CRASHX500's Top 10 Underrated Fire Emblem Units

[NekoKnight]

Didn't watch the video (lol 30 min 'Top 10' video), but how could Tanith, Maiden of a Thousand Pegasus Knights, be underrated?

[solrocknroll]

Tanith lol. Tanith gets her dues easily.

Calill, Sigrun, and Aran sound good on this list to me. I've noticed Aran is just regarded as not!Nolan/Nephenee.

[twistedxgrace]

I find it interesting that he considered Cherche underrated (more so than Nyx and prepromotes especially). While not a favorite of mine, she ranked #5 in the official Awakening character popularity poll, and I found her to be incredibly useful in battle being the only starting first-generation Wyvern Rider and all.

[HF Makalov Fanboy Kai]

Are people still seriously listening to this idiot.

^

while i do question Green Scorpion's taste, his is still better then this nutcase.

[The Geek]

While I don't agree with a lot of his picks either (Stahl, Sumia, Cherche, and Nah underrated? Maybe in the "they're not as overwhelmingly popular as Lucina, Tharja, and Cordelia" sense, but from what I see around the internet they're all very well liked. You could maybe make an argument for Sumia based on the case of rabid Chrom/Robin fangirls, but that's about it) I don't think that using the general views of Serenes Forest members as counterpoints is really accurate in all cases. The Fire Emblem fanbase extends well beyond Serenes Forest, and there are a lot of other communities with vastly different opinions. There are still people who think that Ests are the best units, that Chrom/Olivia is better than Chrom/Sumia (gameplay wise) among other things.

[Tryhard]

My problem with it, is that he was at least partly judging them as units. The dude basically said "I used Wendy once and she was good", but that's not how units should be judged. It's all well and good to play casually, but there's no point in using that to determine unit worth, because any character can be "good enough" for Fire Emblem games given time and effort. Even if the majority of people still think Ests and such are the best units, I feel as though they should be shown through data how a characters efficiency deems their worth if you're going to at all instead of hiding behind 'well it's just my opinion' when misrepresenting characters.

I think "10 underused units that I enjoy using" would be more fitting if you're not prepared to make an accurate case for how good units are.

Edited September 3, 2016 by Tryhard

[Rezzy]

I'm an insufferable Est lover. I like putting in effort to raising up weak units that become strong, assuming they have good growths. I understand why people don't like using them, but it's just a matter of preference there.

I used Wendy on my first FE6 playthrough. She turned out well, but I'm not going to try to convince anyone she's good, and I generally don't like Armor Knights all that much due to terrible movement speed. In FE6, this is especially bad, with 100% Seize Maps.

Nyx is underappreciated? It seems most people prefer her to Odin in Conquests.

[NekoKnight]

Nyx is underappreciated? It seems most people prefer her to Odin in Conquests.

That's just because most people don't like using Odin, not that they like Nyx. Nyx is just an inferior version of Elise so there is little reason to use her after people hit level 20. Ophelia is also a better Dark Mage option.

[Rezzy]

That's just because most people don't like using Odin, not that they like Nyx. Nyx is just an inferior version of Elise so there is little reason to use her after people hit level 20. Ophelia is also a better Dark Mage option.

True, but you have to at least sorta use Odin to get her, or spend a bunch of time support grinding, which is tedious in Conquests.

[Refa]

Nyx (which amusingly autocorrects to mud on my cell phone) can't be under appreciated because she's literally the worst Conquest character (gameplay wise).

[Troykv]

Nyx (which amusingly autocorrects to mud on my cell phone) can't be under appreciated because she's literally the worst Conquest character (gameplay wise).

It's weird to be worse than a character purporsly designed to be bad in the first levels and doesn't technically fit the no-grind style (Mozu)

[Rezzy]

Nyx (which amusingly autocorrects to mud on my cell phone) can't be under appreciated because she's literally the worst Conquest character (gameplay wise).

She's a glass cannon for sure, but there's worse characters.

[BillNyeTheBlackGuy]

Interesting list. I knew there was going to be a triggering after I saw number 2 on his list. It's proof enough that Fire Emblem has one of the worst fanbases in gaming.

[Espinosa]

My problem with it, is that he was at least partly judging them as units. The dude basically said "I used Wendy once and she was good", but that's not how units should be judged. It's all well and good to play casually, but there's no point in using that to determine unit worth, because any character can be "good enough" for Fire Emblem games given time and effort. Even if the majority of people still think Ests and such are the best units, I feel as though they should be shown through data how a characters efficiency deems their worth if you're going to at all instead of hiding behind 'well it's just my opinion' when misrepresenting characters.

I think "10 underused units that I enjoy using" would be more fitting if you're not prepared to make an accurate case for how good units are.

It's probably the kind of content most of the Fire Emblem fanbase (brought to the franchise by the 3DS games) understands since "I used X and they were good" is the only argument these people ever seem to make when they talk about something (okay I guess there's also "you need to have an archer/dark mage/whatever").

[Tryhard]

I'm an insufferable Est lover. I like putting in effort to raising up weak units that become strong, assuming they have good growths. I understand why people don't like using them, but it's just a matter of preference there.

I used Wendy on my first FE6 playthrough. She turned out well, but I'm not going to try to convince anyone she's good, and I generally don't like Armor Knights all that much due to terrible movement speed. In FE6, this is especially bad, with 100% Seize Maps.

Nothing wrong with that. Just that using a character that takes a lot more effort but turns out marginally better than their competitors isn't usually worth it if you care about speed or how "good" a character is.

The same sort of reason prepromotes were shunned for a long time, unfortunately. I'm not sure if people thought they would always turn out bad (even the great ones) or they just preferred to train up their own units, which I could understand.

Interesting list. I knew there was going to be a triggering after I saw number 2 on his list. It's proof enough that Fire Emblem has one of the worst fanbases in gaming.

'Triggering' in the sense that it becomes tiring to see the same opinions for years, not because they are opinions, he can do whatever the fuck he likes on his channel, but they are based at least partly on objective data like base stats, growths, average stats, availability, etc and the conclusion he has drawn from this is pretty much incorrect. The rest of the reasoning for liking Wendy I don't really have any opinion on. I did enjoy watching it, though. I always found top 10/5 lists entertaining at the very least.

Though if that is your bar, the response of a few people, as proof that Fire Emblem is one of the worst fanbases, then I'm sure you could find a lot worse.

It's probably the kind of content most of the Fire Emblem fanbase (brought to the franchise by the 3DS games) understands since "I used X and they were good" is the only argument these people ever seem to make when they talk about something (okay I guess there's also "you need to have an archer/dark mage/whatever").

There's no real point in having a discussion about that, though, is there? It's just saying wow my Sophia was awesome. I've seen it from people who have played the series from years ago so I don't even think it's the newer games.

Edited September 3, 2016 by Tryhard

[Rend Keaven]

Depsite Crash having a reputation for make outrageous options without properly explaining them and making the run time of his videos ridiculously long, this was one of his better lists because it was at least an improvement from his awful Revelations list. The problem with Crash is that he has this mindset that where he would be like "If something is unique to others in its category, then it must be better". To me, that's like saying I'd rather live in a house made of tempered glass than a house made of solid bricks because it's different than most houses without acknowledging the durability and structural strength of each houses.

He put Syrene on the list which is not a problem, but his reason for her being underrated were that you get her late game, she has good supports and is a useful unit if you take the time. From that logic, characters like Renault should have taking the spot, granted Renault is quite popular.

I used Peri in my first playthrough of Conquest and she ended up on my final team in the endgame because she was strength, speed and resistance blessed. Did I had fun using her? of course.That being said, I still think is she is an awful character and I don't find any humour in her murderous persona. Also, do NOT compare Peri to Jaffar, that's just wrong.

[Shadow Mir]

Nyx (which amusingly autocorrects to mud on my cell phone) can't be under appreciated because she's literally the worst Conquest character (gameplay wise).

She's a glass cannon for sure, but there's worse characters.

Tbf, I think there's worse. Like Arthur.

[Espinosa]

There's no real point in having a discussion about that, though, is there? It's just saying wow my Sophia was awesome. I've seen it from people who have played the series from years ago so I don't even think it's the newer games.

Yeah, it'd an old thing. We just took a few steps back since then. I guess the new players can't be blamed for not making sense out of the games with today's tiering being a joke and no meaningful distinction being clarified between good and bad units?

And right, no discussion is presumed. I was proving somebody that Villager Mozu is in no way statistically inferior to Archer Mozu by writing down the base stats, which were exactly the same in all key areas, and when I thought I finally accomplished the job they went 'oh but you don't get it, my archer Mozu turned out well'.

[Moblin Major General]

Tbf, I think there's worse. Like Arthur.

RNG bias. Your heresy has not gone unpunished.

[Shadow Mir]

RNG bias. Your heresy has not gone unpunished.

Or (and this is much more likely) it's the fact I can't trust him worth a damn on the battlefield.

Edited September 3, 2016 by Levant Mir Celestia

[TheAstraWolf]

Guys, go to his comment section and find the comment that I've made to him. It does explain somewhat where his opinions are coming from.

[Tryhard]

Guys, go to his comment section and find the comment that I've made to him. It does explain somewhat where his opinions are coming from.

Didn't really say anything other than "it's my opinion" which was already said. An evaluation of what is a good unit or not is not exclusive to SF, it's based on statistics. If I had the opinion that two plus two equals five, I shouldn't be surprised if no-one respected that.

That's all, though, I'm not going to constantly go on about how he is wrong because I did think most of it was respectable choices, but at the same time it's my opinion that he has a flawed way of judging characters as units, simply from a gameplay perspective.

Edited September 3, 2016 by Tryhard

[Rezzy]

Underrated is also a highly subjective term.

Like I think Wendy is bad, but usable, but since the prevailing opinion is that she is the worst character ever, that might make her Underrated according to me.

[Tryhard]

Underrated is also a highly subjective term.

Like I think Wendy is bad, but usable, but since the prevailing opinion is that she is the worst character ever, that might make her Underrated according to me.

Well, anyone is "usable" when playing casually, lol. It's just not recommended. And the only real valid way of judging characters worth is if they are worth the effort on an efficiency run like LTC (low turn count).That's why debates about placing characters have been around for a while, but it's generally not hard to tell if a character is good, bad or mediocre statistically, it's harder to tell where characters are in relation to each other.

She gets doubled and killed by the closest archer in hard mode FE6 when she joins. That's pretty horrendous. I don't even play efficiently so it doesn't matter to me, I have used Wendy in the past, but she's really not worth being called underrated at all. The jump from "worst character in the series" to "still shit" isn't really one I would dignify, though.

Edited September 4, 2016 by Tryhard

[saisymbolic]

I only agree that Aran is underrated. The man couldn't double to save his life but he could tank and one-shot for days. Add on my favorite Vatage + Wrath + Impale combo and he was set. Only when magic wasn't involved, though. I actually benched Nephenee for him when I played RD. Granted, that was, like, five years ago when I last played and it isn't as if I'm privy to how units work. I'm rather simple—I just grind up all characters, regardless of how garbagio they are.

Unless it's Fiona. I gnikcuf hate her.

Edited September 4, 2016 by SaiSymbolic