Dark Holy Elf

Pandreo is a lot like Kagetsu or Merrin, just generally very good stats for what he's trying to do, which in his case is magical offence. Since he's got a staff boon he makes a great Griffin Knight too, although his magic offence does suffer there. You kinda have to choose between two of access to good tomes, good staves, and good mobility, but whatever choice you make he'll do well. Makes great use of any magic-friendly emblem (Corrin, Byleth, Celica) and works well as filler even without one. His personal is also a nice boost because it's always doing something and can potentially be quite a bit. Compared to Citrinne his magic is not enough lower to offset all his big wins everywhere else, and he basically just completely outshines Clanne or Celine. Compared to Ivy his stats are a bit better but he doesn't have the overpowered class. 8/10

My interpretation of the end of Chapter 9 scene has always been that Byleth had one shot of Divine Pulse remaining, used it to rewind to kill Kronya, but was intercepted by Thales who was observing to make sure she didn't die / get captured. This doesn't require any fancy superpowers on Thales' end is consistent with everything else the game shows us about divine pulse. Of course the player might have more shots of divine pulse left than that, but a weakness of pre-defeined cutscenes is they have to go with a canon number. It might have been cool if the cutscene extended to show various things going wrong based on the number of shots of divine pulse the player had left, but that's a pretty extensive use of development time for a single cutscene. I do agree the specialness of Kronya's dagger feels like a dropped plotpoint. I do think it was probably supposed to have some way to overcome Jeralt's Major Crest badassery, but that's just speculation and certainly the game never elaborates on it. The Manuela situation isn't comparable. Kronya was trying to kill Jeralt, very clearly. Jeritza was not trying to kill Manuela... in fact, since he was acting under orders of Thales whom he dislikes, he has a good reason to do his job as badly as possible.

For what it's worth I always play Fates (and indeed most video games) without the social features and I always find there's a pretty good ore supply. As Jotari notes it's nearly impossible to lose your wager in round 1 of the arena if you're watching the numbers. I feel like I've written this exact sentence before, but past a certain point I find money is a significantly bigger limiter on my forging than ore is. I don't generally bother with bribing though, so that might help. You do indeed keep your winnings from earlier rounds if you give up in the later round. So it's +1 ore for winning one round, +3 ore for winning two, as long as you avoid a turn 1 death in later rounds. You can also savescum the arena very easily; I usually don't but considering the type of things some people are willing to savescum, it's worth mentioning. (Goodness knows ore generation in Fates is far more painless than getting the bond rings you want in Engage, for instance.)

Appreciate the response, and found myself nodding along (I also certainly prefer 5E to 2E from a gameplay standpoint. I was definitely disappointed that it seemed like video games moved away from D&D in almost a perfect reversal of how well I felt D&D would suit work for a video game battle system.)

Fogado is a solidly above average but not exceptional unit. Stat-wise he's got a bit of a speed focus similar to Kagetsu and Merrin, but not as good as either of them. He also has pretty good magic which is nice for the Radiant Bow. As mentioned he's a remarkably low-effort, effective combatant due to his speed, mobility, and bow access. You can make him another class too, the bow proficiency is a nice boon for Warrior. I'm gonna throw out a rare decimal score and go with 6.5/10. Him being about halfway between Alcryst and Kagetsu feels right to me.

CRPG is such a strange term. I agree that it often doesn't include games like Final Fantasy and Pokemon (and Fire Emblem!), but then, if you ask pretty much anyone what genre of video game Final Fantasy 7 belongs to, ninety-nine times out of a hundred you'll get an answer which involves "RPG". So Final Fantasy is an RPG which is played on a console/computer but it is not a CRPG, which ostensibly stands for console/computer RPG? Very strange. I tend to prefer the label of WRPG instead for that reason (it's still not perfect because not all WRPGs are made in the west and there are TTRPGs made in the west which obviously don't fall under the label, but at least the intent of the label is a bit more clear). (I agree that definitions don't really matter and all that matter is that we agree on what terms mean for a given discussion, but goodness if some of the semantics surrounding RPGs aren't extremely strange.) Anyway that's not what I came into this thread to post about. I've been hearing some good things about this game but I really didn't care for the first Baldur's Gate from way back in the day. Mostly I just really didn't care for the combat, and find the idea of trying to recreate TTRPGs (which I play regularly in person and enjoy) in video game form to be a fool's errand because I'll never truly have the freedom and flexibility to shape the story and communicate with the DM that I do in person. Is this game worth checking out anyway?

I'm a big fan of Reposition in this game (and every other one it appears in) but you don't need to dedicate a build to it, just slap it on various units. It's probably most valuable on units who are more durable (since one use is to pull someone two squares back out of trouble, potentially exposing the repositioner instead) and more mobile (especially fliers who can stand on top of difficult or inaccessable terrain). Unlike in 3H you can't canter after using it, which is probably a good chance for balance reasons but does mean the two skills, while both great, do have slight negative synergy with each other. IMO there's little reason to have TWO repositional skills on a unit (both in this game and in 3H). While there may be some value in having different skills on different units for variety, there's definitely diminishing returns on putting multiple skills on one unit, because they largely serve the same purpose and skill slots are too valuable.

Zelkov is an on-paper solid PC who struggles to find a niche. His stats are pretty good though not as good as Kagetsu or Merrin. He just misses the cutoff for part 1 skills, so he may well lose to your most favoured units coming out of that, too. He's stuck in a slightly awkward class for a few maps, although his stats are good enough to make it work and I certainly have a lot more respect for thief than I do for swordmaster. His personal skill gives him +10 avoid and that's very cool, but his average speed and subpar luck do cut into this lead... still, he's good at it. He's a hard unit to rate. Obviously, he completely outclasses various part 1 units you will bench, but not as good as various other part 2 units who join around the same time. If you stick him on the team he'll do well, but arguably in an "optimum" playthrough you might conceivably only deploy him for one map (Chapter 14, with its large limit). I'll go with 6/10 but I could be argued.

I was inspired to catch up with all the ratings I've missed. If these ratings are too late to "count" that's fine, but I figure in case they are still being counted, it'd be better to put them all in one place than post a separate rating in each thread. So with apologies for the wall of text: Boucheron: 4/10. Kinda like Clanne or Etie he's a bit of an earlygame filler unit who is outclassed later. His stat build is overall more impressive than Alfred's IMO, so that's something. Celine: 5/10. She's a cut above the average "mediocre earlygame" unit because she's stronger than Clanne out of the box and thus will get a few good maps as the Best Celica User. But she's not dramatically better than Clanne, either, so there's only so far I'm willing to hype her. Chloe: 8/10. Very good unit, the best to join in the first ten chapters. Stat-wise, she's not as good as some of the midgame badass crew, but she makes up for that by having Canter plus class flexibility on them, not to mention just plain being good in the earlygame. She can do both magic builds and physical builds well, though I've only personally really tried the physical ones. Louis: 7/10. Louis is another very good earlygame unit, but he doesn't age nearly as well as Chloe. Still, his ability to just go almost anywhere he wants (watch out for mages) and not die, while having good killing power, is great; he certainly makes the earlygame much easier. He's pretty clearly better than Vander but worse than Chloe IMO, so that makes the numeric score he'll get pretty clear for me. Yunaka: 5/10. Yunaka is very solid out of the box, she's gonna have no trouble pushing aside the earlygame filler to earn a spot on the team even if you take Micaiah from her. Knives are cool as it turns out. But her long-term is... not good. Thief is nice early but mediocre later and she's stuck in it until Level 21, and her stats are surprisingly worse than you'd expect (below average speed...). Alcryst: 5/10. Mostly replaces Etie (though she does have slightly better str) but will ultimately face the same problems as many other part 1 units, i.e. is outclassed by the midgame units. Still, both Chapter 7 and 8 feature plentiful fliers he can destroy with little investment, and he's workable later in a few roles if you really want. Citrinne: 6/10. Early promoted Citrinne has crazy good combat as a Mage Knight, honestly; she doubles things for quite a while and watch out if she does. Takes increasingly heavy investment to keep doubling things later, and isn't as good as Ivy or Pandreo overall, but a good magic stat goes a long way to making certain builds work. Lapis: 5/10. This is mostly theorycraft, I've barely used Lapis. But she has shockingly good stats for a part 1 unit: respectable strength and good speed, so she can do well in physical roles. She's a bit crowded out by Chloe (in a better class with less effort) and the midgame crew, and it's hard sell for me to give a high score for a part 1 unit who basically requires two seals to get rolling. Diamant: 5/10. I saw some hype for him in another thread when the game came out and I was pretty confused. I don't think he's bad; in fact he's quite good for few chapters if you promote him early so he isn't stuck with his swordlock. But the stats don't really feel like they cut it on Maddening; kinda like Celine he's too balanced for the thresholds that mode requires. If you're not using many part 1 units long-term though he can take a Master Seal and put in great work in Chapter 9-11 at least, but that's not a very big window. Amber: 6/10. I think? Another unit I've barely used, but that strength stat is pretty monstrous. Kinda like Lapis in that you NEED to invest in him fast or he's hitting the bench, but he probably has more upside than Lapis does, since really only Panette does his role better, and there are worse things than running two Panettes. "Really high strength and okay otherwise" can work really well with certain builds in this game, such as Vantage/Wrath or stacking speed via Lyn to have super offence. Jade: 3/10. Vaguely tolerable as filler, probably better than Amber or Lapis if you're not investing in any of them for Chapter 10-11. But overall her stats just aren't very good. When I used her I just made her a Griffin Knight who healed and had just enough strength to kill squishier enemies but frankly anyone can do that, and there's nothing to recommend Jade specifically aside from a barely noticeable focus on res. At this point we transition into the better units! Ivy: 9/10. I decided early that I'd give out no 10's for Engage, and went back and forth as to whether Ivy would get an 8 or a 9. IMO, she's clearly the second best unit in Engage (Seadall's #1). Her downside is that, depending on what you want from her, you need to fix various problems. Hit and luck, fortunately, are pretty easy to fix via a variety of engraves. Speed's a bit harder, but the results are impressive if you do. But however much or little you invest in that, she's still got great magic, B staves, and flight, in a game where both magic and staves are very good. I found her utterly game-breaking with Corrin and I've read she's equally game-breaking with speed investment. Kagetsu: 8/10. Kagetsu's almost the opposite of Ivy, as far as good units go. Whereas Ivy is all about unique class advantages (flying + magic + staves), Kagetsu just has good stats and nothing else. Swordmaster's mediocrity means he's actually not that great in Chapter 12-13, but after that, watch out. The stats are basically best in show all-around. The only complaint is that, since speed is easier to fix than strength/magic in this game, that he might prefer to be really good at the latter rather than the former. But that just means he can use less-demanded emblems like Roy and still dominate. He doesn't really do anything unique and if you swap him out for another good (but not as good) physical statstick you probably won't notice, but yeah, he good.

PoR and RD were the fourth and fifth Fire Emblem games I finished (after the GBA games). Big fan of both. Out of the two I definitely prefer RD, though certainly a great strength of both games is their rich setting, which only exists due to the groundwork laid out in PoR, so in some ways the two are a package deal. Broadly I prefer RD for the following reasons: The story is more interesting and ambitious. In these conversations I'll go for ambition over not, every single time. This should surprise nobody given what my favourite FE is. I'll particularly mention that I found all the antagonists of RD a lot better than those of PoR (including Zelgius who went from someone I was extremely unimpressed by in PoR to a character I ended up enjoying a fair bit in RD). I found the map design much more interesting, especially where it intersects with telling a story. I can instantly recall every map in part 2, they all feel extremely different from each other and all served a clear, distinct story role. I loved the rotating perspectives instead of being yet another RPG that follows a single heroic teenage boy (sorry Ike, I still like you). The story felt much richer as a result. I appreciated that I actually got to use most of the game's giant cast. Most Fire Emblems have 40+ characters but you just use a dozen of them and bench all the rest. In this game, thanks to the rotating perspectives and the Part 4 pathsplit, all but the worst PCs are worth using in at least some capacity. I find that cool. PoR's shop system is extremely annoying, with weapons appearing and disappearing randomly. Want to buy a hand axe? Better hope it's in the shop this chapter. RD is just much more user-friendly; once something appears in the shop, it stays there. The exceptions, the bargains, are advertised as temporary, which I'm fine with. Armour knights and snipers are worth using! I also much preferred how laguz worked in this game, though I can't say I was 100% happy with either game's implementation. I really enjoyed the info conversations, which provided a lot of opportunity for different characters to interact. PoR had them as well but because every single one featured Ike they felt a bit more limiting. Honestly I liked RD's info conversations more than PoR's supports, if I'm being honest. In terms of replayability, PoR's long map animations are a major drag. RD has its frustrating moments too (especially if you don't turn off yellow unit actions on some maps) but I find the "animations off" setting a lifesaver for my 5th, 6th, etc. playthrough of the game. (Yes I played both games this much, I really like both.) Responses based on some other stuff in the thread: -I definitely agree with @Shanty Pete's 1st Mate that RD is more of a "use the strongest unit / prepromo" game than PoR. Oscar, Kieran, Marcia, and Jill are all immediately mentioned as being among the strongest units in PoR; the only prepromo who's mentioned as often is Titania (who is the usual overpowered Marcus/Seth-type). -I'm not really a big fan of either game's battle animations. Early 3D isn't really my favourite, and on top of that battle animations in these games are remarkably slow, particularly if it's something like an armour versus a wyvern. For my money, battle animations improved immensely with Awakening, not so much because they were pretty graphically (they weren't, IMO), but because of (a) critical cut-ins, (b) voice acting, (c) the ability to speedup or end the animation whenever I want, so I can play the game at my own pace, even if my mood changes mid-enemy-phase. -I agree that RD's hard mode removing QoL (and the weapon triangle for that matter) is bad design. But in a direct comparison with PoR, I have to point out that RD Normal (which I almost always play) is still more challenging than any PoR difficulty I have access to, anyway, so I can't really give PoR credit for this.

Personally I thought the second to last chapter is pretty good though I'm not certain what I think about just how vulnerable it is to Warpstrats, to the point where even I (who tend to avoid such things) immediately warped half my team to reunite with the other half. The last chapter itself is pretty meh, though. Just a worse 3H monster boss. Every 3H final chapter is better imo, and I say that as someone who is on record as preferring Engage's map design to 3H's generally. I have definitely seen a general feeling of "map design goes downhill towards the end of the game" (and I'd generally agree, aside from really liking 24) for what it's worth. Engage definitely has great game design and gameplay and it certainly succeeded in that regard. I just don't think it succeeded in story, and the game's reception kinda shows that. As lenticular mentioned the game doesn't really feel like it even succeeds at having a simple, happy, campy story, if that was the goal. And I'll be honest, I don't think that should be the goal. The list of Fire Emblem games most frequently praised for writing has very little overlap with going for that sort of style.

Just seconding @samthedigital here. I rather dislike LTC/warpskip-style play myself (I prefer to play FE maps, not skip them), but really unless you're playing at a glacial pace you should have little trouble reaching new sources of emblem energy on most maps. I checked my own file and my average number of turns over all the post-Corrin maps is around 9 (and that was without any of the "skip" techs like long-range Astra Storm to aggro bosses early), so one emblem circle will get you through some maps even at this speed, and two will get you through almost all of them.

I enjoy fixed mode. Random stats versus fixed stats each have their own appeal to me, therefore I like the option to choose either. I have friends for whom the random stat growths are a big turnoff; fixed mode helps make the games more appealing to them. But obviously random growths have a long history in the series, and I wouldn't propose getting rid of them. One thing I like about fixed mode is it's sometimes nice to experiment with a rarely-used unit and have them turn out how they "should". I only rarely use Rolf, but when I did use him (on fixed mode), I knew he was turning out the way he should, so I would get an objective feel on how good he is at each point in the game. By comparison, if I pick out a character I rarely use in another FE, and s/he gets seriously RNG-screwed (or blessed), I feel like I haven't actually learned much about them as a unit.

Agree with this, but to be fair... you bring up heavy weapons, but there are plenty of lighter weapons too. The Iron Axe+ and Mace+ are the go-to choices for accuracy, and have 7 and 6 weight respectively. Even the Silver Axe+, the go-to choice for raw power (it's basically superior to Zoltan assuming you can't forge Zoltan, except against armours), has 10. (Aymr is obviously very good, but I would generally try to avoid being in a situation where its weight matters; you want to use it for its combat art, Raging Storm, which can't double anyway, and if you're being caught with it out on enemy phase you might burn a use of the weapon which equals a lost shot of Raging Storm the first time it happens.) Yeah, Commander would be a cool thematic skill although interestingly, as impactful as it is for bosses, it be quite a minor perk on a player character in practice, I think. Arguably the most interesting effect it might have would be on the AI, as it would likely discourage enemies from using gambits which, even if inaccurate against Edelgard-level charm, is something you'd rather enemies don't use because it means you're not countering them (and also if they do land, it'll muck with your strategy next turn, necessitating a nearby Restore-user if you have one, or a lost turn by the unit hit if not).

Auto-Potion is famously game-breakingly strong in at least one strategy RPG it has appeared in (Final Fantasy Tactics). While FE's version would likely be less broken for a variety of reasons it would still potentially be a really useful skill. If enemies aren't dealing more damage than your potions restore, you can't die. Inventory limits might be a potential issue, but given that every recent FE has put the convoy on the main character, they at least would still be able to restock every turn. Similarly, money cost could be a potential issue, but every recent FE gives you more than enough. So it's definitely a skill that would need to be carefully balanced, and I think it probably goes against the current design ethos of FE where no-brainer enemy phase abilities are mostly frowned at.

Warrior is definitely a class that I think might attract more attention if Wyvern didn't exist, because it does have an ability to do big damage with axes, but it's a hard sell to do that at 5 move when you could do it with 7 move and canto... plus the point we've hammered before about how a solo A requirement is actually much more onerous than B axes + C flying (yes, even for units with a bane in flying). Good point that it's yet another point of competition for Edelgard's unique classes, though. in the slight defence of Emperor not having Weight-5, Edelgard does have very high strength so often she'll be able to avoid being weighed down much, especially if you have a spare slot for Weight-3, which she qualifies for easily (though obviously, that's a slot that Fortress Knight can use on something else). Ultimately I really like Emperor just having +1 move on Fortress Knight, but you're right that this comparison is much more muddied than it should be. Emperor really should have had something else to distinguish it from other armour classes, be it actually decent speed and/or the ability to use magic

I've soloed the game with Colm and it was not terribly difficult. I imagine Joshua should be able to solo the game as well, though his lower luck does mean his dodging wouldn't be as reliable, so it would be a bit harder than Colm. Cormag's an odd case, since usually "solos" don't begin until you get the unit; if you recruit Cormag at the end of Chapter 10 Eph (a chapter whose victory condition is "survive", so requires no further combat) you should be able to grind him up in optional fights as much as you like before going on with the game, although it's fair if you want to consider "more grinding = harder solo" of course. Of course some games just aren't soloable. RD makes solos literally impossible because of endgame boss regeneration (at least on Normal or above); RD Haar has no chance of soloing his game. But any ranking which places every (or almost every) Sacred Stones character above RD Haar is one I would personally not take very seriously.

To be fair, since he doesn't need to invest riding/flying/armour ranks to get his special class, "infantry" is a purely negative tag in this case. That said, the class does have a slight niche anyway; it's the only Lancefaire class available to men with a speed mod better than +1 (at +4); if you want Dimitri in a lance class with the best non-move stats possible, it's probably your choice. Emperor also has a slight niche, being one of two classes with a +8 defence mod with more than 4 move. Granted, Great Knight has this too, but that's fairly difficult to qualify for. Granted, in practice I find Emperor even less tempting; Edelgard has good enough speed (unlike e.g. Dedue/Raphael/Alois/Gilbert) that just dumping the stat entirely isn't tempting to me, and there's a really, really good Axefaire class with a far better speed mod. Wyvern Lord with a good shield just completely stomps Emperor with a March Ring, for instance, and March Ring is arguably Emperor's best accessory choice.

That's fair, of course, but by your definition, pretty much every class is better in FE8 than they are in Conquest, just because the former is a significantly easier game. At that point it feels more like you're ranking game difficulty than how useful armour knights are in the game. A similar argument could probably put Heath or Cormag above RD Haar or Camilla in a wyvern ranking, yet very few people would actually consider the former two to be better units than the latter two.

Agree with this. Aside from Byleth, who exists in their own unique space as the player avatar, 3H is a game with four dominant characters. If there are going to be four routes, surely it makes sense for the fourth to feature Rhea in a starring role. Give her a bunch of supports which really dig into her, the way the other lords do. Make her an extremely strong playable character; goodness knows it fits the lore. One place I do think KT made the right choice, and perhaps where I disagree with you a touch, is that I don't think CF should have been particularly difficult to get. I think "side with Edelgard" vs. "side with Rhea" (perhaps presented more neutrally, as you suggest) is a wonderful opportunity for a meaningful player choice in a genre which often advertises it but rarely delivers, and I think having some players miss that choice because they didn't jump through [arbitrary hoop X] would be a bit of a waste. I don't mind what's currently in the game (there's an argument that if Byleth doesn't know enough about Edelgard to reach C+ support, they wouldn't trust her enough to side with her after reveal as the Flame Emperor, which strikes me as legitimate) but I don't think I'd have enjoyed the feeling of being railroaded into a key choice because I didn't check a guide.

You've definitely made a long, detailed post, and obviously put a lot of thought into it. Forgive me for wanting to zero in on one aspect in particular, because it's one I feel pretty strongly about. I'll first observe that a video having hundreds of thousands of views does not necessarily mean people agree with its conclusion. It's got a title that cynically be described as click-bait and more generously might have some thought-provoking things to say. Doubtless some people agree with "CF is too short" but plenty of others disagree. I disagree pretty strongly. First of all, Three Houses, on any route, is a long game. I've been watching a good friend of mine play through the non-portable English-released games over the past couple years. His game clock on 3H is longer than any previous FE by a wide margin, with the exception of Radiant Dawn (which I believe is similar, but would have to check). It's almost unthinkable to me that this would not be the case for most players. In terms of raw chapter length, some might argue that 18-22 is on the low end for FE. Well, sure (although FE8 sits at a similar 21). But a lot of problems occur if you try to use that to argue that it's a short game: Paralogues exist. Even on a zero-student-recruitment, no-DLC CF run, there are at least nine (Dorothea, Sothis, Manuela/Hanneman, Alois/Shamir, Flayn/Seteth, Edelgard, Hubert, Bernie/Petra). Already, adding this number onto the number of CF chapters brings us to 27, which is comparable to or greater than the majority of other games in the series. And depending on the other variables I mentioned, there might be up to 10 more, bringing the number to 37. Auxilary fights exist. The player is forced to do one (in chapter 2), and several more are suggested as quests, with at least two (the ones that allow for more merchants) being basically expected by the game. There's more to Fire Emblem than battles, and any route of 3H has a lot of non-battle content. If every route had 18 chapters, I don't think you'd see people complaining that the game was too short, because to me that's just a ridiculous proposition; it's factually one of the longer strategy RPGs on the market. The only reason people might argue CF, specifically, is too short, is because of the comparison with other routes. Personally I'd just as soon argue the other routes are too long. But regardless, all the routes are in what should be, hopefully, to most players, a perfectly acceptable length for a game. I agree. One additional problem is that it's not just that SS isn't very good, it's just that it's not really clear what the route offers players (except perhaps the angst of your closest companion betraying you, which apparently was the key idea for the first draft of the game). If I'm playing Edelgard's route, I want to see Edelgard. I don't think this is just me; everything about the game's advertising, presentation, and introduction are designed to get you interested in the three lords; the initial route branch is about whose story you want to see. As a result, even though SS is officially the "default" route, it ends up feeling more like a swerve from her route onto a "Church route", starring characters that are much less important to the overall narrative and themes of the game, and who I imagine most players are less invested in compared to the big three. To make matters worse, it has virtually no content I can't see while playing Claude's route, which has the added benefit of seeing Claude.

I always felt like RD strongly discouraged me from having Ike use Urvan, in fact I've never done it. Ike already has a SS ranked weapon locked to him. There are only so many SS rank weapons to go around, I'm not giving two of them to one person unless I'm doing a weird challenge or theme run. Related to the above, each unit can only bless one weapon at the start of E-3. Ike must bless Ragnell. Are we proposing I don't bless Urvan? Or that someone else blesses it and then hands it to him, and then that person has no weapon to fight Ashera with? Both suggestions are unsastisfying. Ike has two forced contributions in endgame: he must duel Zelgius and he must deal the final blow to Ashera. For the first fight, the best weapon choice is the Hammer. For the second, he is, once again, forced to use Ragnell. As mentioned, you have to grind Ike's weapon rank to use Urvan. This isn't too hard if you prioritize it, I suppose, but why do it? The entire time Ike is a Vanguard, he has access to Ragnell, which rules. Finally, there are many, many good axe-users in RD. I'm taking at least one to endgame. They're getting Urvan. The most narratively sensible choice is probably Titania; Geril's long-time deputy taking up his axe is neat. Though in terms of gameplay there are many others to consider. Now to be clear, this doesn't meant I'd necessarily oppose seeing Ike with Urvan in Smash. Byleth got three weapons they're unlikely to use in their home game, after all, and I thought that was neat. But nor am I really clamouring for it either. Part of the issue here is that Ike in Smash is already the slow, powerful fighter (moreso than he is in his home game, to differentiate him from Marth). What are axes known for? Being slow and powerful. By contrast, with Byleth, it really let them use different fighting styles (e.g. the slow/strong Aymr, the ranged Failnaught).

Obviously you can do what you want, but 0% growth is absolutely not "difficulty as intended", given that it requires a hacking method. I can virtually guarantee the devs did not consider such runs when designing the game; if they had considered them important or something worth balancing the game around, they would have put in a "0% growths" option when you start the game (similar to how PoR and Engage provide an option between fixed and random growths).

I think the best advice I've seen for Fire Emblem (and it applies to a lot of FE-like games as well) goes roughly as follows: At the start of every turn, estimate which enemies you think you can reasonably defeat (or immobilize, in the case of the FE games that allow that). You can use the battle projections to figure out specifics if needed. Then, as you move each of your units, consider any enemies you're leaving them in range of who you don't think you'll defeat this turn. Consider if this unit can survive all of those enemies attacking them. If necessary, check their atk stats against your unit's def/res. Try to position units in such a way that they will not face enough damage to kill them (however, letting them take non-lethal damage is usually fine, and often desirable if they're able to counter). Otherwise, though, you should generally take an offensive approach; defeat as many enemies you can, and for in general keep moving your units forward, toward future enemies or other objectives (e.g. the seize point, treasure, etc.). Resist the temptation to leave a unit further back just because they're squishier; getting units too far behind where they can't contribute on a difficult turn is one of the more common ways to get into trouble, from observing new players. Basically, unit losses occur when you leave a unit in range of too many enemies; following this method of thinking will avoid that, while also allowing you to push forward offensively and be prepared for future turns.

Yeah I definitely agree with you on this, and 3H definitely does some good things in this regard. I'd also point out the line Dorothea has after AM/VW Myrrdin if Ferdinand isn't recruited; this line has received a lot of praise, and it's only possible to see by recruiting one optional character but not another, so in that sense it's pretty niche (granted, the first character is much easier to recruit than the second, so it ends up more common than you might expect). However, I definitely don't think players are as likely to kill their characters off than just not recruiting them, for something like this. It feels bad. It's obviously most easily seen in Shadow Dragon; I'm sure it's a bit more common here because we're all FE mega-fans, but I've been in a community where I was literally the only person who had seen the Shadow Dragon side chapters, despite a lot of us playing the game. I do agree with @Jotari's point that it's not that hard to add a small number of lines acknowledging player unit deaths, as per 3H monastery dialog. It's nice, even. I just think in this particular case, it's a losing trade for "and now you have to write the story in such a way that any contributions to the story by supporting characters needs to be able to be ignored/written out if necessary". To return to 3H, a common complaint I have seen (and agree with) is that Dedue isn't adequately involved in the story of Azure Moon, despite his importance both to Dimitri personally and to Duscur. And this is basically because he can permanently die; because of this, his contributions either need to be insignificant enough that the main story is the same whether he's there or not, or you need to write two versions of the story, and the latter is too much work for something most players won't see.