RSC Combat Testing Findings

Accounts Used:
Account 1:
99 Attack
93 Defense
74 Strength

Account 2:
95 Attack
93 Defense
90 Strength

Account 3:
70 Attack
67 Defense
92 Strength

Account 4:
72 Attack
91 Defense
66 Strength

Attack vs. Defense:

Account 1 vs. Account 2
In all types of fights (staking and PKing,) Account 1 and Account 2 were even across the board.  Defense, being the same level, held almost identically.  Every fight was lengthy and even, with a slight advantage going in favor of Account 1 (99 attack vs 95 attack.)  However, it is not conclusive if marginally higher attack does have a substantial advantage to a slightly lower defense level.

Account 3 vs. Account 4
In armored PKing, the clear winner was Account 3.  Attack, when faced with no armor bonus, does well against 60 defense.  In fights where Account 4 won, it was due to a lengthier fight.  This shows me that despite defense being outmatched by the attack, it still showed to be tough.

Strength vs. Defense:

Account 1 vs. Account 2
Strength increases the maximum hit an account can achieve, and attack improves the accuracy of the hits.  Account 2, despite much higher strength, had worse results than Account 1.  The average maximum hit for Account 1 is 20.  The average max hit for Account 2 is 25.  Despite these differences, Account 2 still fared worse than Account 1 (93 attack vs 99 attack.)  Account 1 (74 strength, 99 attack) hit a 0 nearly 43% of the time to Account 2’s 33%, while max hit was 5% to 4% respectively.  I conclude that attack has little to no effect on max hit, but a better effect on overall non-0 hits.

Account 3 vs. Account 4
Again, defense reigned king.  Despite having a higher strength AND attack level, Account 3 could not last against Account 4’s superior defense.  Account 3 lost 75% of the fights, hit a 0 nearly 50% of the time, and achieved a max hit in only 2% of it’s hits.  Account 4, while not substantially better ( hit 0 39% of the time, max hit 4%,) was still clearly in charge in nearly every fight.

Conclusions:
In this original combat system, it seems defense + armor bonus is the deciding factor in all non-wildy fights.  Attack, when faced without an armor bonus, still seems to hold a slight advantage.  Strength facing a high defense without armor bonus has a very slight advantage in the wilderness, as attack still produces decently enough.

In terms of maximum hit, I don’t see much correlation between that and the level of attack.  In RSCR, we see higher strength hitting higher more often against higher defense, but in RSC, we see higher attack lasting longer against higher defense, regardless of the strength level.  This tells me that strength is a PKer’s best friend, as it works well against pures, hybrids, and fully loaded accounts that retreat and use up food, runes, and/or arrows, making the fight more even.  Defense is a stakers best friend, as it clearly dominates in controlled environments.  Attack, while advantageous to both parties, seems to be even more so in controlled environments.  High attack levels in the wilderness were only advantageous against an account without armor on.

In conclusion, it seems the ideal combat system is as follows:

High Defense + Armor Bonus + Sufficient Attack = Best
High Attack + Decent Defense + Armor Bonus = Better
Sufficient Attack + Sufficient Defense + High Strength = Good
High Strength + Low Defense + Sufficient Attack = Average
High Strength + Low Defense + Low Attack = Poor (in controlled environment,) Better (in wilderness)

Aside from your typical PKing, strength does not necessarily equal success.  Staking is a game of defense and outlasting your opponent, while PKing is a game of outlasting your opponent’s food source.  This is why strength is more important in the wilderness and, when fighting pures and hybrids, offers the clear advantage.  As soon as a high defense + armor bonus account is put into the fold, the pures and hybrids didn’t stand a chance.

Regarding maximum hit, the most successful rate in a controlled environment was 5%.  This means the maximum hit was achieved only once every 20 hits.  This also leads me to believe that strength, while in a controlled environment, has no real advantage.  In the wilderness, the success rate was about 9%, while the upper 50% of the hit range had a success rate of 59%.  This tells me that, when armor bonus is taken away, the attack is able to better utilize the strength and create a real advantage even against those with good defense.

All in all, I think a system as close to the authentic system as possible will give both PKers and stakers what they are looking for.