Acc cross class is awesome
By F91
Acc cross class is awesome. If you had never tried it don't comment.
If you started your base as a warrior, I would not recommend going cross class. You lose too many potential beneficial buffs (gladius buff, assaulter buffs etc)
However, if you started as a Ranger, you don't lose any beneficial buffs when you cross to warrior, unless your plan was going to gunner -> striker.
Cloak is useless in PvP, unless your enemies are real dumb.
Trap deployment is a joke.
Self Destruct useless
able to open portals is good, but who is in Ether these days?
Phantom Shadow gets 1 good attack.
On the other hand when you cross to a warrior at level 30 and work to get your expert (I unlocked melee expert shortly after I cross at 30) and keep working to get both elites when you hit 40-41. You now have much more beneficial buffs that you can use as well as you can chain 6 skills total and if you want to you can actually do mT3-mT2-mT1-rT3-rT2-rT1-mT1-rT1... repeat.
You might lose out on some HPs, but you will have the most FP out of any Acc in game. I have close to 2.5K FP.
My skill PTs are like this, because you can now use cleanse as a ranger.
Melee: 72 basic, 70 expert, 62 Elite
Range: 72 basic, 72 expert, 67 Elite
So tell me how it is only disadvantage?????
Also ranger x-class to spec or warrior x-class to spec are not bad as well.
----------------------------------------
Reply by Hotarunix
the original question was about strikers. a cross-classed striker is worthless since all launcher-related skills are class-related. and a cross-class warrior will have worse def/atk speed/accuracy/attack/all of the above than a pure-class warrior. a cross-class spec will not be able to turret or use the class skills, so they'll be less useful than a pure class spec. acc rangers get shafted in the attack department: our attack spot is taken up by a mage, so the added % missed attacks from counter and the crits from bullseye (which shouldn't be happening anyways) will give them slightly more survivability and offensive ability than a pure-class ranger, but let's be honest: accretian rangers are support. we are more about usefulness to our race (scouting for CW, porting) than damage. we don't have the chance to receive beneficial buffs like the coran's aiming one or the bells' agility or HS or all the other ones. so in that case a cross-class ranger is less useful than a pure class ranger since you forfeight your strategic abilities in favor of being offensive and come up short stacked against the warriors.
and about the inclusion of the 3 more attack skills: ranger skills do less damage than melee skills and the only real usefulness of ranged skills as opposed to melee skills is that they can hit a moving target consecutively for slightly longer due to their range.
kinda long winded... oh well maybe I'll reorganize it later or change wording.
----------------------------------------
Reply by F91
A pure range may be support, but a ranger cross class can be support and damage. And a ranger xclass spec is super support and can deal damage at the same time.
Turret is useless in PvP.
Cloak is not even that useful in PvP but works well in PvE.
I know a few warrior who cross class to striker as well, as it benefit them more for leveling and PvPing.
The key to it all is your playstyle, what may work for someone doesn't necessarily means that it will work for you.
I know I am doing something right because I get called out by the other race constantly because of my potential dmg and crit lock in PvP.
|
