Installa Steam
Accedi
|
Lingua
简体中文 (cinese semplificato)
繁體中文 (cinese tradizionale)
日本語 (giapponese)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandese)
Български (bulgaro)
Čeština (ceco)
Dansk (danese)
Deutsch (tedesco)
English (inglese)
Español - España (spagnolo - Spagna)
Español - Latinoamérica (spagnolo dell'America Latina)
Ελληνικά (greco)
Français (francese)
Indonesiano
Magyar (ungherese)
Nederlands (olandese)
Norsk (norvegese)
Polski (polacco)
Português (portoghese - Portogallo)
Português - Brasil (portoghese brasiliano)
Română (rumeno)
Русский (russo)
Suomi (finlandese)
Svenska (svedese)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraino)
Segnala un problema nella traduzione
Regole e linee guida per le discussioni
Segnala questo messaggio
A lot of the pro-Phantom arguments tend to cheerlead the virtues of Concealment while claiming swords don't do enough damage, apparently without realising that Phantom != Concealment and that Blademaster goes (some) of the way to making swords more viable. Worse, many of those arguments then go on to handwave away the need for Conceal, claiming that that Phantom is enough by itself and letting them pick Run'N'Gun without issue - when Run'N'Gun totally clashes with Phantom.
In my experience, particularly with the Hunter's Axe in the game, the extra chunk of damage and accuracy to blades pushes it into something that legitimately offers a decent backup option (plus a free shot in the case of the axe).
The main issue with Phantom is that it locks you into a dedicated scout. If that was your intention then it's a decent pick, but if you want more of an assassin then at best it's going to be deadweight in the majority of missions as not only does it not exempt you from the actual concealment rules in any way, but it also prevents your Ranger from contributing any damage - including Concealed Overwatch ambushes - when you Ranger is one of the top damage dealers in your squad. Furthermore, Conceal does virtually everything worthwhile that Phantom does without neutering your blade and forcing you to hold fire from the start of the mission.
There is some merit in going both Phantom and Conceal, in that you can start doing hit and fade assaults on retaliation missions, but I personally don't see that worth dedicating an entire soldier towards.
As for the rest of the blade-focused talents - honestly, they're up against *much* stronger perk choices. Implacable offers some amazing get out of jail free cards (combined with Untouchable it can be a game changer) while Rapid Fire is arguably the strongest non-Psi perk in the game. In comparison, Bladestorm needs very risky play to gain anything out of at all and Reaper is basically a weaker version of Serial.
You should have a stealth-oriented ranger and a melee-oriented ranger.
If you have to choose, go for stealth since it's always valuable. A Phantom ranger also starts all missions concealed, even retaliation and VIP escort.
and those skills are used to stay hidden, and scout for snipers (high rank or they'll miss) to fire at enemies who won't be able to fire back
do stealth units even get xp? they don't kill enemies, and once they are un-stealthed, then what? all stealth-related skills are useless
so yeah
you want to kill the enemy before they kill you, do high damage ASAP, so I usually go for blademaster except for the last skill
being able to hit a sectopod twice with a powerful weapon with decent critical hit chances? two of those are death incarnate
the thing about this game is that you only have two choices every level, and it's obvious which of the two skills is better every time
Which are the only two missions where you get that benefit aside from Avenger defence, and the only one that occurs regularly is the Retaliation.... which you can manage with Conceal.
Don't get me wrong, it's definitely an advantage, but not one where you get the benefit of all that often.
In some cases, not all... the Ranger probably has the most (Rapid Fire and Untouchable are pretty much mandatory). There's a few others elsewhere (Notably the SPARK's Repair/Bombard, the Specialist's Covering Fire/Threat Assessment and the Sharpshooter's Long Watch/Return Fire) but for the most part there's arguments for both.
There isn't a clear leader over the Conceal/Run'N'Gun choice, for example. Same with Shadowstrike/Shadowstep.
If you HAVE to break concealment, he's great at doing an almost guaranteed crit with an ambush attack.
Absolutely.... if. Being realistic, if you can reliably kill the first pod without breaking concealment then the mission is likely too easy to need a dedicated scout in the first place.
Generally speaking,by turn two I'll have all the map info needed to finish a mission with a stealth ranger equipped with movement bonus & scanners,which leaves the ranger free to throw a proximity mine on one (preferably two) pods near mission end to get some xp,which is no biggy if they're already colonels.
Staying stealthed at any particular time is optional,but starting stealthed is crucial for gaining a large amount of map intel quickly and having the option to re-stealth if the objective has a crowd gathered around it can really take the pressure off by letting a grenadier open walls and giving a sniper/s free reign on whatever the objective may be.
Don't be put off by the ranger not attacking,the whole concept of this approach is a passive-aggressive playstyle on the rangers behalf,the longer he stays in stealth the more potential damage the squad can do from a relatively safe distance without retaliation.
But again to apply what I said earlier about theoretical absolute solutions in situational scenarios onto the above tactic would make me very foolish to believe it's the only way to get things done.It's only one of many ways to skin a cat and I can appreciate new ways to skin cats.
EDIT: I suppose I'm just very old school in my playstyle.Map intel is very important for my squads success and on *most* occassions each squad member has a specific role to play,rarely doubling up on roles,breaking from their intended role garners less then effecient results for myself.
In some cases this may mean I actually have a stealth ranger AND blade ranger in the same squad and still have good results.
Im currently playing an endless campaign (no AVATAR project) and experimenting with squad composition is the main draw for me.397 hours in and I'm still messing around with the stock standard classes ... oh and the Necromancer class ... just because am fan of the Necro from Diablo. lol
=P
Am I reading that right? Is that what you really believe?
I should have added that depends on how your Ranger is built, and what stage the game is. +25 to aim and crit chance is nice to have early on, and there's plenty other options to handle overwatch. In that case, both skills are equally meh as opposed to equally good like the former comparison.
I still pick Step every time, though, but that's because I almost never build my Rangers as dedicated scouts - and they're more likely to be visible.
that 100% hit chance is awesome for getting down an important target as there is otherways to counter flanks if played carefully and planning ahead.
That's the spirit mate,give it a go ! =)
What's the worst that could go wrong eh ? Actually ...don't answer that.
It's just funny how I defended blade-oriented rangers when everyone was saying they were useless and now I'm defending stealth-oriented ones)
Thing is, I use my melee rangers with SMGs for more mobility. They pretty much only use their blade unless it's too risky.
"Blademaster do high damage ASAP"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4