I see no reasons why marksmen should be better than mages at BOTH killing tanks AND turrets
So tanks, fighters and assassins seem somewhat reasonable: tanks do not deal damage, but are tanky, assassins (should) deal tons of damage, but are squishy and fighters are somewhere in between. There is more on the table like mobility, crowd control and so on, but let's simplify things.
Meanwhile: Marksmen are better than mages at killing tanks, killing turrets, have better synergy with supports (
). What are mages supposed to be better at? Burst? Well, first of all 
and 
exists, second of all assassins are supposed to be better at than mages at that. Also marksmen are better against burst, because 
+ life steal exist. CC? Well, tanks are better than mages in that and marksmen are still better than mages against that, because 
. Wave clear? AOE? Well, + 
. On top of that marksmen enjoy better scaling, because the itemize AD+AS+Crit+CDR, while mages increase their damage with AP+CDR. So tell me, please. At what aspect of the game mages are supposed to be better than marksmen?
early they will have a wonky build, unlike a fighter mid. marksman have always served the same purpose as a mid laner, due to getting damage from their auto attacks as well as scaling on their kits, marksman are squishy and have to build squishy to have any real effect. the way to beat them is to pick them off and avoid extended fights with them.
