Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
idk man. I've got gold in both now and I play about both equally. My experience is reaper is way easier
Bruh, you're in gold - most likely you didn't have to optimize builds yet.
Even if reaper is easier to get going, one can't judge balane until they mostly optimized both.
On top of that, ranger's item spread solves a much wider variety of problems, having both strong offensive and defensive subclass choices, and having base luck crit scaling makes the class a much bigger comeback threat - you can absolutely win rounds you should've lost on a crit. Obviously, this shouldn't be your goal - but given that every loss matters, any way to hedge your bets should be considered relevant.
Reaper does have some cool openers via early hammer into stacking daggers to flex into mana or leech, but you can say the same about ranger - guaranteed access to wooden sword lets you scale into weapon damage via hero sword very consistently, and gives them a much better chance at getting to crossblades if you're going that route.
I think there's a much stronger argument for ranger than people imagine. They're both very good.
All of this is ignoring items and builds - you can build pretty much anything on either class. In fact, I think endgame ranger has a substantial advantage.
In the midgame, I'd say they are about equal (it's honestly hard to say, since there are so many options that are strong in their own ways), and by lategame I suspect ranger is a little bit stronger on average. But dying with 9 wins is a lot better than dying with 3 wins, and at least your final build isn't up to a couple RNG rolls, so you have real agency in maximizing your chances.
All that being said, I feel overall the balance isn't that bad. For an early demo, it's better than many released games I've played over the years. You can play either class and have plenty of viable build options. Expecting the devs to spend their time carefully perfecting the balance when half the damn classes aren't even in the game is just silly (since, y'know, it'll all go out the window when they are released...)
Not all mecanics/items are in the game
Not all classes are in the game
Right now it's Ranger vs Reaper and just the starting bag reaper has an advantage from the get go no matter what you play you'll trigger the bag unlike ranger that requires Luck/weapon
nah, id rather say reaper is easier to get through the earlygame, but the endgame cap is lower. im pretty certain that the most 17 + 18 wins boards are rangers cuz the crit cap with sapphires setup is so strong. but reaper just gets more consistendly to 13-15 wins because his earlygame is stronger and he gets to roll more gold sacrificing 2-3 lifes at turn 6-8 for a working mid-lategame board whilst most rangers hit round 6-8 with 3 or less lifes
I guess ranger's early game or class bag should be buffed, or reaper's coffin should be nerfed...