Who would you consider the better unit on HHM: Raven or Harken?

[XeKr]

Obviously Harken2 is the best since he doesn't have the opportunity cost of not recruiting Karel.

If Harken's recruitment cost in turns is a serious detriment, wouldn't Raven's move be the same? He will barely contribute anything because he will fall behind and doesn't have the utility to make ferrying him worth the effort, and all training opportunities will go to your weaker horses and fliers so that they have the combat parameters to save turns later on. Whereas Harken's bases are good enough to make meaningful contributions in certain rout maps.

“otherwise identical” was supposed to refer to stuff like that too. Interesting though, you think that Karel is the only relevant consideration between Harken, Harken2, and Harken3?

And I see waiving recruitment costs as a separate issue from Raven (and Harken) lacking a mount. And anyways, that’s essentially what I was getting at with the earlier statement (reproduced below)…

imo, like the only way I could personally maybe see Harken is if you waived recruitment costs and went full no-mount-is-bad-so-availability<nonexistance and also only considered the optimal case of Marcus+ Lyn Mode!Sain + Lyn Mode!Florina or something. Even then, does Harken contribute anything?

Along with inserting deliberate qualifiers like “(in most teams)” and such. I spent so many words trying to make that distinction.

I know some people may actually think that way (i.e. only the optimal is worth anything), but I also specifically mentioned a fluid, non-specific team composition for my own evaluation. Even if one adopts a strict framework like turn-based ones, it’s possible to consider varying contexts, and the ensemble of cases where the toptier mounts aren’t used. Raven, with his stats, is probably one of the best units from his recruitment on, in most teams. Of course so is Harken, but for much shorter time.

Edited April 7, 2014 by XeKr

[Baldrick]

otherwise identical was supposed to refer to stuff like that too. Interesting though, you think that Karel is the only relevant consideration between Harken, Harken2, and Harken3?

I took "otherwise identical" to mean bases, growths, supports etc. and Harken2 being recruited regardless meant regardless of anything that happened in the chapter. In efficient play, Harken2 is the best because of 0 turn cost. With my interpretation, in "casual" play, that is the only difference. There's no harm in clearing out all but one enemy and waiting for Harken3 (and possibly Harken1) to show up.

And I see waiving recruitment costs as a separate issue from Raven (and Harken) lacking a mount.

I disagree. The only playstyle in which their recruitment cost is non-trivial is one where their lack of mount is also non-trivial. If you consider Harken's recruitment cost to be a dealbreaker, then your playstyle is one that does demand an optimal strategy in terms of turn-count. If you consider non-optimal contexts, especially the cases where you aren't using top-tier mounts, then Harken's cost in terms of turn-count is trivial.

[Nobody]

Ok, I'm getting a bit confused. Who is Harken 3? (I'm assuming Harken 1 is Harken and Harken 2 is Raven)

[XeKr]

I disagree. The only playstyle in which their recruitment cost is non-trivial is one where their lack of mount is also non-trivial. If you consider Harken's recruitment cost to be a dealbreaker, then your playstyle is one that does demand an optimal strategy in terms of turn-count. If you consider non-optimal contexts, especially the cases where you aren't using top-tier mounts, then Harken's cost in terms of turn-count is trivial.

I see people play efficiently without the optimal team or with varying conditions all the time. Drafts, girls only, bow only, recruit all, no sacrificing, etc. They don’t matter? (that’s why I called it a ground rule thing) And people who don’t play efficiently still might care it’s “harder” to recruit Harken (or say…Xavier).

We don’t really know, and I don’t think you can assume such a binary distinction.

And in the cases (multiple) where lacking a mount is non-trivial (which I agree is non-trivial. As in, not having a mount matters), it doesn’t render the other distinctions between Raven and Harken absolutely irrelevant. The space of stuff that is non-trivial is not all identical (or singular).

Could you please clarify? I think I understand what you’re saying but (atm) I legitimately don’t follow your logic in reaching that conclusion.

Or answer this in a word, in your opinion, is FE9 Jill (or FE13 Male Avatar) top or bottom tier? I totally promise this is relevant.

Ok, I'm getting a bit confused. Who is Harken 3? (I'm assuming Harken 1 is Harken and Harken 2 is Raven)

Harken is expected to cost 3ish turns. Harken2 is expected to cost 0 turns. Harken3 is expected to cost 100 turns. They are otherwise identical. Are they equivalent (in efficient or casual or whatever play)?

Edited April 7, 2014 by XeKr

[Baldrick]

Reading back, I'm not so sure myself. I guess what I'm trying to say is that when making a unit judgment based on turns, you should consider all factors rather than just recruitment. For example, it is valid to say Titania > Jill because Titania's net turncount contribution is better, but it is not valid to say Titania > Jill because Jill has a recruitment cost. With that, you could conclude that Rhys has the same recruitment cost as Titania so Rhys > Jill. Raven v Harken is a different situation to those two examples (both have the same class, etc.) but they should be judged with a similar metric.

[Logience]

Raven. Harken requires a few turn sacrifices on LTC, and generally doesn't have that good stats, even with HM bonuses

[BBM]

It's funny because using Raven most likely sends you to Jerme's map, which costs you at least 3 turns as opposed to Kenneth's map. And it also results in Harken not costing as many turns. I think he only costs like 1-2 on Jerme's map. You don't HAVE to go to Kenneth if you train Raven, but it does mean you need to train one of Erk/Lucius/Serra/Priscilla a greater amount than you might want to.

[General Banzai]

Harken is the third best unit in the game after Marcus and Pent

availability is for scrubs

[Refa]

What about Athos?

[Paper Jam]

It's funny because using Raven most likely sends you to Jerme's map, which costs you at least 3 turns as opposed to Kenneth's map. And it also results in Harken not costing as many turns. I think he only costs like 1-2 on Jerme's map. You don't HAVE to go to Kenneth if you train Raven, but it does mean you need to train one of Erk/Lucius/Serra/Priscilla a greater amount than you might want to.

You'd have to use more than one of them, probably. Priscilla, at least, can't gain experience nearly as quickly as Raven can (at least before she's promoted, but she can't promote until she's at least level 10, and she starts off at level 3). You can level Serra up pretty high in Lyn's tale (the better to promote her early in Hector's tale), but Erk and Lucius can actually fight from the moment you recruit them. I'd say you'd have to use Erk and/or Lucius to compensate for the experience gained by Raven.

It is weird to be arguing about whether Raven or Harken is better, given that (a) as you said, using Raven increases your probability of getting Jerme's map, and (b) Harken is easier to recruit in Jerme's map than in Kenneth's. I consider Raven and Harken to be pretty much mutually inclusive.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Paper Jam

[XeKr]

It’s so easy to train the mage units and staff spam in the lenient defense maps though. >_>

[BBM]

It's regardless an extra hoop you have to jump through to use Raven in an LTC playthrough. You have to invest effort into training units for no purpose other than to get you to Kenneth's map just to use a unit whose contributions in an LTC playthrough are already questionable.

[XeKr]

To my knowledge, the fastest runs were done by Horace, Gergeshwan and Espinosa, and Horace/Gergeshwan used Raven, while Espinosa used random stuff like Eliwood (probably could have used Raven instead with less effort/stat blessing). All skipped Harken. All would probably have liked Harken for CoD, but dem turns.

Moreover, this was with a Paladin!Sain from Lyn mode or otherwise Lyn-buffed units. I think I’m less harsh on Raven since I usually skip Lyn mode, and he’s then one of the very few units that onerounds from base. Also, some of them probably weren’t that concerned with reliability, which someone like Raven is usually better regarding (compared to other growth units) since his bases are so good and his level is so low for more statistical robustness. Obviously don’t need Raven if you rig growths on mounts. Obviously Harken is even better wrt bases, but he has barely any time to flex it compared to Raven.

Yeah it takes a bit of effort to go to Kenneth, but Serra/Priscilla are good to staff spam anyway, since it’s “free” exp. Also, my point was that investing is Erk/Lucius has negligible turncount/reliability implication, given how lenient defense maps are. And they can maybe heal/Restore/kill stuff to help (okay so you can skip Lucius with 2 Pallys and a highly optimal strat but eh). And besides, Harken is slower either way, it’s just 4-5ish turns (highly optimized) in Kenneth’s map vs. 2ish (not sure how optimized) in Jerme’s.

To be clear, I don’t think Raven is that great at all in efficient play. But I think he’s still better than Harken (whether you waive his recruitment or not, but it’s arguable).

EDIT: words

Edited April 25, 2014 by XeKr

[intergalacticoh]

I've never really been a huge fan of Raven, mostly because his stats are stupidly lopsided and he has shittastic durability, relying on dodgetanking mostly. Not that that's a big deal, because the majority of FE7 enemies have awful hit rates and Raven's got a lot of WTC.

I generally prefer Harken because he has an immediate Str lead, higher con for axes and braves, and much better luck and defenses. And, speaking of axes, Harken comes with a B rank, whereas Raven starts out with E and has to use irons and hands (or steel but nobody wants -6 AS). Raven's sword rank is kind of irrelevant when swords aren't that great to begin with. Oh, and Harken doesn't eat a hero crest.

I like both, I just think that Harken is superior. The only thing that Raven's got over Harken is more time to build supports. Kind of reminds me of Erk and Pent, except that Erk's nowhere near as good as Raven.

[Paper Jam]

Oh, and Harken doesn't eat a hero crest.

There are only four characters that do eat hero crests, and there are three hero crests to go around if you don't count the one in Jerme's map. And if you need those three hero crests for Bartre, Dorcas, and Guy, you're probably going to get Jerme's map (and the fourth hero crest for Raven) anyway.

[Shadow Mir]

I've never really been a huge fan of Raven, mostly because his stats are stupidly lopsided and he has shittastic durability, relying on dodgetanking mostly. Not that that's a big deal, because the majority of FE7 enemies have awful hit rates and Raven's got a lot of WTC.

I generally prefer Harken because he has an immediate Str lead, higher con for axes and braves, and much better luck and defenses. And, speaking of axes, Harken comes with a B rank, whereas Raven starts out with E and has to use irons and hands (or steel but nobody wants -6 AS). Raven's sword rank is kind of irrelevant when swords aren't that great to begin with. Oh, and Harken doesn't eat a hero crest.

I like both, I just think that Harken is superior. The only thing that Raven's got over Harken is more time to build supports. Kind of reminds me of Erk and Pent, except that Erk's nowhere near as good as Raven.

There are only four characters that do eat hero crests, and there are three hero crests to go around if you don't count the one in Jerme's map. And if you need those three hero crests for Bartre, Dorcas, and Guy, you're probably going to get Jerme's map (and the fourth hero crest for Raven) anyway.

With regard to that, though, given that most of the units that use hero crests are mediocre to outright awful...

Back to the topic at hand, I kinda prefer Harken, mainly for weapon rank purposes.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Levant Caprice

[BBM]

Raven doesn't generally need anything other than Iron/Hand/Steel, all of which he can use at base. Killer would be nice, but really more than his weapon rank what holds Raven back from using axes as well as he wants to is his CON. He has good SPD and can therefore afford to take the hit most of the time, but it can suck against the CoD Valks.

[Mekkah]

Meh, he can always Brave Sword the Valkyries if he really needs to, maybe have somoene trade an Iron Sword/Hand Axe to the top before enemy phase. CoD isn't his strong suit regardless. It's not like Harken is all that much better with that Con of his, since he is so much slower. Raven hits Harken's base Speed at L14 unpromoted and has a +2 Speed promotion bonus to look forward to, which means even a 10/1 or equivalent Raven is as fast as Harken. In reality Raven's level is a lot higher than that and he's also a Body Ring candidate. I've seen Raven double some of the slower Valks using Iron Swords, and at the very least avoid getting doubled when using Hand Axe.

[intergalacticoh]

There are only four characters that do eat hero crests, and there are three hero crests to go around if you don't count the one in Jerme's map. And if you need those three hero crests for Bartre, Dorcas, and Guy, you're probably going to get Jerme's map (and the fourth hero crest for Raven) anyway.

It was more considering ranked runs, where both are excellent. Just a minor negative for Raven that he hurts the funds rank while Harken doesn't, but that extends to a lot of characters, and Raven is certainly worth one of your promotions (unless he gets severely screwed like he always does for me. Base speed at lv15 is really unfortunate)