Quote:
Originally Posted by Amy Awien
There was a thread on the Assasin forum a while back where we did some damage calculations.
Yeah I remember this thread, but as usually there was a bunch of numbers to make it look really objective despite the fact it didn't take into consideration many aspects of the game. Comparing the damage dealt by a sin and a ranger is impossible, since even if you try to include every variable, make charts for the different kind of bows, for foes immune to bleeding or that who ain't, include the time spent for casting sin enchants, the probability for a sin to run out of energy and have to use normal attacks till he gets energy back with a crit, make different charts depending on both the hp and AL of your opponent to measure the length and therefore the damage taken from bleeding, etc, there is still one more variable that is not clearly known: the probability of doing a critical strike - it's known it depends on both your level in the weapon attribute nd the elvel of the opponent, but last time I checked no one had figured how it works exactly. So in this case, I really think that personal experience > "math".
Now to answer the OP, this is very subjective, but IMO, sins are better than ranger in low level places: crit barragers are deadly in Consulate Dicks for example, better than rangers. But I find rangers more efficient in high end places where many foes can't bleed, and where their high level lower the probability of doing a crit strike.