Simple but not that simple as you are ignoring crit and hit chance. Rangers have slightly higher crit damage with BeO (assuming they can see a lot of enemies) but lower crit chance (a good crit sniper can easily get to 100% and probably that won't change in 1.3). Hit chance is also a big factor on your average damage unless you are save scumming to get every shot to connect (i'm not suggesting you actually do it, just stating facts). If you have 65% chance to hit that enemy in high cover, your 7-12 damage becomes 5-8 average damage on many shots. Once again snipers can often get to 100% against targets in high cover.Veneficus wrote: That is simple math.
Rangers might have higher raw damage against exposed targets but snipers' accuracy can't be overlooked and if that tree makes it in 1.3, the addition of lone wolf is another +10 aim for most snipers if you take it.
I don't think everything is fine with Snipers but i think it's not as bad as you seem to consider. Their efficiency depends a lot on how you play and this something that probably won't change. Some classes or builds will always be inferior for some players, but the same builds will be great for other players because different tactical approaches are possible. That's actually not a bad thing.
Also, Sharpshooter's tree is not final so far and we'll have to actually test them to know whether they are good, bad, or somewhere between and whether they need more tweaks to be on par with other classes.
I also don't want to be pedantic about Sniper or Sharpshooter terms but i was pointing out that the Sharpshooter class is larger than just pure sniper, the holobot shouldn't be considered a sniper in the "sniper on a roof" sense but more like a scout who happens to have a long range rifle in case he needs to provide some support while staying safe.
I have first hand knowledge about how easy it is to make a post that looks aggressive when it's not what you wanted Sometimes even something you meant as an innocent joke will look like a real insult to someone reading it.Sorry, it didn't seem like that to me at all.
Turning XCom2 into a scripted game is certainly not what they are trying to do based on what they did with LW1 (they actually added a lot of replayability to the much more scripted XCom EW). I'm convinced they just need more time and balance passes to "get it right"I would point out, if you make something that only appeals to a narrow audience, which turns a game based on replayability into a scripted game where in order to play you have to dive through code to see how things work, or take away more and more choices, future endeavors are not likely going to be successful.
Appealing to a narrow audience is a totally different story. When you are working in the gaming industry, you can try to make a game that pleases the widest possible audience like big companies and end up with games that others will consider "dumbed down", uninteresting or simply will all look similar. The other option that many "indie" developers prefer is to design a game that will fit a smaller niche, but at least will have success within that niche as it won't compete with "AA" titles. It's not necessarily a bad think for Pavonis to have a precise and unforgiving view of their game even if it turns away some players.
For the "dive through code" part. Well, they only have so much hours per day to work on LW2. The hours they spend on documentation are hours they don't spend on fixing bugs and improving balance. Sooner or later UFOpedia will have an almost complete documentation and we won't have to dive into the code.
And i was just pointing out what was happening when you make a post that doesn't really explain what your concerns are and looks like a direct attack on the developers of a game in a forum full of fans of that gameI was just pointing out what was happening with the decisions being made from an outsiders perspective, from somebody who doesn't spend hours combing through ini files learning how mechanics work to play. If the response to that is "if you don't like it, go home" that's cool. I am not going to fight about it. But I am also not going to be particularly inclined to revisit anything eventually for sale either and companies don't stay open by alienating people with "my way or get lost", just ask United Airlines.
My turn for being sorry about a rude sentence. I won't pretend i didn't meant to say that, it was really my first reaction when i saw your post. I thought that if you disliked the game and the developers so much you should just move along. Then i realized you probably had real concerns and that's why i made a longer and (hopefully) more constructive answer but without removing that part.
On a bad day i would probably have stopped at the first sentence and that wouldn't have helped the discussion at all
Finally, don't take this wrong, but please try to use the preview function when posting with multiple quotes. Your post is a mess of badly placed quotes that make it hard to read or even know who posted what.
I also learned to always use the preview function the hard way