I always treated psi operative as a win more button, if you got to the point where you maxed out a psi operative, you've already won the game, so having a unit that's so extra powerful doesn't really do anything.
@@kadirali1456 interesting perspective, makes me see it as, it's an extra, optional unit, basically. And I think they're better used as Psi support, with Stasis, fortress, and the mental aura to remove all effects. For offense, they require more finesse, and even they, the grenadier's attacks are largely better.
I just finished my first play through and I have to agree. I was looking forward to playing with my two psi troops, and I got to use them exactly twice before the last mission came up.
I sometimes put reaper and sharpshooter together cuz if you scout the enemy with the reaper you can use the sharpshooter from across the map with squadsight to hit and they will need a turn or 2 to get to you and sometimes take the entire squad down
It might just come down to a difference of play style, but I would definitely place ranger in S and the reaper at least A. Both classes being able to remain concealed for longer is such a huge boon. The rangers, once upgraded, can dish out such huge amounts of damage with crits, and the mobility to reach the high priority targets and still get out unharmed. There have been multiple play throughs where my rangers have ended up with the majority of the kills by a wide margin, usually only really competing with sharpshooters. As for the reapers though, I agree with most everything you said, but I think I just value their contributions more. They definitely have low damage potential, outside of claymores and detonations, but lots of the time mine don’t even harm anything until every alien on the map has been located. Mine exist to run the whole length of the map as quick as possible and let me get as much information as I can so I’ll know if there is another pod of aliens right outside of detection range about to reinforce and make the fight more complicated. I’d still put reapers below rangers though because when reapers are good, they are great, but rangers are always great. Great video!
@@DigistructGrunt well said all around! But it does come to playstyle, as I'm more aggressive with templars than rangers. Also overlooked on my part is the killer skill for reaper, which allows it to stay in shadows as long as the target is killed. Pretty effective for finishing off targets and letting the squad focus on the more pressing threats.
I think it’s a little unfair to have the main knock on PSI ops to be that they come too late. Looking at abilities and skills they are certainly A or S tier. (Assuming maxed out). Dom & stasis immediately take an enemy out of a given fight. They get the ability to apply rupture to a hard target. Or you could give your hard hitter a free action. Another ranger shotgun blast.
It's also unfair to say the spark has low accuracy when they have almost the same accuracy as the sniper and Their gun gives aim climb where sniper does not. It's not impossible to guarantee hits againsts enemies in cover. It also seems unfair to rank the Templar based on Random bonus skills but not give any credit to the base classes who can all roll serial or DfA which allow them all to do the thing he said makes the sniper S teir. He also ranked the sniper with the darklance, but the katana also means the ranger can do what he said makes the Templar S tier, but better and with no luck involved.
The Specialist Field Medic is a force multiplier. I rarely go into a mission without one and would definitely rank it higher. The Specialist Hacker is super useful too, especially if you get the +20 hack stat bonus from hacking bonuses and the Skulljack for another +25 to hack. With that you have a guaranteed two turn stun against any robotic enemy and a very high chance to take control of one.
I just finished my first game, and I was looking forward to getting a psi troop in the field, using Domination on a Shield Bearer, and buffing my squad with an energy shield, but by the time she was ready the game was over.
The reason I like this game is that I find every class useful. It all depends on stage of game (early/mid/late) but even more on environment. Sharpshooter and Reaper are epic in open missions. Skirmisher and Templar much better in tunnels etc. The most difficult class imo is the Templar. Requires ton of ability points, Bladestorm as bonus and playing style.
I have modded my game so sparks gain access to the new skill tree. Other than that i think they are crucial in late game since they do not have will and do not need to rest.
@@andreasfiltenborg4952 without mods, you can easily play the game without the spark. With mods though, it can drastically change that. I use mechatronic warfare, which allows destroyed sparks to be rebuilt with all of their skills. That alone can create a strong incentive to focus on a spark squad over soldiers.
I treat Reaper as a premier scout. They have better stealth than the ranger, and they stay concealed. With the right abilities, they can still remain concealed after shooting. Makes them perfect for making sure that a second pod won't be walking into sight of my revealed soldiers.
Skirmisher should be higher imo. Those extra actions and retribution skills make mine a monster. Specialist are so invaluable as well with the aid protocol that can make rangers and templars dodge more attacks on the front lines. Shows how good this game is. So many different strategies to this game!
Hey bud, do you have a list of the mods you used in this video? I recognized the elite mutons but i've never seen that many in my games. Also 4 focus points on your templar?
@@tech9d i plan on making mod videos for all of the mods I use, but those you mention, it's "supreme focus" which adds the 4th bar (and more damage) as a skill you can pick as you level up, and "overwhelming enemy pods" doubles the amount of aliens deployed.
I had a squad of 6 psi ops maxed level. Mind control is ABSURD. How so? Nab an Andromedon, shield bearer, the Advent officer for the 15% bonus aim... Plus I can use them as meat shields for the aliens to target over my psi ops too, and since Andromodons have shred? Mecs or sectopods aren't safe.
The Sniper class's main weapon really isn't that good until you reach colonel rank, and the Sniper also takes LONGER to level up than all of the other classes. You can't move at shoot with a Sniper rifle, unless you can somehow still have two actions remaining after moving (such as with a bonus action or with a grappling hook move). When you reach colonel rank, you finally get access to serial, which is a very powerful skill... However, this skill still has very situational utility. So many missions have time limits, and require you to keep moving your entire squad forward, and the Sniper class tends to be really bad for these missions unless you invest in the pistol related skills. The pistol related skills are actually pretty good.
This is a bad list. For some reason, it only takes into account extremely favorable late game scenarios for Sniper and Templar, while ignoring the strong early and midgame scenarios for Skirmisher and Reaper. 1)There is no doubt that a Templar with Bladestorm (and Reaper, and Fortress) is amazing. But a Templar without Bladestorm is just straight up C tier. His damage just falls off a cliff and he's worse than a random Ranger, let alone a good Ranger, which can get Serial. Strategically, this is the weakest faction to start with, as its HQ bonus is the worst, its Resistance Order pool (on average) is also the worst, with 2-3 amazing A/S tier orders, but the downside is that the rest is just garbage, no in-between. His early game is also the weakest, as he doesn't start with parry, and he's the most difficult unit to use, because you can easily activate more pods if you just casually try to melee every enemy you see. 2)As another commenter pointed out, the difficulty of the game is frontloaded, and the Sniper is the weakest early game class. Worse damage output than the Ranger class, no utility like Specialist/Grenadier. And the problem is not just limited to the tactical layer. You will also have to pay A LOT to upgrade BOTH the Sniper rifle and the Pistol to Tier2. And none of this is mentioned (let alone considered) in the video. Focusing solely on the late game when you can mow down pod after pod with Serial/Death from Above can impress casuals, but not seasoned L/I players. 3)Speaking of economics, SPARK is bad not because it's bad or dies easily, but because it costs an obscene amount of resources to manufacture and upgrade. Otherwise it would be an fascinating option. 4)The only problem with Skirmisher is the weak lategame, with bad skills at Major/Colonel level, and a bizarre Plasma weapon upgrade (only +1 dmg, instead of +2) which is unlike every other primary ranged weapon. Otherwise, it's the most powerful early game unit. Grapple costs no Action Points and can easily mitigate the short range penalty. Justice oneshots Troopers reliably (especially if used with the elevation bonus), and doesn't even end the turn. 2 Attacks a turn and Grapple also make it the most damaging anti-Chosen soldier out of all 3 factions in the early game. Best HQ bonus, and arguably the best (although Reaper is a close 2nd) Resistance order pool make it top tier. It is also the only unit that can reliably SOLO the 1st mission on Legend. Even if you get mind control, it's not dangerous if you keep the others in a corner. 5)Unlike Templar and Skirmisher, a Reaper is never particularly weak at any point in the campaign. It can become weak in any given mission once you run out of consumables and concealment, but by that point you should have put in good work, and you've prevented yourself from fighting more than 1 pod at a time with Reaper's superior scouting. Late game? It is the class with the best single target damage, as its Banish skill with a weapon with Superior Repeater + Superior Magazine size can oneshot even Chosen and Rulers. 6)PSI OP does come late, but the utility is unrivaled. You don't even need to have extensive training or upgrade your PSI AMP. Even just having the humble Stasis skill alone makes his presence on the team noticeable.
The reason I focus on late game is because it's only at late game that all skills are unlocked, and you get the most out of every class. This is something I say in the video. You can disagree with the approach, but I would ask, what's the point of comparing classes in early game? That would mean ranger without bladestorm, grenadier without the increased explosive radius, specialist without healing. It's true that some classes might fair better early on, but given the rapid advance of skills and tech, it just seems irrelevant when you just want to rank the classes as a whole. But given your points, let's address them. 1) It's true that those special skills are randomized and not guaranteed, but even without bladestorm, I'd put Templar as a B at least. Its base attack is still stronger than the ranger, but the ability to either parry or quickly redeploy still makes a melee attack significantly safer to use than with a ranger. Also given that you can only use 3 resistance orders per faction, the ones provided by the Templars are actually very useful. One of them causes damage to any aliens that use psi attacks, which multiplies by the number of targets. So a codex using its storm attack on 3 targets will instantly die. A wounded priest or sectoid can also be finished off without needing to use an attack on them. Another order makes psi attacks only last one turn, meaning panicked troops will immediately come back as soon as the alien's turn is over. Very useful indeed. 2) I agree the sniper is initially weak, but again, what does that matter? As soon as tech and skills improve, it's an immediate table turner. If you want a ranking based on early game, maybe you should make that video yourself at this point. 3) Well again, once the cost is covered, we're talking tactical practicality here. And if you can see more potential there, make the argument, but like everything else, it comes down to playstyle. For me the spark ain't that great, at least in the base game. 4) The skirmisher is definitely useful, even in late game. But it does require more finesse, which is why I don't rank it so high. 5) Basically what I said. 6) Again, it just comes down to its fundamental necessity. If you made it that far in the game without ever having a Psi Operative, you can basically beat the game without ever using it. I think of it as an optional unit, as most of its skills I never tend to use, as other classes get the job done fine. I find them better as a psionic support unit, using their aura to cleanse mental attacks, or the stasis to save a unit from the next turn. Again, it's mostly playstyle.
@@TerryDuke >what's the point of comparing classes in early game? 1)There's a 2hr video called "Unnecessarily long class tier list" which has 3 separate early/mid/lategame class tier lists, I agree with 95% of it. For example, It accurately reflects how the Skirmisher falls off in the late game. It also suffers from the same drawback this one does: economy is not taken into account. >given the rapid advance of skills and tech 2)It's not rapid at all on Legend. And I'm now all but certain that this tier list was done under the impression of playing on sub-Legend difficulties.
@@kane_lives well that's nice, but that's not the video I'm interested in doing personally. If that's the video you want, you can just watch that one, but dont come here expecting someone else's video and complain when inevitably it's not the same video. Also no, I dont play on legend difficulty, but the implication that this invalidates anything I say just oozes of elitist snobbery. Imo.
@@TerryDuke he might be a touch aggressive with the points but it's not elitist snobbery to point out that the list isn't made using too difficulty settings (and that absolutely should be mentioned), as if someone is wanting to really improve to get their standard high enough to up the levels you will be teaching them bad practices which will need to be unlearned to improve further. Just because something works at a lower level doesn't mean it's actually a good thing. For example, if a player reads your list and then tries to implement it at a legendary level they will probably lose the game early on.
@@andrewmasson4829 Except I litterally point out that my tier list relies on late game. And it's a tier list for fun, not a strategy guide. So sure, you can make the argument that my tier list doesn't take early game into account (because it doesn't), or that higher difficulties could experience the classes differently, but then again, every one has a different play style. You can read the comments, and you'll see that people use different tactics which means using the classes differently as well. And this can also be influenced by what part of the game you're in, and the difficulty itself. So really, I think the only real problem here is that people take this video too seriously. It's my opinion, based on my playstyle, in the part of the game I prefer most. I enjoy talking about the game and learning how other people play it, but I don't care to debate the minutiae of everything, as if there is an objectively correct way to play the game, which is the snobbery I was talking about; it's one thing to disagree on play style, but a whole other to suggest that because I don't play the game at your preferred difficulty, or cover it from the angle that you wanted, that it somehow renders everything I say meaningless.
I raised an eyebrow at Sharpshooter in S, scoffed at seeing Spark in D and just stopped the video at seeing the Reaper in B. This list is hard to take seriously. You cannot decide by what metric you judge these classes. Psy ops are bad because of the investment required to get them good, but Sharpshooters are the best in the game, despite being a major liability through the entire early/midgame, which is the hardest part of the game, all the way until you have upgraded pistols and have taken down the Hunter? Nah, this ain't it.
This tier list doesn't make sense, you put the Psi op at C because it's awkward to get (likely to be late game by the time you have it), but then put sniper at S tier when it's also not going to be good until late game. In my opinion, the sniper is BY FAR the worst class in the game, for the simple reason that the first 5 - 10 missions in every xcom 2 playthrough are by far the most difficult, and any class that helps deal with those early engagements is going to be way more powerful than one that needs a lot of investment to be good (sniper). rangers and especially grenadiers, for this reason, are both S tier to me. You can win legend difficulty playthroughs without EVER using the sniper (and I often do) because they lack any early game power when compared to the other classes.
I disagree, yes the sniper takes a bit of time to get good, but not nearly as much as you imply. My only point is that the Psi Operative takes so long to research and trade that you are in late-game by then, and made it that far without it, hence you can keep going without it. And it makes for a decent Psi support unit, but in terms of combat effectiveness, it's not even close to the sniper.
@@TerryDuke When would you say the Sniper becomes good? because I'd say it's about when they reach captain rank, if not further down the line, especially if you compare to what other classes are getting at those ranks too (run 'n gun, holo target etc), sniper still isn't as useful as rangers and grenadiers, perhaps they're better than specialists by this point? but that isn't saying much as that class is also kind of trash
@@J4ckmaestroin my experience squad sight has been the best so far. Sure it's weird with cover and stuff but I just lob a grenade the covers gone, suddenly the sniper is killing people lol. But I Agree it's the weakest of the classes, but it's certainly not bad
@@NevinWarrior-es6ds you lob a grenade and the cover is gone, why does that benefit the sniper over and other class? Just shoot them with a grenadier and its the same damage
Ridiculous transition as a content creator, you are not strategic at all. You should have moved from Warband to Bannerlord First, then to another game in that genre while slowly adding this one. Warband to XCOM is ridiculous.
@@Alfarooq8719 i already made bannerlord videos, been making them for almost as much time as warband, and i intent to make more, provided new mods come out. Check my channel before presuming to tell me what to make.
I always treated psi operative as a win more button, if you got to the point where you maxed out a psi operative, you've already won the game, so having a unit that's so extra powerful doesn't really do anything.
@@kadirali1456 interesting perspective, makes me see it as, it's an extra, optional unit, basically. And I think they're better used as Psi support, with Stasis, fortress, and the mental aura to remove all effects. For offense, they require more finesse, and even they, the grenadier's attacks are largely better.
@@TerryDukeI treat them as a "if I want to play as aliens I'll use them" button lol
just doing the victory lap yea
I just finished my first play through and I have to agree. I was looking forward to playing with my two psi troops, and I got to use them exactly twice before the last mission came up.
I sometimes put reaper and sharpshooter together cuz if you scout the enemy with the reaper you can use the sharpshooter from across the map with squadsight to hit and they will need a turn or 2 to get to you and sometimes take the entire squad down
The only downside is that when you're targeting in Squadsight range, your chance to hit starts to decrease as you go beyond your Rifle's range
It might just come down to a difference of play style, but I would definitely place ranger in S and the reaper at least A. Both classes being able to remain concealed for longer is such a huge boon. The rangers, once upgraded, can dish out such huge amounts of damage with crits, and the mobility to reach the high priority targets and still get out unharmed. There have been multiple play throughs where my rangers have ended up with the majority of the kills by a wide margin, usually only really competing with sharpshooters. As for the reapers though, I agree with most everything you said, but I think I just value their contributions more. They definitely have low damage potential, outside of claymores and detonations, but lots of the time mine don’t even harm anything until every alien on the map has been located. Mine exist to run the whole length of the map as quick as possible and let me get as much information as I can so I’ll know if there is another pod of aliens right outside of detection range about to reinforce and make the fight more complicated. I’d still put reapers below rangers though because when reapers are good, they are great, but rangers are always great.
Great video!
@@DigistructGrunt well said all around! But it does come to playstyle, as I'm more aggressive with templars than rangers.
Also overlooked on my part is the killer skill for reaper, which allows it to stay in shadows as long as the target is killed. Pretty effective for finishing off targets and letting the squad focus on the more pressing threats.
I think it’s a little unfair to have the main knock on PSI ops to be that they come too late.
Looking at abilities and skills they are certainly A or S tier. (Assuming maxed out).
Dom & stasis immediately take an enemy out of a given fight. They get the ability to apply rupture to a hard target. Or you could give your hard hitter a free action. Another ranger shotgun blast.
It's also unfair to say the spark has low accuracy when they have almost the same accuracy as the sniper and Their gun gives aim climb where sniper does not. It's not impossible to guarantee hits againsts enemies in cover.
It also seems unfair to rank the Templar based on Random bonus skills but not give any credit to the base classes who can all roll serial or DfA which allow them all to do the thing he said makes the sniper S teir. He also ranked the sniper with the darklance, but the katana also means the ranger can do what he said makes the Templar S tier, but better and with no luck involved.
Nice! I think everyone has their own style. You kinda inspire me to make XCOM2 videos! Nice work fam!
The Specialist Field Medic is a force multiplier. I rarely go into a mission without one and would definitely rank it higher. The Specialist Hacker is super useful too, especially if you get the +20 hack stat bonus from hacking bonuses and the Skulljack for another +25 to hack. With that you have a guaranteed two turn stun against any robotic enemy and a very high chance to take control of one.
I just finished my first game, and I was looking forward to getting a psi troop in the field, using Domination on a Shield Bearer, and buffing my squad with an energy shield, but by the time she was ready the game was over.
The reason I like this game is that I find every class useful. It all depends on stage of game (early/mid/late) but even more on environment. Sharpshooter and Reaper are epic in open missions. Skirmisher and Templar much better in tunnels etc.
The most difficult class imo is the Templar. Requires ton of ability points, Bladestorm as bonus and playing style.
Specialist guardian plus repeater is gold lol. I have a specialist who can keep up with my rangers in assault
I have modded my game so sparks gain access to the new skill tree. Other than that i think they are crucial in late game since they do not have will and do not need to rest.
@@andreasfiltenborg4952 without mods, you can easily play the game without the spark. With mods though, it can drastically change that. I use mechatronic warfare, which allows destroyed sparks to be rebuilt with all of their skills. That alone can create a strong incentive to focus on a spark squad over soldiers.
I treat Reaper as a premier scout. They have better stealth than the ranger, and they stay concealed. With the right abilities, they can still remain concealed after shooting.
Makes them perfect for making sure that a second pod won't be walking into sight of my revealed soldiers.
Same! Although sometimes it's possible with a claymore + car or other explosive to one shot the first alien pod without revealing the squad at all!
Skirmisher should be higher imo. Those extra actions and retribution skills make mine a monster.
Specialist are so invaluable as well with the aid protocol that can make rangers and templars dodge more attacks on the front lines.
Shows how good this game is. So many different strategies to this game!
Hey bud, do you have a list of the mods you used in this video? I recognized the elite mutons but i've never seen that many in my games. Also 4 focus points on your templar?
@@tech9d i plan on making mod videos for all of the mods I use, but those you mention, it's "supreme focus" which adds the 4th bar (and more damage) as a skill you can pick as you level up, and "overwhelming enemy pods" doubles the amount of aliens deployed.
@@TerryDuke thanks, I look forward to your newer videos
I had a squad of 6 psi ops maxed level.
Mind control is ABSURD. How so? Nab an Andromedon, shield bearer, the Advent officer for the 15% bonus aim...
Plus I can use them as meat shields for the aliens to target over my psi ops too, and since Andromodons have shred? Mecs or sectopods aren't safe.
I never got to recruit a Templar with bladestorm and I'm salty about it
The Sniper class's main weapon really isn't that good until you reach colonel rank, and the Sniper also takes LONGER to level up than all of the other classes. You can't move at shoot with a Sniper rifle, unless you can somehow still have two actions remaining after moving (such as with a bonus action or with a grappling hook move). When you reach colonel rank, you finally get access to serial, which is a very powerful skill... However, this skill still has very situational utility.
So many missions have time limits, and require you to keep moving your entire squad forward, and the Sniper class tends to be really bad for these missions unless you invest in the pistol related skills. The pistol related skills are actually pretty good.
sharpshooter best because hunter rifle you can shoot again you can kill enemy from higher elevation because of death from above
@@nimeshkansagara7275 yup, deadly af
This is a bad list. For some reason, it only takes into account extremely favorable late game scenarios for Sniper and Templar, while ignoring the strong early and midgame scenarios for Skirmisher and Reaper.
1)There is no doubt that a Templar with Bladestorm (and Reaper, and Fortress) is amazing. But a Templar without Bladestorm is just straight up C tier. His damage just falls off a cliff and he's worse than a random Ranger, let alone a good Ranger, which can get Serial. Strategically, this is the weakest faction to start with, as its HQ bonus is the worst, its Resistance Order pool (on average) is also the worst, with 2-3 amazing A/S tier orders, but the downside is that the rest is just garbage, no in-between. His early game is also the weakest, as he doesn't start with parry, and he's the most difficult unit to use, because you can easily activate more pods if you just casually try to melee every enemy you see.
2)As another commenter pointed out, the difficulty of the game is frontloaded, and the Sniper is the weakest early game class. Worse damage output than the Ranger class, no utility like Specialist/Grenadier. And the problem is not just limited to the tactical layer. You will also have to pay A LOT to upgrade BOTH the Sniper rifle and the Pistol to Tier2. And none of this is mentioned (let alone considered) in the video. Focusing solely on the late game when you can mow down pod after pod with Serial/Death from Above can impress casuals, but not seasoned L/I players.
3)Speaking of economics, SPARK is bad not because it's bad or dies easily, but because it costs an obscene amount of resources to manufacture and upgrade. Otherwise it would be an fascinating option.
4)The only problem with Skirmisher is the weak lategame, with bad skills at Major/Colonel level, and a bizarre Plasma weapon upgrade (only +1 dmg, instead of +2) which is unlike every other primary ranged weapon. Otherwise, it's the most powerful early game unit. Grapple costs no Action Points and can easily mitigate the short range penalty. Justice oneshots Troopers reliably (especially if used with the elevation bonus), and doesn't even end the turn. 2 Attacks a turn and Grapple also make it the most damaging anti-Chosen soldier out of all 3 factions in the early game. Best HQ bonus, and arguably the best (although Reaper is a close 2nd) Resistance order pool make it top tier. It is also the only unit that can reliably SOLO the 1st mission on Legend. Even if you get mind control, it's not dangerous if you keep the others in a corner.
5)Unlike Templar and Skirmisher, a Reaper is never particularly weak at any point in the campaign. It can become weak in any given mission once you run out of consumables and concealment, but by that point you should have put in good work, and you've prevented yourself from fighting more than 1 pod at a time with Reaper's superior scouting. Late game? It is the class with the best single target damage, as its Banish skill with a weapon with Superior Repeater + Superior Magazine size can oneshot even Chosen and Rulers.
6)PSI OP does come late, but the utility is unrivaled. You don't even need to have extensive training or upgrade your PSI AMP. Even just having the humble Stasis skill alone makes his presence on the team noticeable.
The reason I focus on late game is because it's only at late game that all skills are unlocked, and you get the most out of every class. This is something I say in the video. You can disagree with the approach, but I would ask, what's the point of comparing classes in early game? That would mean ranger without bladestorm, grenadier without the increased explosive radius, specialist without healing. It's true that some classes might fair better early on, but given the rapid advance of skills and tech, it just seems irrelevant when you just want to rank the classes as a whole.
But given your points, let's address them.
1) It's true that those special skills are randomized and not guaranteed, but even without bladestorm, I'd put Templar as a B at least. Its base attack is still stronger than the ranger, but the ability to either parry or quickly redeploy still makes a melee attack significantly safer to use than with a ranger. Also given that you can only use 3 resistance orders per faction, the ones provided by the Templars are actually very useful. One of them causes damage to any aliens that use psi attacks, which multiplies by the number of targets. So a codex using its storm attack on 3 targets will instantly die. A wounded priest or sectoid can also be finished off without needing to use an attack on them. Another order makes psi attacks only last one turn, meaning panicked troops will immediately come back as soon as the alien's turn is over. Very useful indeed.
2) I agree the sniper is initially weak, but again, what does that matter? As soon as tech and skills improve, it's an immediate table turner. If you want a ranking based on early game, maybe you should make that video yourself at this point.
3) Well again, once the cost is covered, we're talking tactical practicality here. And if you can see more potential there, make the argument, but like everything else, it comes down to playstyle. For me the spark ain't that great, at least in the base game.
4) The skirmisher is definitely useful, even in late game. But it does require more finesse, which is why I don't rank it so high.
5) Basically what I said.
6) Again, it just comes down to its fundamental necessity. If you made it that far in the game without ever having a Psi Operative, you can basically beat the game without ever using it. I think of it as an optional unit, as most of its skills I never tend to use, as other classes get the job done fine. I find them better as a psionic support unit, using their aura to cleanse mental attacks, or the stasis to save a unit from the next turn. Again, it's mostly playstyle.
@@TerryDuke >what's the point of comparing classes in early game?
1)There's a 2hr video called "Unnecessarily long class tier list" which has 3 separate early/mid/lategame class tier lists, I agree with 95% of it. For example, It accurately reflects how the Skirmisher falls off in the late game. It also suffers from the same drawback this one does: economy is not taken into account.
>given the rapid advance of skills and tech
2)It's not rapid at all on Legend. And I'm now all but certain that this tier list was done under the impression of playing on sub-Legend difficulties.
@@kane_lives well that's nice, but that's not the video I'm interested in doing personally. If that's the video you want, you can just watch that one, but dont come here expecting someone else's video and complain when inevitably it's not the same video.
Also no, I dont play on legend difficulty, but the implication that this invalidates anything I say just oozes of elitist snobbery. Imo.
@@TerryDuke he might be a touch aggressive with the points but it's not elitist snobbery to point out that the list isn't made using too difficulty settings (and that absolutely should be mentioned), as if someone is wanting to really improve to get their standard high enough to up the levels you will be teaching them bad practices which will need to be unlearned to improve further.
Just because something works at a lower level doesn't mean it's actually a good thing.
For example, if a player reads your list and then tries to implement it at a legendary level they will probably lose the game early on.
@@andrewmasson4829 Except I litterally point out that my tier list relies on late game. And it's a tier list for fun, not a strategy guide.
So sure, you can make the argument that my tier list doesn't take early game into account (because it doesn't), or that higher difficulties could experience the classes differently, but then again, every one has a different play style. You can read the comments, and you'll see that people use different tactics which means using the classes differently as well. And this can also be influenced by what part of the game you're in, and the difficulty itself.
So really, I think the only real problem here is that people take this video too seriously. It's my opinion, based on my playstyle, in the part of the game I prefer most. I enjoy talking about the game and learning how other people play it, but I don't care to debate the minutiae of everything, as if there is an objectively correct way to play the game, which is the snobbery I was talking about; it's one thing to disagree on play style, but a whole other to suggest that because I don't play the game at your preferred difficulty, or cover it from the angle that you wanted, that it somehow renders everything I say meaningless.
Cool vid
I raised an eyebrow at Sharpshooter in S, scoffed at seeing Spark in D and just stopped the video at seeing the Reaper in B.
This list is hard to take seriously.
You cannot decide by what metric you judge these classes. Psy ops are bad because of the investment required to get them good, but Sharpshooters are the best in the game, despite being a major liability through the entire early/midgame, which is the hardest part of the game, all the way until you have upgraded pistols and have taken down the Hunter? Nah, this ain't it.
This tier list doesn't make sense, you put the Psi op at C because it's awkward to get (likely to be late game by the time you have it), but then put sniper at S tier when it's also not going to be good until late game. In my opinion, the sniper is BY FAR the worst class in the game, for the simple reason that the first 5 - 10 missions in every xcom 2 playthrough are by far the most difficult, and any class that helps deal with those early engagements is going to be way more powerful than one that needs a lot of investment to be good (sniper). rangers and especially grenadiers, for this reason, are both S tier to me. You can win legend difficulty playthroughs without EVER using the sniper (and I often do) because they lack any early game power when compared to the other classes.
I disagree, yes the sniper takes a bit of time to get good, but not nearly as much as you imply.
My only point is that the Psi Operative takes so long to research and trade that you are in late-game by then, and made it that far without it, hence you can keep going without it.
And it makes for a decent Psi support unit, but in terms of combat effectiveness, it's not even close to the sniper.
@@TerryDuke When would you say the Sniper becomes good? because I'd say it's about when they reach captain rank, if not further down the line, especially if you compare to what other classes are getting at those ranks too (run 'n gun, holo target etc), sniper still isn't as useful as rangers and grenadiers, perhaps they're better than specialists by this point? but that isn't saying much as that class is also kind of trash
@@J4ckmaestroin my experience squad sight has been the best so far. Sure it's weird with cover and stuff but I just lob a grenade the covers gone, suddenly the sniper is killing people lol. But I Agree it's the weakest of the classes, but it's certainly not bad
@@NevinWarrior-es6ds you lob a grenade and the cover is gone, why does that benefit the sniper over and other class? Just shoot them with a grenadier and its the same damage
@J4ckmaestro simple answer, death from above lol
Deep cover is hot ass, don't say it like a positive.
What do you mean?
This list is offensive
@@troubleman1128 sounds like you're easily offended 😄
Ridiculous transition as a content creator, you are not strategic at all.
You should have moved from Warband to Bannerlord First, then to another game in that genre while slowly adding this one.
Warband to XCOM is ridiculous.
@@Alfarooq8719 i already made bannerlord videos, been making them for almost as much time as warband, and i intent to make more, provided new mods come out. Check my channel before presuming to tell me what to make.
Imagine telling someone how to make videos for their channel, LMAO XD
@@tech9d Tryna help out my favorite formerwarband youtuber.