Which is "better" in leadership?

Given the choice between assault and tactics, which would you consider "better", assuming no need for the power to be an IO mule?

I'd go for Assault in general.
Its far more likely for you allies and you to be capped at 95% To Hit than it is for them to be capped for damage. So much of the time Tactics does nothing, but Assault always does something.

Tactics does have the nice side-effect or providing +Perception though, which can be a game changer against Arachnos.

For me, Tactics is the primary purpose of picking up the Leadership pool. The toss up is between Maneuvers and Assault. There are plenty of people who believe that slotting only one Accuracy is good enough. Well, yeah, if you were fighting nothing special, even con enemies. However, you may note that in the higher level game, most teams are running +2-4 and facing debuffs and defenses. Do you want to spend your time whiffing and complaining that the Devs nerfed accuracy again or do you want to land your attacks consistantly? And as DrMike mentions, there are the frickin' Arachnos and their overpowered smoke grenades.

I guess I'm less interested in Tactics because I use set IOs.

Its pretty hard to not pick up global accuracy bonuses. Thunderstrike, Crushing Impact and Positrons are my default for attacks, mostly for other reasons, but all come with a side order of +Acc. And Thunderstrike and CI leave you with around 60% native accuracy in the power itself, so I'm happily hitting +3s with 95% accuarcy without Tactics.

If you're slotting SOs or generic IOs Tactics becomes much more valuable.

Tactics, both for the +perception bonus and for the Confuse/Fear protection. Especially true since I play Masterminds a lot and one of the more dangerous things to run into is a Succubus. And MMs/Controllers/Doms are running around with lower level pets that may need help to hit.

Assault. I rarely have problems hitting, even with SOs/generics, while not only is more damage always good, but Assault gets it's full effectiveness with just the default slot, while Tactics needs extras.

Guess it depends on what you commonly fight. For most well-built characters, or characters with tend to team with Rads/Colds/Therms/TAs/any debuff set really, you don't necessarily need the extra tohit provided by Tactics and you can simply pop a yellow if you do. Assault's a nice power which only needs the default slot. On the other hand, if you routinely solo high-level characters you might want the extra tohit Tactics provides. I'd say if you PvE Assault will generally be the better choice, while Tactics is the superior choice for PvP.

I went with Assault/Tactics on my Mercs/DP MM because the 2% defense that I'll get from Maneuvers isn't really enough to warrent spending that much endurance on.

tactics is nice is you do lots of TFs. I don't know how many times I've heard, "I'm not hitting anything"

Really, I'd say it's better to have a mix of Tactics and Assault, while everyone is suppling the +Defense with Manuevers.

Tactics also gives confuse protection and fear duration reduction. Those two don't pop up a lot, but it's nice to have.

Count me in the "Assault" category. I have enough Acc, but +Dmg is
always Welcome & Good.

Like Mike2000, I slot set IO's, and frequently have a Kismet +Acc in my
builds as well. Slotting for 60% Acc in attacks will get you to the 95% ToH
cap against most PvE mobs, and it's a snap with Global Acc bonuses.

I agree with Mac about Tactics being important in PvP, but I'm usually
the Stalker they're trying to see, so I typically don't have it... Of course,
with side-switching, Tactics is probably more pertinent in PvP these days.


Regards,
4

Assault.

Tactics is useful on occasion.

Assault is useful every time you attempt to damage something.

I think it depends on what you are playing. I generally prefer tactics on controllers and assault on blasters and scrappers. I wouldn't bother with either on a SS tank or brute.

But if I dip into the pool, I usually pick up both.

Depends upon the AT, but Tactics is pretty typical for most builds I make. A 10% damage buff isn't much, but having Tactics is basically the difference between hitting highly evasive enemies or not.

Mostly though, I like Tactics for the Gaussin's Set, which is a good Defense boost on top of everything else Tactics does naturally.

Depends on what I'm trying to do with the build overall.

If I'm trying to maximize damage output, say, with a /fire blaster, Assault is my pick.

If I'm trying to build for debuffs and other secondary effects, say, with a /dark defender, Tactics is my pick. This allows me to build around Tactics, slotting less accuracy and more of other enhancement types.

I'm one of them people that belive in overkill when it comes to ACC. ALL my guys have at least 70% acc slotted into each power that takes acc, at LEAST 70%, they all have +6% to hit progs in the build, set bonuses for acc, and if i train leadership on them, they take tactics.

I hate missing. I found that the romens in the ITF's i enjoy running have pretty impressive defence when they huddle up. So, i got heavy on ACC and +hit buffs to compansate. And being able to buff up my teams to hit is just a bonus IMO. Don't care how powerful an attack is, doen't do squat if it misses.

Count me in the "Tactics" crowd as well. If for no other reason than it removes that annoying blind effect from Arachnos. It also accepts IO sets.

Of course, if you like the leadership pool, why not take them all like I have done.
Currently running Tactics, Maneuvers and Assault on my team build, and after I19 and the fitness changes go live, I will be adding Vengeance to my build.

I value Tactics a lot more. When you need it, you need it. I tend to prefer powers that let me do things I couldn't otherwise do (such as seeing Arachnos) over powers that increase kill speed. Your mileage may (and probably does) vary.

I may well pick up assault on my defenders, and maybe, maybe on corruptors, with the new change to Fitness. I will likely skip it on blasters and anything melee, just because the modifier is so low.

If they put the high level resistance mobs into incarnate content, tactics will be *extremely* useful for fighting them. Both for protection from their random confuse, and for always being able to attack them, even when their stealth turns on.

It is a pure judgement call.

If you have other +def or -acc powers to stack with it, manuvers is the way to go otherwise take assault.

If you can spare the slots take manuvers and tactics and mule them both with the idea that +Per and a lil more +def is nice!

If more people would take these powers.....(I do, I also dont need an lamepath to pick my nose like most of you do) Then you can slot for different things....like end redux, or rech or Range......since youd have +acc and a moderate chunk of defense on a team instead of always building a toon the exact same way across multiple AT's because you need the exact same things every single time.

Tactics for the +perception, the tohit also helps for punching through pesky defensive shields. The damage bonus from Assault imo, isn't worth the end cost on end hungry characters, small teams or solo and certainly not when you've got a Kin around, which is pretty common. On my MM, however, it adds up but I'd still choose Tactics first.

Usually, characters that are dipping into the Leadership pool at all are planning to get at least two from it. (Heck, after the inherent Fitness, I'll be able to get 3 or all, but anyway.) I pick Assault first, then Tactics. It's "always kinda useful" vs. "occasionally very useful", and I can put the latter off for a couple of levels.