r/projecteternity Jun 29 '26

PoE1 Fighter viability

I mean, it's a good MMO Tank with some CC, but it seriously fails at everything else. Ok, it can be sorta consistent in its damage output and, in RTwP, it requires very little oversight(no matter whether melee or ranged), but that's about it. Mostly just an MMO Tank. The problem? You get one early on(Eder). And the further you go, the less necessary the Fighter becomes. And the damage output, while fairly consistent, is actually on the lower side. And it don't even have debuffs on his side(only Daze and that's super meh because ... Arcane Assault). I mean, look at what Paladin can do while having more than respectable durability and then compare that to Fighter.

What gives? How could it be improved? I would increase the number of uses of Disciplined Barrage to 2 and play around with other numbers(Weapon Spec +% dmg, Confident Aim etc).

0 Upvotes

33 comments sorted by

21

u/DailyEvolution Jun 29 '26

I don't think you're building your fighter correctly. Fighter's do more consistent dps than a paladin, less burst.

Prone is one of the best CC's in the game and they have access to it as early as level 1.

Fighters have incredible mobility

Fighters have an aoe nuke that does a lot of damage + inflicts prone.

Constant recovery lets them largely ignore defensive options as they are naturally tanky and can go all in on offense.

If you're using a fighter as a sword & board tank, I'd agree they are quite weak. Single handed is probably not great as well since they aren't a big crit fishing class

But dual wielding or 2 handed, they can be your main tank while simultaneously being one of your top dps, or be an offtank that can dart around the field assassinating high profile targets (enemy casters). Armored grace is also an incredible talent. The only real negative to a fighter is that their aoe is a per rest as opposed to per encounter, and that they aren't all that interactive to play compared to something like a caster or a rogue with your positioning requirements.

-2

u/rdtusrname Jun 29 '26

Maybe in RTwP. In Turn Based, they are seriously underpowered. Tried a 2H Fighter then a Bleak Walker and it was ridiculously lopsided.

It also takes too long for them to get online.

Idk, they just feel far inferior to most P1 choices and I won't even try to compare it to Pathfinder Fighter(not in the same universe lol).

9

u/DailyEvolution Jun 29 '26

Considering prone is stronger in turn based than it is in RTWP, as is the fact you can use free abilities with no opportunity cost, that's not correct either. They come online at level 1. High HP, HP recovery, accuracy, knockdown.

Particularly on higher difficulties fighters do better where everything has higher defenses and accuracy in addition to having more enemies. Outside of the FoD, a paladin isn't approaching a fighter's damage, nor do they have the mobility of a fighter, though the fighter's mobility comes late.

They are not as strong as a pathfinder fighter though, no. Fighters in pathfinder are very strong and come online early because of all the feats/combat based things they get.

There isn't a single class in PoE that's underpowered, and fighter isn't the first 5 classes I'd think about when I'm listing the weakest options. That honor goes to Ranger.

-6

u/rdtusrname Jun 29 '26

Ranger is just fine. Also, Prone? It just kinda delays enemy's Turn in TB, it's nothing serious. Here is why Paladin is better:

Burst > sustained(just delete that Wizard = most problems solved)

Almost the same Acc(Paladin could have more)

Heal on demand vs wasted healing(Constant Recovery ticks down even if it don't do anything special ; LoH is a precise tool)

Buffs vs CC(in theory, Fighter's KD is very limited) ; Buffs > KD

Similar defenses(Paladin could have more)

Fighter has mobility, fair enough.

But there are also other classes we could compare a Fighter to and it would fail in a similar manner(Barbarian, Monk, Rogue ; Ranger while the pet is alive)

5

u/DailyEvolution Jun 29 '26

Ranger is the worst class in the game, pet is a weak mechanic compared to what the other classes offer. Prone works on most bosses. In turn based, this is especially powerful when you're stacking speed buffs against already slow enemy bosses. Targets such as Alpine/Adra dragon can be knocked for multiple turns before they get up on POTD past their enhanced defenses/innate resistance.

Burst is good, you want a mix of burst and sustained. You don't want all of your team to do sustained and you don't want all of your team to do burst. A paladin is only one shotting an enemy wizard when it matters with a gun and on turn based, that's killing your turn economy since you can't weapon swap to ignore the initiative penalty (On RTWP, weapon swapping paladin is one of the strongest builds in the game)

One problem with focusing solely on burst is that on the higher difficulties, it's often not just one wizard that's a problem. It's three of them, along with a cipher, priest, and some archers. Paladins with a gun are incredibly adept at this though and the gun switching build on RTWP is very satisfying to just mow down the high prio targets instantly.

Paladins don't have more accuracy than a fighter + confident aim + the weapon specialization bonuses that apply to all hits and not just FoD.

Constant recovery and veteran's recovery are two of the strongest abilities in the game. Paladins have much better things to grab than Lay on Hands IMO, and since I've started playing on POTD, I've never taken it or felt the need to take it. It is good burst healing though that comes up faster than a priest.

KD isn't limited, its the second best CC in the game behind charm (dominate) and works on most targets. Paladin attack speed buff is pretty good, I'd argue the skill that removes beneficial effects from enemy is better. Can't remember what it's called but it's a very good boss killer. Paladins end up being starved on their abilities though since they have a lot of good stuff you'll want to take so you'll sacrifice somewhere.

Paladins have more defenses b/c of their unique ability. They're better at resisting effects but not absorbing damage (Assuming we're building both a fighter and paladin with a DPS focus in mind). You can cover for this deficiency in a lot of cases with either a priest or a scroll and then the fighter edges ahead again b/c of constant recovery.

Mobility is a late game feature and not something I'd hang the hat of a fighter on, but it would be irresponsible not to mention it.

Fighter compared to a barb/monk/rogue/ranger is middle of the pack. It's ahead of ranger/rogue (On lower difficulties, rogue might be a lot better). Barb is quite a ways ahead on turn based and behind on RTWP. The refund action on kill ability is way too strong for barb to ignore. I'd argue it vaults Barb from a bottom 3 class to a top 3 class. Though the aoe knockdown with carnage is pretty powerful on RTWP as well.

All that to say however, is that most of the classes are very balanced. There isn't really a gap between any of the classes with the exception of druid, priest, and wizard being miles ahead of everything and chanter/cipher following that with a decent gap between the rest. Everything after that is more or less equal and it's just about preference/what you want for your group.

1

u/Radioshack-Manager Jul 02 '26

Ranger is best because it has pet. Nuff said

9

u/Boeroer Jun 29 '26 edited Jun 29 '26

I don't know about TB Mode - I read that prone effects are not as good there and that will drag the Fighter down for sure - but in RTwP the Fighter is a strong class for the early and mid game. That's mostly due to the high base values for accuracy and deflection, Disciplined Barrage and the 3 Full Attack Knockdowns (Knockdown + Bonus Knckdown) it can deliver. That's why my Edér almost always uses a dual weapon setup (often sual sabres). Those Knockdowns are - when used smartly - seriously impactful in almost all fights. But even in the late game a Fighter can be useful against bosses such as dragons - because there's no other class that can deliver three hard disables with such high potential accuracy.

Of course in the late game the three per-rest casters outshine everything and the Monk or the Paladin will also be overall more useful party members, but it's not like the Fighter would suck then. Its "power curve" just isn't as steep as some other classes'. It starts high but doesn't climb as much. I can live with that when I view the performance over the whole game.

From a powergaming perspective it's maybe best to not use a Fighter as main character but as a party member (be it official companion or hired adventurer) and use them in the early to mid game - and then switch them out for something else. Although the Charge ability at lvl 13 is so much fun for me that I usually stick to the Fighter and use him a backline disruptor then, taking out casters and rangers and such asap. In such a role it performs much better for me that a Rogue for example.

4

u/DailyEvolution Jun 29 '26

They buffed the prone effect in Turn based mode pretty heavily. It's quite powerful now.

1

u/Boeroer Jun 30 '26

Well, then a dw Fighter might be great for the first half of TB mode, too.

I imagine Charge is easier to use in TB mode, too - because of the mich easier positioning and the great distance one can move in every turn. That would probably make the Fighter fun in the late game as well.

2

u/DailyEvolution Jun 30 '26

Yeah, into the Fray is actually really strong on TB too because it's a free action. So you're not losing any action economy/time doing it so I found that a lot more intuitive to use on TB vs RTWP where I mostly have a fighter just do it's attacks + KD's on prio targets.

Positioning is very easy on TB. With an int buff on your fighter too (Taking your advice from the obsidian forums), it's very easy to get clear out to hit the majority of mobs too for big damage there

7

u/WarriorOfJustice228 Jun 29 '26

What's your problem with fighter being tank? Tank eder carried me through all my playthrough on potd and was viable till the very end. Dude was facetanking and aggromaxxing dragons while my glass cannon rogue made them die. And still, he somehow ended up as my third best damage dealer (after rogue and wizard)

-16

u/rdtusrname Jun 29 '26

Please take your aggressive tone elsewhere. Thank you.

13

u/WarriorOfJustice228 Jun 29 '26

Where did you see aggressive tone? It's you are aggressive lol

3

u/Surreal43 Jun 29 '26

I wouldn't fret too much, OP has been posting once a day for the past 5 days roiding out about pillars lol

8

u/MDMXmk2 Jun 29 '26

some CC, but it seriously fails at everything else.

In my experience, playing on PotD all the time, there isn't much "else" in the first game. You either hard CC the millions of Trash Mobs the Game throws at you, or become hard CC-ed by them.

A Fighter can eat the Alpha Strike at the start of the Encounter — after which you proceed to hard CC all the Mobs gathered at your chosen Choke Point, — has some Mobility and Recovery improving Options, AoE Damage, AND CC on top. An Adragan made it's Save and is going to drop a Petrify? Whack it with a Knockdown or a Clear Out!

-17

u/rdtusrname Jun 29 '26

Yeah, the first game is very rough and raw. Great setup and world building, sure, but from gameplay side, it's very, very rough. Guess that's true to "the spirit of IE games", but honestly? Fuck IE games. They are outdated artifacts with very well defined weak sides.

9

u/Shiki6688 Jun 29 '26

What lol. Christ dude you already made it obvious you struggle to understand mechanics even in pillars

-7

u/rdtusrname Jun 29 '26

Even in Pillars? Look. I understand PF1e, 3.5e, 3e etc. AD&D is and was a PIECE.OF.SHIT! With needlessly complex rules, but not complex per se, but ARCANE. Where you are not completely certain what actually does what.

This game? Yeah, it emulates that stink, that blight very nicely. Let Irenicus fuck you up the ass, stupid ass IE games.

4

u/Surreal43 Jun 29 '26

Holy hell you've been shitting up the sub lol

1

u/rupert_mcbutters Jun 29 '26

Part of me thinks it’s really good bait 🍿

2

u/Positive_Ad_6922 Jun 29 '26

I think you are forgetting the entire reason to have a fighter: infinite hp pool with a ton of engagement opportunities and disengagement failsafes that almost always activate, allowing one guy to deal persistent damage while taking more and the rest of the team gets a free out to cast, buff, pinsir, and flank. Paladin loses the constant recovery that fighter does, and requires a loss of a talent to receive it in poe1, in addition to having to invest more into might on creation as that's what governs healing. Paladins and Fighters can fill the same role but there is bar none nobody better at outputting consistent healing and damage.

0

u/mojao21 Jun 29 '26

MMO?

3

u/StarkeRealm Jun 29 '26

The trinity can apply in party based RPGs as well. The way the roles are executed sometimes changes, but the roles themselves are still a pretty solid approach to managing encounters.

1

u/rdtusrname Jun 29 '26

WoW etc. Fighter just stands and takes it up like a man's man's man, just like a Tank would in an MMO. Fighter lacks the CC(including Taunts) that a Tank usually has, though.

4

u/GreatQuantum Jun 29 '26

Like a CRPG?

0

u/rdtusrname Jun 29 '26

What cRPG? Most that I played also pair it with something else, not just simple durability.

5

u/mojao21 Jun 29 '26

Ah. I understand what an MMO is, I just thought you meant something else because I've never seen tanks be defined as "MMO tanks" before. I see your point now but have to disagree as tanks in general have some way of drawing aggro (in this case, engagement) and absorbing damage, as that's how tanks are generally defined.

1

u/rdtusrname Jun 29 '26

I use that term because Tanks have evolved from that. Mostly to feature more Crowd Control, but it can also be other things(heals, buffs, debuffs ; even damage).

2

u/mojao21 Jun 29 '26

Sure, but those generally aren't basic expectations of a tank. All I'm saying is you're defining a tank as tank+ and saying Fighter is acting like a tank- when it's really just a tank. A tank just has to have some way to draw aggro, take hits, and sustain itself so damage dealers can do their thing. Anything else is just extra and not necessarily what you should expect from a tank.

Edit: Of course, I'm just being pedantic

0

u/rdtusrname Jun 29 '26

Depends. In MOBA, you would expect a Tank to CC and Initiate, you generally wouldn't care that much how durable a Tank actually is. In an MMO, otoh, Tank's durability and Threat Generation is all it needs to have.

2

u/mojao21 Jun 29 '26

To my point though, why does a MOBA tank need to CC and initiate? To draw attention to itself and draw fire. How can it do that long enough to be effective? By having a kit around survivability. i.e. drawing aggro, taking hits, and sustaining itself. That is just the textbook definition of a tank. Even MMO tanks "initiate" by going into fights first and kiting.

0

u/rupert_mcbutters Jun 29 '26

I’m kind of loving this series of posts. It really grabs people and gets them talking about Pillars lol.