Merge[]
I disagree. If you read the articles, they are entirely different things. Armour and weapons give bonuses and penalties to attack types, not attack styles. The attack style you use determines your exp and what attack type your weapon uses. Your bonus to a certain attack type is compared against your opponents defence bonus against that attack type to determine how much damage you deal and if you hit. -- Couchpotato99 (talk) (contribs) 21:20, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- FOR I think the problem is in the terminology. We need to make sure that we are using the official RS terminology for these two different articles. Then the question is, if a user is searching for Attack Styles (aggressive, accurate, defence) will he/she really know which to search for, attack TYPES vs attack STYLES. I wouldn't think so. My gut tells me it's just too ambiguous. Endasil 00:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
i believe they are the same thing although i think the whole title should be changed to "Combat Styles" to incorporate the use or armors and making the title more broad to more information
- FOR-Definitely merge them, i don't even understand why there should be 2 articles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Heres John E (talk) on 01:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC).
Attack style and Attack type should NOT be merged! Attack style refers to the way you attack - aggressively, accurately, defensively, etc. This can be changed in the attack style interface (the crossed swords) and determines what combat skills you receive experience in, as well as helps determine how hard and often you hit and get hit. Our article on attack type refers to the equipment bonuses shown in the equipment menu!!! These attack and defense bonuses (and prayer and strength) help determine a large amount of the calculations gone into combat - how hard and often you hit and get hit, how quickly your prayer points drain, etc. These bonuses can't be changed simply by switching attack styles - they're the sum of the bonuses given by the items you have equipped! Put on a warriors ring and your slash attack and slash defense bonuses go up by 4, but your current attack style stays the same! These are two completely different parts of combat, and they're not hard to understand. The bonuses article was simply written at the wrong title. Move it to 'Equipment bonuses' make redirects from 'attack bonuses' 'attack bonus' 'defense bonus' 'defence bonus' 'defense bonuses' 'equipment bonus'... etc., change Attack types to redirect to Attack style, make some more redirects, and that should straighten things out and avoid any future confusion. In fact, I'll start on it (bored atm). 
Gangsterls 
talk01:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
After reading the Attack type page more thoroughly, I realized that the way it was written made it difficult to understand that it was about bonuses, and only talked about Attack bonuses. I'll start on splitting it into two sections with a small introduction and writing a basic defense bonuses section. Gangsterls talk01:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
?!?[]
Equipment bonuses are NOT the same as attack styles! 
Chiafriend12
Loon is best buttlord 01:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Attack/Defense[]
In the section attack bonuses it says "lowers the chance of being hit by an NPC or player's (whatever bonus it is here)" in the descriptions for all of the attack bonuses. Surely this should be in the defence bonuses section?
I would have normally edited this without saying, but because its under construction i thought i'd better say. -Gaz Lloyd 19:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- It's either vandalism or a contributor copying from Defense and forgetting to change.
Doomedrusher|Talk||Contributions||Edit Count| 00:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I've done some work on it now[]
I tidied up a few things and split some of the information into attack types. Plus I put the defensive information where it should be. However, someone with knowledge of Summoning needs to confirm the information in the Summoning section, as well as calculate and add in the maximum Summoning defence. --Andorin Kato This That 08:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, the maximum bonuses are constantly changing due to the updates. I have removed them.Doomedrusher|Talk||Contributions||Edit Count| 22:38, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Update![]
The Equipment Stats screen has been updated with the new hairstyles - the bonuses now appear on the left side. I don't really have anything good to wear, so perhaps someone could take a screenshot soon.
Randommelon MORE COWBELL! 
20:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Updated Picture[]
I just updated the picture of the Equipment Status Screen to reflect the recent changes that Jagex made to it. I also edited the caption to fit my picture.
Kazel01 21:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Updated magic damage bonus[]
I put the way how potions can influence the magic damage bonus under the magic damage. Odd that Wikia didn't have any mention about it, yet it is clearly mentioned in Runescape's manual: Magic FAQ. Pandaflakes 20:55, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
in game proof?[]
lets see some offical in game proof backing all this up. until then,? Orodalf? needs to stop trying to enforce his "facts". he even made a thread where he claims its all "offical".? Quick find code: 15-16-651-64107257? Heavyoak (talk) 15:39, November 26, 2012 (UTC) ..... the wiki keeps adding "?"'s to everything.....Heavyoak (talk) 15:44, November 26, 2012 (UTC)
- No one will go through all that writing without first verifying it. And it's also pretty plausible and one look at File:Combat Stats interface.png also shows that it can be correct. As for the reference to the thread, it was removed. --Alchez 15:46, November 26, 2012 (UTC)
- yea thats real cool and shiny looking, but not 1 weapon in game shows its own stats, not 1 Armour show any stats. the only time you see any stats is when the imaginary numbers show up after its been put on and then you cant tell what did what. untill each item has its own stats and the GUI explains in real numbers what each item does, im calling bullshit. this own damn page is made up as there is nothing in game to back any of this up. but go ahead, lie just like jagex does. go ahead and claim that im just a minority in this opinion. go for it.--Heavyoak (talk) 15:58, November 26, 2012 (UTC)
really now? yea, thoes are not the real stats. thats just fake numbers to make the item look cool. the real numbers show the + and the - to each stat, and tell how it works in a fight.--Heavyoak (talk) 16:19, November 26, 2012 (UTC)
- I think you'll find those + and - values were removed completely with the EoC update. Before that update, you didn't get life points from Iron armour, for example. Everything has changed, so you can't rely on your past experience. Sorry.
- — Lexmechanic (talk) 00:34, April 2, 2013 (UTC)
Universal Slayer[]
The armour category "All" needs to be formalized a bit, as it would be exceptionally handy to know exactly what armour fits in this category. Or I could do it on my personal pages. Whatever. 74.41.81.126 01:57, December 4, 2012 (UTC)
Items give their own "Target attacking" and "Target defending" values- for example, gano boots might give the following for target defending: magic [100], melee [50], ranged [25]. Can we add this info to each page??
"All" on the offensive[]
As I understand it when fighting with Melee, wearing Magic body, legs, or shield hinders my attacks. According to the wording of this section, I'm thinking wearing "All" class armour does not hurt? Or do these also impose penalties?
Additionally! Can we set up a category and/or nav box for equipment in this category so as to make it easier to find such items? Considering their utility, having an accessible list of some sort would be beneficial.
— Lexmechanic (talk) 01:06, April 2, 2013 (UTC)