I ask because I realized that in the "ultimate problem solver" build (CaP + Killer Instinct + Rapid Fire) really has enough crit already (30% from CaP, 40% flanking, natural shotgun crit + laser sight) and doesn't really need it, better to pick Extra Conditioning. So then what do people use it for? I suppose now that I think of it I did use it on my trenchgun build but with an Elite Stock to prepare beforehand, I'm not even sure it's necessary there.
Thoughts?
What do you all use Aggression for on the Assault tree?
Re: What do you all use Aggression for on the Assault tree?
The AOE heavy "raider" build doesn't take Close and Personal. The arc thrower heavy "stun gunner" build take Close and Personal or Killer Instinct. There are probably loads of other hybrid builds you could play with that don't really need those abilities.
For instance, a tanky assault that goes Lightning Reflexes, Trench Gun, Fortify (or Stun Gunner), Formidable, Hit and Run, Untouchable, Chain Lightning could be very tanky without worrying too much about absolute murder.
For instance, a tanky assault that goes Lightning Reflexes, Trench Gun, Fortify (or Stun Gunner), Formidable, Hit and Run, Untouchable, Chain Lightning could be very tanky without worrying too much about absolute murder.
Re: What do you all use Aggression for on the Assault tree?
I would actually question the use of Bring'em On before I question Aggression.
Since there are targets that cannot be flanked (robots, archons, zerkers), Aggression can help mitigate the massive loss of crit (40%). It's extremely relevant to push down the dodge of archons in particular. I have also sometimes noted that it is safer for me to shoot through a wall at a flankable target and maintain my own cover than get a "real" flank, so aggression could help in that circumstance get your crit up without flowing past 100%.
Bring'em On to me is almost always overkill. A plasma shotgun min damage is 10, with 8 crit damage. You're probably going to crit if you built for it, and 18 x 2 (rapid fire, or CE if you chose) = 36 damage is probably enough. I didn't even count killer instinct in there, which adds another 4 critical damage on each shot. I think it's reasonable to include talon rounds as well which is another +1/+2 damage. BoE doesn't make you get crits more reliably, it just makes your critical hits complete overkill. There might be some niche circumstances where BoE is good (note it no longer works with pistols so no more cheesiness there), but I don't see it at a real choice when Untouchable and CCS are available at that tier.
BoE to me exists to be an AWC perk with an explosives class than as a viable choice for an Assault. Note it is a viable choice for Rangers since their weapon doesn't do nearly as much damage so it's not overkill on them.
Since there are targets that cannot be flanked (robots, archons, zerkers), Aggression can help mitigate the massive loss of crit (40%). It's extremely relevant to push down the dodge of archons in particular. I have also sometimes noted that it is safer for me to shoot through a wall at a flankable target and maintain my own cover than get a "real" flank, so aggression could help in that circumstance get your crit up without flowing past 100%.
Bring'em On to me is almost always overkill. A plasma shotgun min damage is 10, with 8 crit damage. You're probably going to crit if you built for it, and 18 x 2 (rapid fire, or CE if you chose) = 36 damage is probably enough. I didn't even count killer instinct in there, which adds another 4 critical damage on each shot. I think it's reasonable to include talon rounds as well which is another +1/+2 damage. BoE doesn't make you get crits more reliably, it just makes your critical hits complete overkill. There might be some niche circumstances where BoE is good (note it no longer works with pistols so no more cheesiness there), but I don't see it at a real choice when Untouchable and CCS are available at that tier.
BoE to me exists to be an AWC perk with an explosives class than as a viable choice for an Assault. Note it is a viable choice for Rangers since their weapon doesn't do nearly as much damage so it's not overkill on them.
Re: What do you all use Aggression for on the Assault tree?
Good points all around, trihero. Didn't even consider unflankable enemies, so easy to forget about them when considering crit builds and hit 'n' run. I usually just pick BeO without thinking, and it might still come in handy if your weapon tech is a bit behind, but Untouchable and CCS are almost certainly better choices. And yeah BeO is still awesome on rangers.
I think I'll still pick Extra Conditioning over Aggression though. Unflankable enemies are best dealt with by rangers and perhaps sharpshooters anyway.
I think I'll still pick Extra Conditioning over Aggression though. Unflankable enemies are best dealt with by rangers and perhaps sharpshooters anyway.
Re: What do you all use Aggression for on the Assault tree?
I'm with you davibones, I also generally pick Extra Conditioning under the philosophy that the assault is at its best when it can R&G, and R&Ging more often is better than like 10-15% crit in normal situations from Aggression.
However, I have from time to time noticed that you really don't always need more than 1 R+G per mission, so extra conditioning isn't always actually doing you any good unless you literally need to hit that R+G cooldown 1 turn earlier to save the day. I still do go with it though in case it might save the day. But Aggression again does have its uses against unflankables, in which case the crit chance is highly relevant.
Perhaps one way to look at things is you could/should build a minimum of one ranger who is the most single target overkilly possible simply for the sake of avatar hunting, who on legend have a lot of hp/defenses just to make sure that your R+G + rapid fire murder it (before it annoys the crap out you flying around changing cover), and then the other rangers you can sort of adjust based on how much you notice they overkill or don't overkill things.
However, I have from time to time noticed that you really don't always need more than 1 R+G per mission, so extra conditioning isn't always actually doing you any good unless you literally need to hit that R+G cooldown 1 turn earlier to save the day. I still do go with it though in case it might save the day. But Aggression again does have its uses against unflankables, in which case the crit chance is highly relevant.
Perhaps one way to look at things is you could/should build a minimum of one ranger who is the most single target overkilly possible simply for the sake of avatar hunting, who on legend have a lot of hp/defenses just to make sure that your R+G + rapid fire murder it (before it annoys the crap out you flying around changing cover), and then the other rangers you can sort of adjust based on how much you notice they overkill or don't overkill things.
Re: What do you all use Aggression for on the Assault tree?
Are you talking about Assault (R+G) or Ranger here? Or perhaps both?trihero wrote:...you could/should build a minimum of one ranger who is the most single target overkilly possible simply for the sake of avatar hunting, who on legend have a lot of hp/defenses just to make sure that your R+G + rapid fire murder it (before it annoys the crap out you flying around changing cover), and then the other rangers you can sort of adjust based on how much you notice they overkill or don't overkill things.
And what would be the max single target build for each? Perhaps
Assault
Slug Shot - Close and Personal - Killer Instinct - Aggression - Rapid Fire - Bring 'Em On - Lethal
Ranger
Close and Personal - Locked On - Center Mass - Executioner - Bring 'Em On - Rapid Fire - Rupture
Re: What do you all use Aggression for on the Assault tree?
I grab it on whoever Assault goes with Trench Gun since now you're not picking Close and Personal.