besides, a double 13 is still plenty to get a nice jump on a Mage.

 

 

 

How can a ranger attack a melee from distance? Of course on his first strike he can but when the melee gets close to him the ranger is dead.

[Blaze The Movie Fan]

[Post's been deleted by user to prevent further flames.]

[frogmite]

Like other said, the wilderness has became ridicilously powerful because of this. And with a poison ouch.

 

 

 

Dragon Daggers can't hit as high as rune arrows with a magic shortbow, both can be poisoned ++, so if it would be as many times in a row without the bar being empty it's too overpowered, that's what rune arrows were.

 

 

 

I don't know about crystal bow however, can that hit twice in a row? :-k

 

 

 

Anyway my point is, dragon dagger can't hit as hard as rune arrows, so this had to be changed.

 

 

 

are you having a laugh? Dragon daggers can hit 41's rune arrows 25's.

 

 

 

crystal bow has no special and has a max hit of 29.

[Blaze The Movie Fan]

Oh sorry about that, I was comparing to other posts in this thread. :oops:

[Ghost-Knigth]

To add more: Kinda hard to poison many arrows. Dragon dagger only needs to be poisoned once.

[Blaze The Movie Fan]

Ok, I might've been wrong about rune arrows be more powerful than dragon daggers. But that wasn't my main point. My main point is, you can get shot by an arrow from a long distance, and it is very unfair having to run all the way to the archer to kill him. Yeah, that's my main point. Ok, I might've been wrong about the DD being worse, but I'm not wrong about that it was unfair to being able to hit so often.

[Ghost-Knigth]

Ok, I might've been wrong about rune arrows be more powerful than dragon daggers. But that wasn't my main point. My main point is, you can get shot by an arrow from a long distance, and it is very unfair having to run all the way to the archer to kill him. Yeah, that's my main point. Ok, I might've been wrong about the DD being worse, but I'm not wrong about that it was unfair to being able to hit so often.

 

It's only possible to shoot a maximum of 2 times before the melee guy is at you.

[attackyomom]

nah rangers fine way they are ive gotten in a fight against 90+ rangers im wearing full rune i may hit 30s with my dds specs but is extremely rare but then again im 80 attack 80 def 80 str but also i am super potted and usually during specs pray attack and str and i 100% time fo the fights ive been in with 90+ rangers i lose every time they hit faster and at higher average then i ever will at my level so why give them 2 specs?? im pretty sure it takes 55% for msb spec. well with my dds i can sometimes use 4 specs just to ko cause usually i hit about 30 all together 1 one spec but by then they ate a shark so around 30ish health i spec again usually same thing keeping them constantly low until i hit about 40+ and usually ko and thats on a lucky day too... cause i don't walk into fight specing unless they in robes and still usually ill get to 40-60 cause no way im killing them when they full health. But practically all the time say a 90 range will almost always hit me for around 35 in there spec now lets say they spec me begin of fight and they hit double 21s take me to 40 hp now i eat sharks but they hit another 20 keeping me constantly 40ish unless they get bad hit by time there spec recharges its pretty likely they will kill me with spec if i don't run.

 

 

 

now tell me overpowered? that rangers with 99 range and 90 def too can be 100cb with around 90 hp and 52 pray that is going with tips combat calc?? when this just balanced meleer safe to assume isn't balanced though he would have 81 str 81 attack 81 def 52 pray and 83 hp for 100cb. The range can't be considered even pure because they got defence too those are two people who have the same combat level who do you think would win in wild?? can't say ranger is pure really

[Ghost-Knigth]

Maybe rangers would own "normal" players with equal combat stats. But against pure, no matter if it is rune or normal pures, they own rangers.

[nyyankees588]

i think that rangers should get 2 specs, because someone with a dds spec can hit lets just say a 15-15 then times that by 4?!?! rangers max spec is like a 20-20 and they only get 1!