The formula shown on the front page cannot possibly be right. The game doesn't crash if the opponent does not have any defence bonuses (divide by zero error) and I can hit if I have no attack bonuses (while 0/anything = 0). This formula also breaks down with negative bonuses, giving negative chances to hit. I think it will be closer to something like
A ^ (attack bonus - defence bonus) * attack level / defence level . This gives no negative chances or divide by zero errors. A should be higher than, but close to 1. Having it close to 1 reduces the effect of the power, reducing the extreme increases with high attack and low defence bonuses. Dragnmn talk cont 09:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- This might work. and can be approximated by fighting a rat with full attack equipment. -- 11:27, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
The in game importance of using the "correct" attack types[edit source]
It is often stated that different melee attack styles are more efficient towards different armour. For example slash against no armour, stabbing against chainbodies and crush against plate mail. I deceided to put this to the test:
- To be objective I have used different attack style weapons
- Used their most powerful attack style
- Bashed the same kind of monster with all weapons
- Bashed not only one (or a certain number), but for a reasonable time to equal out bigger statistical errors, ie about 10 minutes.
The results were then measured in experience points earned per minute, which is directly proportional to damage delievered. The testbed was for example rune weapons: 2h sword, battle axe, warhammar, scimitar and longsword against Falador guards.
So what was the outcome? Well surprisingly the slashing damagedealer scimitar is always the winner among the basic weapons, no matter that it should be useless against plate mail.
Question: Am I doing anything wrong here, is there a misconception, or does RS simply not care about the different kinds of armour, but simply what bonus your weapon has in the attack style you use?
Delapaco 18:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- I have a theory that the game issues an advantage to whatever combat participant is out-damaging the opposition, so this might have a bearing on it if it is actually in the game code and not just speculation. If this theory holds true, then accuracy is also influenced by attack speed, thus explaining how the scimitar out-damaged the other weapons, regardless of just a crude damage per second calculated based on maximum damage and attack speed. Another factor to consider is that all of the most accurate melee weapons have their strongest accuracy score in slash, so the game does seem to be biased toward slash. Even though the armour is supposed to be better against certain types of attacks (chain and leather absorbing blunt, plate being less likely to be pierced,) if you have any defence level above 30 the differences are practically negligible since it might be a one point difference (I think that's the case with crush defence on Dragon chest armour) or a 15+ point difference (Rune chest armour) but your defence level makes it seem like the difference isn't there, which is why so many people just wear platemail all the time and ignore chains unless they're poor or haven't finished Dragon Slayer. There's pretty much no difference noticeable with same-quality equipment, but there are some larger differences that you actually can notice. Try stab attacks against somebody wearing Bandos instead of a Barrows-level armour piece or try a crush attack instead of a slash attack against somebody wearing a torso. The only place you'll see attack styles other than slash actually become useful in melee is during some form of PvP. The problem, though, is that all weapons that deal non-slashing damage are either ludicrously slow or can only attack with controlled or defensive style and aren't used because PvP-style players are defence-phobic. Basically this test is pointless because the best thing to use against a monster is almost always going to be the fastest weapon available in the highest grade of equipment you can use (scimitars and whip, although low health with Dharok's and Godswords are exceptions since they come close to or exceed those exp rates even with their lower speeds.) I say just tell everybody that outside of very specific circumstances, your attack style is irrelevant. -- Bartuccio304:25, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
- And that was also the thesis of my post - attack style and armour class combinations do not matter, simply attack bonus vs defense bonus. So the whole stab/slash/crush thing is useless and irrelevant as far as I can see. Delapaco 00:36, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
It Can't Be Right![edit source]
How can the equation on the front possibly be right? So, if I have attack level 44, and im fighting a chaos druid (lets say 5 def?), I have .515 chance of hitting it? That is definetly not right. If I were to set attack bonus +1, I have a 350%+ chance of hitting it!? That can't be right.
Also the formula does not work with negative stats (Such as Mage Defence bonus)
- Please sign your arguments, so that the rest of us more easily may distinguish what you've added. (four tildes in a row "~") Delapaco 21:55, December 26, 2009 (UTC)
stab vs unarmored[edit source]
why would slash be better vs no armor then stab? It makes no sense, take off all your armor, do you have a huge negative slash defence stat?? or has this been stated on the official website?
- As I have been discussing earlier - I don't see any use of the different combat styles. It would be interesting if someone could show an example where there is a drastical difference between crush/stab/stab (with same bonuses of course). But to your question, it is stated that you should use stab against chainmail, slash against no armour/leather, and crush against platebody. This is consistent with practise in Warriors guide. Delapaco
- The advantages of using different attack styles against different armor are probably there. But you just can't beat an attack and strength bonus combined with a high attack speed such as the scimitar. The advantage may be there, but it's just simply more efficient to use the scimitar at all times. Does this mean the advantage of using a shortsword on some enemies isn't there? Of course not, but it's still being outweighed by how good the scimitar is stats-wise. Wehttam.bassist 00:15, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
This article lacks several att types[edit source]
for example hack from hatchets and punch, kick etc with bare hands Xeoxer 12:55, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
- Hack for hatchets is the "slash" attack type. Punch and kick with bare hands is "crush." Slash and crush are listed. I think you're confusing style name and attack type. --Saftzie (talk) 18:20, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
Style bonuses effect on attack styles?[edit source]
You have good points But I want to train with controlled, and only controlled.
What I have been trying to find out for the past few hours is what Effect the Attack/Strength/Defence Attack bonuses have, and if they effect the Controlled attack style at all.\
For example, what differences would I see useing an addy longsword which has 20 stab, 29 slash, -2 crush while using the controlled style which utilizes stab.
an addy longsword which has 6 stab, 29 slash, -2 crush while using the controlled style which utilizes stab.
Does it make any difference using stab with a higher weapon stab bonus? 6 vs 20
Assume Attack speed and Strength bonuses are irrelavant.
Now A different question, Don't get these mixed up.
Assuming using only Controlled attack style, would it be more effective to train with a scimitar or a Longsword? Why? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) on 18:34, 17 October 2012 (UTC).