Class Specialization Review - Post-Helmet Update

[Solstius]

Before we begin the discussion, Imma get some misconceptions out of the way. No, I'm not doing spec reviews based on the addition of helmets. I'm calling it as aforementioned simply cos I did my analysis based on the fact that I did it AFTER this update kicked in. I'd put in the version number if I could but I can't locate it.

Now that THAT is out of the way, let us go for a review of the specializations after all this time. Imma rank each specialization of each Class from 1 to 4, 1 being the best one and 4 being the worst one. I'd like to know what everyone else thought as well so that we can learn something new.

Without further ado, this is how I ranked them.

Swordsman:
1. Fighter
2. Duellist
3. Swordmaster
4. Protector

Brute:
1. Smasher
2. Destroyer
3. Brawler
4. Vanguard

Warrior:
1. Berserker
2. Executioner
3. Barbarian
4. Sentinel

Spearman:
1. Halberdier
2. Harpooner
3. Pikeman
4. Herald

Ranger:
1. Assassin
2. Poisoner
3. Strategist
4. Cutthroat

Archer:
1. Hunter
2. Infantryman
3. Marksman
4. Beastmaster

So, how would you lot rank em and why? Also, if you'll agree with my ranking, then also, why?

[Solstius]

İlk olarak zaphod tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak funkmonster7 tarafından gönderildi:

Smasher is definitely not number 1. He is number 4 on my list. The poison clouds he makes are more to my detriment than the enemies' most of the time....
.

...poisoned impact was reworked. no longer makes a poisoned cloud.

Mhm. That's exactly why Smasher is number 1 on my list. He can hit multiple targets and also self-sustain his own damage output by apply Poison directly free of charge. So that means instantaneous Cruelty proc for subsequent attacks. It's always a major welcome.

[Reipard]

Beastmaster was weakest link for me for quite a while, but with 3 alphas and bears its quite a nice boss killer especially with the bow that also causes animals to attack the target. I guess it's mostly for rping runs like my tracker run where i try to pick more barbaric feeling classes and a lot of animals.

All in all very fun to use though, but the placement on the bottom is correct since if you don't go balls to the walls with the animals its not very effective.

[Solstius]

İlk olarak Reipard tarafından gönderildi:

Beastmaster was weakest link for me for quite a while, but with 3 alphas and bears its quite a nice boss killer especially with the bow that also causes animals to attack the target. I guess it's mostly for rping runs like my tracker run where i try to pick more barbaric feeling classes and a lot of animals.

Yeah, honestly, can't rank Beastmaster at the top in general cos of the way it's designed. Beastmaster is, depending on how you build up your team, either the best class in the game or the worst in the game. I put it as 4th simply cos it's just not great on its own.

[Solstius]

İlk olarak funkmonster7 tarafından gönderildi:

Smasher is definitely not number 1. He is number 4 on my list. The poison clouds he makes are more to my detriment than the enemies' most of the time. If I want an AOE attacker that does what the Smasher does, I'd go with a Vanguard who has the ultra useful Slowdown debuff, or use a very beefed up Executioner, or even a Swordmaster.

Also, a Harpooner cannot possibly rank higher than Pikeman. A Pikeman can very literally deny a melee enemy's turn, unless it is a spearman. It may be for 2 VP which is a very high VP cost, but there is no one that can perform this task, unlike the Harpooner which when it comes to inflicting bleed, an Assassin can do it, a crit-based Archer class can do it, certain specs can do it as well. It is not easy to line up a row of enemies and let your Harpooner inflict bleed and destabilization (with the right skill learned) on all of them with a single skill. Most of the time you'd only get 1-2 enemies hit, but it hardly matters because you have more than enough Fighters in your party for the job. Besides, a Pikeman can destabilize as well, and has more utility with any team. A Harpooner risks friendly fire, a Pikeman doesn't.

I can understand Herald ranking lowest, but I've used a Herald before, his role is very similar to the Sentinel; you use him to place buffs on certain characters so they hit way harder than they usually can. I actually would rank Herald higher than Harpooner just by this fact alone. Just as I would rank a Sentinel higher than number 4, just because no one can give Inspiration to your entire party.

There is no way a Cutthroat ranks lowest, or even lower than Poisoner. Poisoner actually isn't that strong. You need a very specific strategy to make him actually strong i.e. he is the guy that places Vulnerability on your enemies, but Vulnerability can only be exploited by someone other than the Poisoner himself. It is the same as the Cutthroat where he needs a tank to hold someone down so he can backstab for humongous damage. The difference is it is much more easier to set up for a Cutthroat to do his job than for a Poisoner to set up for others. There is no hard counter for Cutthroats, but there is a hard counter for Poisoners i.e. Poison-immunes. This being said, Assassins do this job better than Cutthroats sometimes, so I suppose if you have Assassins in your team, you won't need Cutthroats.

Strategists are not that great, they rank last imo. They're really only good in the early game where you can get your tanks engaged the whole time, but later on in the game you don't want your tanks staying engaged because of enemy party skills. Although this means Strategists are more useful, there is another way to disengage your tanks: burst down whoever they're engaged with. This is why a Cutthroat easily wins over a Strategist or Poisoner, as the latter two are meant for specific strategies to make them viable. For a Cutthroat, they're viable no matter who they're with (you can engage with another Ranger as well, just make sure you kill the enemy he's engaged to before the enemy gets his turn to attack).

Lastly, I wouldn't underestimate the Protector. It may seem like -20% damage is a small amount, but it is actually a very strong ability. I can understand why a Protector is that low in the rank though, he is simply outclassed by the other classes. But he also provides a feature that no one else can provide... huge AOE Protection buff for 3 rounds. He can also be specced to cause Weakening on enemies as long as he has a buff on; which he can cast that on himself.

In terms of damage output, Smasher and Vanguard are equals, numerically. The difference between the 2 is that one can charge and the other focuses on hitting the same guys in the same place. Vanguard's great strength is also its weakness and that's you have to move with it. Vanguard's performance is capable of being compromised via vision obstruction and also terrain. Smasher, not so much. If anything, Smasher is far more economical in how it performs. I'll give points to the Vanguard for the Slowdown but there are other ways to add Slowdown. Heck, if they are given the right sword, the Swordsman line (with any Specialization) can do what the Vanguard does. They just don't gain Fury.

Pikeman's cost isn't the only issue, it suffers the same issue as Infantryman. The cost could simply be utterly wasted without a single shot of Spear Wall getting used up. Harpooner doesn't have this issue. You don't have to steer a battle to a point where every hostile is oh so conveniently lined up like they are waiting for their order at a cafeteria. Just hit one to two and you're fine. If ya hit more, even betr. At least you're still hitting something with absolute certainty. If you're worried about hitting allies, then either get closer for an easier time with aiming or just move elsewhere and make a different move. You don't always have to use the skill. Why waste VP when you know it's not gunna do anything? Also, you're using Assassin and the Archer line for Bleed alternatives? Assassin only targets one unit. That and most people, if they could, prefer to use Assassin's skill on an already Bleeding target for bonus damage. As for Archers, yes, they can apply Bleeds. However, if that is the case, they'd be forced to wield weapons that provide AoE coverage like the Fugitive Bow, which has really bad damage scaling and you'd just waste away the Archer's damage potential. Not to mention your Archer has to CRIT in order to Apply the Bleed. Harpooner on the other hand, has the Bleed built in, and can apply to multiple targets without needing to sacrifice another skill for it. Best of all, it's guaranteed, ya don't need to Crit or meet any other requirements. I am kinda surprised that Pikeman can apply Destabilization though cos last time I checked, Destabilization can only be applied if you hit targets with a Ranged skill. Despite the fact that Spears can hit from a distance, it is still considered a Melee weapon so it shouldn't really hit that category. Is this cos of Spear Wall?

For Herald, I didn't rank it high enough cos Fury lasts only for 1 turn. That and most of the prominent Nukers have ways to generate Fury themselves or have something betr. You'd rather have the Warrior line provide Battle Cry cos they last longer. If you're going to complement it WITH Battle Cry for even more face melting, then sure, go for it, Herald is never bad to have if ya can fit it in your team. Also, for the Sentinel argument, WE HAVE A HORSE! That thing provides Inspiration and that covers a pretty large area. Most importantly, IT'S FREE! It doesn't cost 300 Gold for an upgrade, nor does it cost 2 VP for Inspiration. Inspiration from Sentinel is great only in the late game AND only if your team is large numerically. You wanna waste 2 VP on a team with 8 or less members for combat? Be my guest.

As for Cutthroat, they do have a weakness, it's called Eyes on the Back of the Head. Not a common sight, but it is there. As for the actual Poisoner vs Cutthroat discussion, use em according to party composition. I used both and I found Poisoner more relevant than the Cutthroat AND I found the Poisoner far more user friendly compared to the Cutthroat. I suggest you read some of the posts commented on here cos I already discussed why I consider Cutthroat to be on the lower end. Also, even if Poisoners do have a permanent counter to them, they can still be relevant if you have a dedicated Swordsman Nuker on your team cos chances are, they have Hardcore Training on and that means you can spam Poison on them to activate Rage Stacks. Finally, we have Outposts. You don't wanna use the guy or the upcoming fights have Poison proofing? Put em in there.

As for the Strategist talk, you covered the general knowledge part and you can check comments for the other details. Strategist is probably the biggest mixed bag for everyone so far.

I put Protector on the bottom cos he contributes the least in terms of frequency. Fighter, attacking and defending is natural for him. Duellist? Shuts down nearly anything in single combat WITHOUT needing to switch hit. Swordmaster? A Beast Slayer. Creepers, Ghost Packs, Wild Packs, etc are mincemeat. Protector? Is just a Tank. That's 1 job, and it ain't contributing much to killing stuff. Protector is at the bottom not cos he is OUTCLASSED, it's cos he doesn't contribute as much to the areas necessary. I do remember saying on the posts that I'm not ranking them to say one is betr over the other, I ranked em all according to their performance consistency, relevance and contribution frequency. That's why some of the rankings are abit more deviant compared to others.

If anything, I like Protector. I just don't use a Protector for common fights since it ain't relevant in those parts. You'd not use a Protector in random, everyday bounties, it's a waste of time. You wanna use Protector when you REALLY need a major tank, like when a Fighter AND even a Destroyer can't do the job or has to be elsewhere but are forced to tank. Like the Creeper King for instance. Heck, the moment I saw the Creeper King for the first time, the first thing that came to my mind was "I'm actually gunna need a Protector for this thing". Protector is like, the Ultimate Tank without equal. But unlike the other more popular tanks Like the Fighter, Destroyer, Brawler, heck even a Sentinel, it doesn't contribute to killing stuff directly in any way. Only time you'd actually need a Protector is if you're going to fight a major boss that gives trouble in a lot of areas, in which, all of those are rare occurrences. As of the moment, Protector will only be relevant in the highest possible difficulty and even then, it's only going to be of major use for Boss fights and maybe high level bounty mobs. If you're going to use it still for any difficulty and in any setting, then the Protector will only be of relevant use in the Arena where it has to distract key units and the Boss in the last stage.

[76561188078797539]

İlk olarak Solstius tarafından gönderildi:

Regarding the Poisoner, use em for specifics rather than all purpose. Hard counters mean, you don't need them for that type of fight or you should just allocate them for other tasks.

Honestly, your logic eludes me.

You rate Strategist, which can be utilized in every fight, lower than specs with skills that either require a more demanding setup to use, or get hard-countered by several enemies. Despite the fact that the potential damage output as the result of those skills is comparable. Assassin might have higher damage potential, but it's all single-target. Poisoner requires keeping enemies alive for it to proc, unless you're running some proc-on-poison two-hander-heavy team, I suppose. Which still requires enemies to set up clustered close enough to justify the use, because poison vial has much lower AoE radius than smoke bomb, and so do your two-hander swings.

Meanwhile Strategist allows not just damage, but VP generation along with boon and debuff application (and, at least on Expert, that alone would justify using it), on top of full control of the engagement, no matter what actions your enemies take. As long as you have action queue enabled to reliably counter enemies before their move, anyway.

Strategist is not situational if used properly, even without skill upgrade (knockback radius increase is mostly useless without specialized Spearwall or Barrage trolo). Poisoner and Assassins both are, and Assassin needs their skill upgraded for best performance (Poisoner's upgrade viability depends on party comp). Yet your logic apparently ignores those two while defending low-rank for the best, overall, performing skill because the most generalist use skill is apparently "situational." While admitting you've been using Strategist as a panic button, not a core part of your tactical rotation. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Strategist:
-Long application range (throw+AoE radius)
-Large AoE of skill effect
-Multi-target
-Does not require specific abilities/weapon types for synergies
-About as multi-purpose skill as you can find in Wartales
-Does not require pre-use setup (again, large AoE radius)

Assassin:
-9 meters range
-Single-target
-Requires skill upgrade
-Requires pre-use setup
-Requires class unlock

Poisoner
-Small AoE radius (multi-target IF you forced enemies to cluster)
-Requires closer approach than either above
-Requires forcing enemies for positional pre-setup to be effective
-Imposes tactical limitations with "friendly fire" potential
-Poison requires enemies to act to do damage on its own
-Requires specific party comp and weapon types to exploit

This without even going into skill/passive counters that enemies can have.

There's no consistency behind your reasoning, but I guess that's my cue to drop this exchange.

[zaphod]

İlk olarak Sheepify tarafından gönderildi:

...
Strategist:
-Long application range (throw+AoE radius)
-Large AoE of skill effect
-Multi-target
-Does not require specific abilities/weapon types for synergies
-About as multi-purpose skill as you can find in Wartales
-Does not require pre-use setup (again, large AoE radius)

Assassin:
-9 meters range
-Single-target
-Requires skill upgrade
-Requires pre-use setup
-Requires class unlock

Poisoner
-Small AoE radius (multi-target IF you forced enemies to cluster)
-Requires closer approach than either above
-Requires forcing enemies for positional pre-setup to be effective
-Imposes tactical limitations with "friendly fire" potential
-Poison requires enemies to act to do damage on its own
-Requires specific party comp and weapon types to exploit
...

just for me to understand better.
difference between a strategist and another class is that strategist only has advantages and the others only disadvantages?

[76561188078797539]

İlk olarak zaphod tarafından gönderildi:

just for me to understand better.
difference between a strategist and another class is that strategist only has advantages and the others only disadvantages?

Nah, though I'm not sure what you'd call a disadvantage for Strategist, since it relies on something that will happen anyway for its skill's functionality.

Ranger as a class in general is "support damage." It's base attack is a finisher. Crafted weapon chain relies on backstab. That's its design niche. You can mess around with different approaches, but most likely they'll be inferior to the role it's meant to fill. It's literally there to finish off enemies engaged by other classes. Smoke bomb is just complementary to what it should be doing most of the time, by design.

Assassin has superior single-target damage spike that does not require backstab. Though probably not as useful on lower difficulty settings to start with, and even on Experienced you should be fine with general backstab as a finisher instead. It does require setup to pull off, though, so becomes more reliable the higher your general party level (and is locked out of lower level play anyway). Higher party level (and game progression) also gives you drop-only gear for other companions that can synergize.

Poisoner is excellent when you can set up properly, and with companion synergies, but much more difficult to play to the fullest. Doesn't help that it can damage friendlies, so until you have Hardcore Training up (level 8), it's going to be really fiddly to play around. Requires specific drops for decent synergies with other classes, as well. Personally, I don't like the fact that you need to have enemies survive taking action (and presumably dishing out damage) for its primary DoT to kick in. It's more applicable to Extreme difficulty, but even there you should be actively controlling the fight to limit friendly exposure to any damage. Which means doing unto them, with extreme prejudice, before they can do unto you, for the most part.

Unless you go full AI-abuse kite, and spend several times as long on fights as really needed, I suppose.

Cutthroat is just too expensive to use most of the time, and will generally be overkill with competent play anyway. At least in my experience.

If you're making a "general ranking" list, though, your highest spot should be a choice of a skill that is near always, if not always, useful and possible to utilize, and carries from start to finish, not just starts to get better than others after level 12 with specialist gear.

So... yeah. As far as I'm concerned there's no competition to Strategist in this kind of "general effectiveness" list. Doesn't mean you can't get better results with specialist parties, but that's not what this list is about, right?

I'm not saying I know everything there is about every single party comp and all the possible build synergies, but I have yet to see factual validation of why either Assassin or Poisoner would rate higher as "generally better" than a class that has limited setup requirements, is not locked behind level abilities or zone access, and can still pull damage spikes with the best of them even from the basic enemy placement the game uses.

Just because it doesn't throw up big pretty numbers on its own doesn't mean it's not causing them by proxy, and again - that's completely ignoring the tactical utility of it.

But, ultimately, that's just, like, my opinion, man. And I probably should stop spending so much time putting it in writing at this point. Just wanted to provide you with my reasoning to pick apart :)

[Reipard]

Executioner is one of my favourites also, it's very costly but the satisfaction from upgraded challenging shout to cutting maelstrom is just immense especially since the seasoned troops tend to be clustered in a lot of random fights. Add in the +150% damage on first attack and you can easily clear a nice batch of even tanky troops at once.

[Iron Horse]

Halberdier can be found in Arthes from the priest in the main city after completing the arena.

[Solstius]

İlk olarak Sheepify tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Solstius tarafından gönderildi:

Regarding the Poisoner, use em for specifics rather than all purpose. Hard counters mean, you don't need them for that type of fight or you should just allocate them for other tasks.

Honestly, your logic eludes me.

You rate Strategist, which can be utilized in every fight, lower than specs with skills that either require a more demanding setup to use, or get hard-countered by several enemies. Despite the fact that the potential damage output as the result of those skills is comparable. Assassin might have higher damage potential, but it's all single-target. Poisoner requires keeping enemies alive for it to proc, unless you're running some proc-on-poison two-hander-heavy team, I suppose. Which still requires enemies to set up clustered close enough to justify the use, because poison vial has much lower AoE radius than smoke bomb, and so do your two-hander swings.

Meanwhile Strategist allows not just damage, but VP generation along with boon and debuff application (and, at least on Expert, that alone would justify using it), on top of full control of the engagement, no matter what actions your enemies take. As long as you have action queue enabled to reliably counter enemies before their move, anyway.

Strategist is not situational if used properly, even without skill upgrade (knockback radius increase is mostly useless without specialized Spearwall or Barrage trolo). Poisoner and Assassins both are, and Assassin needs their skill upgraded for best performance (Poisoner's upgrade viability depends on party comp). Yet your logic apparently ignores those two while defending low-rank for the best, overall, performing skill because the most generalist use skill is apparently "situational." While admitting you've been using Strategist as a panic button, not a core part of your tactical rotation. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Strategist:
-Long application range (throw+AoE radius)
-Large AoE of skill effect
-Multi-target
-Does not require specific abilities/weapon types for synergies
-About as multi-purpose skill as you can find in Wartales
-Does not require pre-use setup (again, large AoE radius)

Assassin:
-9 meters range
-Single-target
-Requires skill upgrade
-Requires pre-use setup
-Requires class unlock

Poisoner
-Small AoE radius (multi-target IF you forced enemies to cluster)
-Requires closer approach than either above
-Requires forcing enemies for positional pre-setup to be effective
-Imposes tactical limitations with "friendly fire" potential
-Poison requires enemies to act to do damage on its own
-Requires specific party comp and weapon types to exploit

This without even going into skill/passive counters that enemies can have.

There's no consistency behind your reasoning, but I guess that's my cue to drop this exchange.

It doesn't look like consistency is behind my reasoning cos I've got multiple reasoning behind each that are still in my head. Essentially, I'm not thinking with a 1 track mind. Before I made this post, I dropped the use of Strategist from my party a week ago. It was at around that time, that I found the Strategist not as necessary for me anymore. The Strategist's overall contribution to my team went from, very relevant to, just needed when I make an unexpected error or my calculations/gambles don't work out. Like for example, I've sent a Nuker in to finish a target up but the Crit Chance is like 50%. I expect it to do the job but none of the attacks land a crit, so I got no choice but to use the Strategist for clean up, deal an Ambush attack and then use Smoke Screen to pop up an AoO for cleaning. Use Fury to wrap it up if it STILL wasn't enough somehow. As I progressed deeper in the game with the team though, my Nukers eventually just scaled to the point that the Strategist began to become less relevant. Only reason to why I've had the Strategist up to that point still was cos he is my Captain. I eventually changed the guy to an Assassin cos I wanted him to be more active. If I had made this post over a week ago, I'd have placed Strategist at 2 instead of 3. I'm fond of the Strategist enough to the point that I'd use one right away if I believe I'd need him again, but in all honesty, right now, I don't see it contributing to battles as frequently as it used to.

[zaphod]

İlk olarak Sheepify tarafından gönderildi:

...
But, ultimately, that's just, like, my opinion, man. And I probably should stop spending so much time putting it in writing at this point. Just wanted to provide you with my reasoning to pick apart :)

My post was only a reaction to your final summary, which was quite "strange" for me. You listed only positive features for one class and only negative features for the other two.

Overall, this comparison (the whole "tier list") seems quite useless and misleading to me. For each of the classes, it is crucial how big a group you play with and what your playstyle is (or what you just like).

[Solstius]

İlk olarak zaphod tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Sheepify tarafından gönderildi:

...
But, ultimately, that's just, like, my opinion, man. And I probably should stop spending so much time putting it in writing at this point. Just wanted to provide you with my reasoning to pick apart :)

My post was only a reaction to your final summary, which was quite "strange" for me. You listed only positive features for one class and only negative features for the other two.

Overall, this comparison (the whole "tier list") seems quite useless and misleading to me. For each of the classes, it is crucial how big a group you play with and what your playstyle is (or what you just like).

I didn't list as much save for summaries cos if I went into minute details of everything, the post would be too long. That and discussions as a whole would either grind to a halt or won't be interesting. It's good to have discussions man.

[=]

İlk olarak Reipard tarafından gönderildi:

Executioner is one of my favourites also, it's very costly but the satisfaction from upgraded challenging shout to cutting maelstrom is just immense especially since the seasoned troops tend to be clustered in a lot of random fights. Add in the +150% damage on first attack and you can easily clear a nice batch of even tanky troops at once.

You can increase the damage by another 20% by using the Spangenhelm (?) that can be bought from wandering merchants in Tiltren. Executioner is probably the best DPS class in the game IMO, it is very situational in that it does require some careful positioning (and a helpful enemy set up) but it can consistently obliterate 4 higher level human enemies on it's first turn if you can get them all in range of challenging shout.

[76561188078797539]

İlk olarak Solstius tarafından gönderildi:

It doesn't look like consistency is behind my reasoning cos I've got multiple reasoning behind each that are still in my head.

Reads like a massive dodge to provide any explanation as to why other skills are better. Doesn't help that you constantly keep reinforcing that you're not actually using Smoke Bomb for consistent damage output as part of your tactical rotation.

You can get, reliably, more damage from it than any other skill, with lower investment. Assuming you use it for that purpose in the first place.

İlk olarak Solstius tarafından gönderildi:

Essentially, I'm not thinking with a 1 track mind.

You are. Somehow you don't see how it's core skill for tactical rotation that maintains higher VP generation, buff/debuff upkeep, AND contributes heavily toward steady damage output. In a single VP package. This makes it top-tier skill from the entire list of skills in Wartales, not just Ranger choices.

İlk olarak Solstius tarafından gönderildi:

Before I made this post, I dropped the use of Strategist from my party a week ago. It was at around that time, that I found the Strategist not as necessary for me anymore.

You literally wrote a few back that you only used them as a "whoops, I done mess up" crutch, so color me skeptical to this claim. Not to mention your dismissal of its general utility outside of immediate damage.

İlk olarak Solstius tarafından gönderildi:

Like for example, I've sent a Nuker in to finish a target up but the Crit Chance is like 50%. I expect it to do the job but none of the attacks land a crit, so I got no choice but to use the Strategist for clean up

Like I wrote before, we're playing differently, because to me "50% chance" is "yeah, I'm going to assume I get the worse result and plan around it, and if not, happy bonus."

I don't "expect" 50% to be anything more than pure random chance it is.

İlk olarak Solstius tarafından gönderildi:

I'm fond of the Strategist enough to the point that I'd use one right away if I believe I'd need him again, but in all honesty, right now, I don't see it contributing to battles as frequently as it used to.

"I'm not using the skill to it's full potential, therefore it's worse than others I do..."

İlk olarak zaphod tarafından gönderildi:

My post was only a reaction to your final summary, which was quite "strange" for me. You listed only positive features for one class and only negative features for the other two.

That's because they are far more of liabilities than Smoke Bomb. You need setups for either, you probably need better gear than you'll have through at least a third of the game (without drop-grinding), both limit your tactical control, and require far more planning from the player to pull off.

So... yeah, they do come with far more disadvantages than Smoke Bomb as far as I'm concerned, and less reliable general utility.

Which is why my "WTF BBQ" reaction to seeing Strategist as no3. on "general use" list, because that's THE best generalist ranger spec pick.

İlk olarak zaphod tarafından gönderildi:

Overall, this comparison (the whole "tier list") seems quite useless and misleading to me. For each of the classes, it is crucial how big a group you play with and what your playstyle is (or what you just like).

And it matters a LOT whether you play scaled or level-locked. Extreme Scaled will make your Assassin sweat at lot. Poisoner will get "better" in utility, but the disadvantage of much smaller AoE and damage-all effect of it is still there, messing with your tactical flexibility.

Smoke Bomb might not be necessary on Easy, but anything higher (and especially with enemy scaling) it has the capacity to be part of any standard tactical rotation, and performs reliably from level 1 to end game with no additional requirements in terms of synergy companion builds or specialist gear for the Ranger. If that's not "best" in terms of general use ranking, we're talking different languages, just using same-sounding words.

Aaaanyway... :)

[zaphod]

İlk olarak Sheepify tarafından gönderildi:

And it matters a LOT whether you play scaled or level-locked. Extreme Scaled will make your Assassin sweat at lot. Poisoner will get "better" in utility, but the disadvantage of much smaller AoE and damage-all effect of it is still there, messing with your tactical flexibility.

Smoke Bomb might not be necessary on Easy, but anything higher (and especially with enemy scaling) it has the capacity to be part of any standard tactical rotation, and performs reliably from level 1 to end game with no additional requirements in terms of synergy companion builds or specialist gear for the Ranger. If that's not "best" in terms of general use ranking, we're talking different languages, just using same-sounding words.

Aaaanyway... :)

I uploaded how much the assasin sweats here (expert difficulty) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HI8_lC8RRY ... after the second corpse, of course, he can run anywhere (this way he only blocks the archer for a moment at the cost of about 10 damage).
...without any synergy with anyone, with a lvl.2 helmet, an average outfit and an average computer player, he eliminates half of the opponent's team.
If he had a throwing axe in his off hand (which I don't have yet), he will take out the third one as well and run anywhere out of range, while still being able to end the fight with the same VPs as at the beginning.
This is my typical fight from about lvl 5 (that is, roughly from the level when you get the assassin). At lower level it has no crit. hit and kills usually only one (+ shooter block), but again there were fewer enemies here.
Right now, I'm absolutely certain I'm sweating more than he is.

But the point of my previous post was not whether something is better than something else (because even if I don't have the place of smoke grenade, someone else might like it). I was just asking why when comparing one you only give positives and the other only negatives.