I think when it comes to strength and weakness, I find that the strength of 5E comes down to how clear an image of a class is and what they do.
Look at one of the stronger classes: The Paladin. A holy warrior in heavy armor that smites enemies, heal allies, shrugs of conditions, and rides a magical steed.
Now look at the top classes in this poll. "Big guy who gets mad and hulks out" "unarmed unarmored warrior who punches a lot and can stun punch" "guy in a green hood who ummm does nature stuff and shoots arrows or dual wields" "a mage born with innate magic" "a mage who makes a pact to do Eldritch Blast and cheat out some spells"
Not as solid. These are some of the most variable classes through the editions. And that lack of solid base imagery and actions likely forced the designers to fill gaps themselves and do it cautiously because they are creating it not the community.
Look at one of the stronger classes: The Paladin. A holy warrior in heavy armor that smites enemies, heal allies, shrugs of conditions, and rides a magical steed.
Now look at the top classes in this poll. "Big guy who gets mad and hulks out" "unarmed unarmored warrior who punches a lot and can stun punch" "guy in a green hood who ummm does nature stuff and shoots arrows or dual wields" "a mage born with innate magic" "a mage who makes a pact to do Eldritch Blast and cheat out some spells"
Not as solid. These are some of the most variable classes through the editions. And that lack of solid base imagery and actions likely forced the designers to fill gaps themselves and do it cautiously because they are creating it not the community.