Orochi~ Wrote:i think.. that's a good example of why ppl stop using rhea.. and why rhea can be skipped in the first place. aether.. palaemon... zephyrus.. all do more damage and have better troop types.. and only require spr instead of valor+spr.

the problem with rhea.. is she does comparatively low damage, and only leeches back hp = 1/2 the dmg dealt. so up to a certain point in maps, she can't dps well.. and if she can't dps well, she can't tank well either since she only gains back a pathetic amount of hp.

i like rhea. i really wanted to use her for as long as possible on one of my accounts, but i don't see how she can last any longer than LT.. and even then LT is a stretch (granted i don't have kylin, but even if i do have kylin i wouldn't put it on her). in pvp she does horrible dmg to calvary type.. which incidentally all the main pvp heroes are.. like sult, hera, anubis etc. for maps she can't tank like heimdal or dps like any faction sally hero.

Taotie Wrote:FYI, i don't suggest u use Rhea,instead,Sult work much better than her.as for her BM damage composition, i'd like to support the view that 60% spirit from mount.since it's easy to get a purple weapon but relatively difficult to get a purple mount and usually equip a red mount ,leading to the view that 60% valor from weapon.Anyway, merely a guess,

Squinters Wrote:My suggestion is to click through my chilly/LT reports before looking at the desert and VL ones. That will be the biggest indicator to how short-lived rhea is.

Rhea is a great hero through rag, desert, and valk's. but unfortunately she her damage output just isn't sustainable through CM and LT. so the viability of using her as a meat-shield and primary hero really outweighs the cost.

So if you are super patient, and willing to sacrifice the laurels/time to train rhea then I highly encourage it. But, in terms of efficiency, rhea is not worth the effort