安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
4 
举报此帖
You are objectively better off keeping Reynauld and Dismas with you, evidenced by taking one look at what they are, what they start with (compared to what you could get otherwise), how the game works, and what it expects at that time.
They are strong heroes with strong quirks and strong synergy, one of whom's best zone is the one you'll be spamming for the foreseeable future to progress the game. They have absolutely everything you could want from a 4-man (using half the slots), with both being in their element and having a leg-up on resolve - at a time when your barracks are empty and crying out for filler and levels, particularly flex picks (eg. healing, soothing, mobility, etc).
To say nothing of the "5-Week Rule", where the inverted early-game curve is eased by having fully upgraded level 2's for Apprentice, thus throwing away 1-2 synergistic characters with 1-2 dungeons worth of XP and good quirks is not ideal.
The only issue is Reynauld (optionally) needing a week at the Sanitarium to remove Klepto, which (at worst) normalizes him with the follow-up recruits (with the PD/VES having at least one week to catch up with him). Sure, you can also throw them away and win no biggie, but there is no practical reason to do so.
If people simply prefer other classes, that is perfectly fine. You can disband every single hero and win with nothing but a barracks full of Antiquarians if you truly want to, but for those who care for it, the optimal route is to keep the starting heroes. That's just how it is.
Conversely, I always get really good quirks on Dismas and it always pains me to fire him. Only in one game did I keep him on as a lvl 2 mascot of sorts while everyone else was legend.
I actually really like Dismas, but Highwaymen don't gel very well in my teams. The skillset, stylistically and mechanically really isn't my thing.
to be precise, maybe the word is "'strategically' better off" because you're discussing tactics of survivability.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means...
Where, precisely?
https://steamcommunity.com/app/262060/discussions/0/583876246978456877/#c583876246978478142
https://steamcommunity.com/app/262060/discussions/0/583876246978456877/#c583876375391255896
https://steamcommunity.com/app/262060/discussions/0/583876246978456877/?ctp=2#c583876375391279173
---
I'm objectively discussing plain and simple efficiency and how the game works. Survivability has never been a focal point of any of those posts, falling under the umbrella by sheer osmosis (ie. a good start makes life easier, shock horror).
Keeping Reynauld and Dismas means two gap-covering flex-picks with good quirks, good synergies, and a headstart on resolve - in a game where that is the main source of RNG squash for the entire Apprentice tier until you start farming trinkets. Reynauld has two useful bonuses for the zone you have no choice but to spam for X amount of weeks, and said duo (and the PD/VES that follow) are highly flexible additions to what starts as a nigh-empty barracks in desperate need of compositional filler, with all four forming one of the best overall generalist squads in the game.
Given how everything works, there's no practical reason to dismiss Reynauld and Dismas at all during the early game, other than merely wanting to, and while you can win just fine doing that, it is more advantageous to keep them around than it is to discard them or let them die (which equates to avoiding one paltry trip to the Sanitarium and whatever subjective preferences that player might have).
It is what it is.
I get that you're really hammering home the point that Rey and Dis with their skill set are strategically and tactically great starting characters, and that dismissing them is a mistake.
all communique is perspectival. i don't see how you can step beyond or outside your own self to make an "objective" point. The terms 'Objectivity' or 'objectively' are all misnomers and misused in general language usage.
to hide behind "objectivity" seems disingenuous to me, and is use of the term as a crutch for your argument is called an "appeal to objective fallacy.'
Anyway, i still don;t think the Crusader is a cool class. But to each their own.
Gotta give you a big old NOPE on all of this except the opinion that you don't think the crusader is a cool class. You are welcome to your opinion about that. The rest of this makes no sense. You're tossing around big words, misusing them, and not really saying anything...
It sure is. I love that we can look at someone's post history.
Well, that's pretty much the kind of response I expected from you especially after reading through some of your post history.
I will say it again - your last post isn't really saying anything at all, all you've done is toss around a few "fancy" words. I challenge you to prove otherwise.
Don't see this discussion becoming productive if you keep harping on your lack of understanding and blaming me for it, buddy.
What you have seen before is irrelevant.
This part of your post seems to suggest that someone posted an ant-education, anti-intellectual post in this thread but that hasn't happened. Interesting that you think it did.
No one was "stymied by vocabulary" here... except maybe you because you're trying a bit too hard. The problem with what you attempted to say has been explained to you and you were challenged to prove you actually said something in that paragraph. You have failed to do so and resorted to attacking and deflecting instead which, honesty, was not a surprise at all.
LOL. You think that's what I said? Talk about a lack of understanding, buddy. I'm using plain language and you still got it wrong.