Defensive or Offensive

[-Edge-]

Which side do you view as more elite? Feel free to bring up reasons why.

[magnet]

It's not as easy to decide, so for the benefit of all I made a honour/lameness ranking.

Most honorable classes: Mages and Warriors.

Warlocks are very weak to damage and die at their first mistake. They require a lot of experience to be played correctly.
Barbarians even more so.

Conjurers are very hard to play and can be frustrating but they make the world turn.
Knights help the group big time and yet they have few rewards.


Lamest class: Archer.

It is truly difficult to decide which sub-class is the lamest here.

We have to choose between Hunters who use lame tactics, always run, but on the other side can't do much otherwise because their damage is shit.

Marksmen on the other hand have powerful attacks, awesome defense... They are lame because they have too much of everything, and playing an overpowered class is obviously lame. Some are known as Barbarians with Range, others are Knights with Range (see Kritheo who tanks at Herb and even use "walking" mode to show how secure he feels tanking with his Marks, with 3 Knights hacking furiously his flesh).

Thus the question: Which is the lamest subclass, Marksman or Hunter? Many philosophers have debated on this matter for years without reaching a definitive answer.


Obviously, considering those facts, we can conclude that Syrtis is the lamest realm, with so many archers, and that Ignis and Alsius still are somewhat honorable (even if lately Ignis has gotten too many archers, a sign of impending doom ).

PS: for those who don't read second degree:

[misaccc]

Man....can i say both?

[ByteMe]

I voted offense with the exception of the conju who IMO is the most valuable player on the field!

[Pizdzius]

Conju conju conju

[amade]

Support ftw.

[makarios68]

Neither is "better" - both are neccessary...

[NightTwix]

Originally Posted by makarios68

Neither is "better" - both are neccessary...

very true

and most classes can be played both offensive and defensive. with mixed efficiency...




And marks arent ranged Barbs, at least i cant do normal non-critical hits of 1200dmg (only slightly above 1000 )

[ljrossi]

I vote for defensive, just imaging what should be a batle betwen these two teams.

A conju given life to the warrior and mana to the hunter should be suficent to defeat easy the barbarian or warlock,the marskman should be left for the end.unless he is on close distance(good marskman stay far)

If the conju remains safe (the good ones know how)

Anyways allways dependes on how lucky you are to put the first skills.

Regarsd

Julius

[Signatus]

Originally Posted by magnet

We have to choose between Hunters who use lame tactics, always run, but on the other side can't do much otherwise because their damage is shit.

Meh... That shouldn't be your opinion after 3 hunters rep shot 6 or 7 goat mages in front of menirah a week ago!

And "lame tactics"... nah, I can't believe I'm reading this, we are the defensive class with more diversity in its powers... conjus have one tree full of healings and another full of summons, knights have... wait, what do they have that works? You can have at least 2 known setups (with, without pet) or even sacrifice damage for tricks... etc, conjurers have "good" and "bad" conjurer (namely supportive and warjurer) and knights have... die slowly or even more slowly...

And we do not always run... sometimes we go camu

And when we run that's because it is a situation where everybody would run from... the difference is, hunters get away with it and the "poor" warlock had to kill 3 before being caught...

I voted defensive, even though knights are included...

But then again... all goes down to the player, whichever class is chosen.