The whole point of this thread is that while attacks are balanced across the classes if you only consider the baseline attacks, but once you include bonus attacks and reaction asttacks, the Battlemaster clearly loses. So I do the maths including them. How the PC gets those extra attacks is irrelevant.
You've had a good half dozen replies to this claim already, which you've mostly ignored, but I will try once again.
It's not irrelevant, because it was impossible to get a bonus attack as a Ranger.
If something is impossible to get, it cannot be part of the baseline. They
DO NOT GET a bonus action attack. Period. Your scenario, which you laid out for everyone to see, which you corrected people on multiple times, was impossible.
That is relevant. No matter how many times you simply declare it is irrelevant without an explanation for why it's irrelevant, it's still relevant. Because you cannot assume a baseline which does something impossible under the rules and then declare it the norm.
Now if you are willing to remove the all-day-concentration spell from your assumptions (because that's what is interfering with the ranger's use of spells which can actually grant a bonus action attack) I'd be more willing to listen. But as long as you're including in your baseline something which directly conflicts with that ranger's use of it's abilities to get a bonus action attack,
IT'S HIGHLY RELEVANT.
And if you're willing to say, "OK I messed up in that initial scenario because I forgot it was a concentration spell or I forgot that a feat was the only way they had to get that bonus action while concentrating on that spell" I'd also listen. Though of course then we need to add back in the fighter feats - which they get more of than the ranger.
But as you've refused to face the question at all, and you just keep fiating over the issue by simply declaring it irrelevant with zero evidence to back up the claim it lacks relevance and a heaping ton of responses demonstrating why it's deeply relevant, it's become difficult to take you seriously. I am starting to suspect you've been trolling us all, because it's like you keep saying "The sky is green - can we stop talking about sky color now because the sky is green because I've said the sky is green which means the sky must be green."
