Is Lyn better than Marcus/is Marcus good/ is Lyn good

[BlueDevil]

Lyn all day every day <3

[SocialJusticeBowWarrior]

I don't know who Marcus is.

Which means Lyn is much better than him.

[DiogoJorge]

7 hours ago, Mister Rogers said:

man this thread is basically the best example on "how not to have a proper argument".

 

With all due respect, Lyn is the singular worst character to be relying on growths since she's melee locked for a long time in a lance heavy game. Rebecca/Wil/Nino are garbage, but that's also due to their own bases and not being handy in an EP heavy game.. Out of all the dudes in fe7 that had shaky growths, Bartre/Heath/Lowen are the ones that give the biggest boost if the growths clock in properly. The 1-2 range is worth it just that much.

 

without LHM, Lyn's effectively like Lucius, but at 1-range.

Well, at least you said with all due respect, that's an vast improvement over how the others have been behaving here.

I don't have any problems with being melee locked, since the damage she takes from lances is acceptable and Mani Katti is  almost godlike how it destroys nomads Knights, Cavaliers and other annoying enemies and you have enough uses for the entire game. Rebecca and Wil are good, Rebecca is faster while Wil is stronger, Rebecca is the preferable one, since she doubles easily even with heavier weapons like Brave Bow (meaning 4x attacks) as a Sniper, Nino is bad however, because of her poor availability, she would need to join at chapter 26H at the very least or before to be of any use.

No it's not, 1-2 range is not that much of a thing other than a few chapters and Barte's averages show that he's going to take a long time before doubling. Also you have more than enough units to kill everything that survives during Player Phase, and those times you can't kill all of them, you usually can't do it with 1-2 range weapon either due to their meh accuracy and MT. Not to mention that a large portion of enemies attack at 1 range, meaning that you will find yourself wasting javelin and handaxes on enemies that have 1 range. 1-2 range is usefull, but a unit can easily compensate by being better in other areas.

You shouldn't play it whitout LHM to begin with, you are only handicapping yourself. And if you want to skip Lyn mode, there's  a better way to do it, by keeping a save of chapter 10 or 11 around.

Edited July 23, 2018 by DiogoJorge

[Hanes]

Hiya what did I miss? It's 2 AM Shouldn't ya'll be asleep now?

[ping]

"The damage Lyn takes from lances is acceptable"

"Marcus' 10 base defense is way too bad"

hahahaha If only every bullshitting in the world was so easily spottable. (And before you complain about my choice of words - I'm using the term in the way Harry Frankfurt characterizes "bullshit" in his essay. It's philosophical 'n shit)

7 hours ago, Florete said:

Eh, I don't really agree with that. Sometimes a unit can seem mediocre at first but knowing the right way to use them makes them very good, like Jill in RD.

Fair enough. Although I don't think that Jill is hard to use (source: this scrub when playing RD for the first time), it's more that it's not so immediately obvious that she is the best use of your resources.

8 minutes ago, This boi uses Nino said:

Hiya what did I miss? It's 2 AM Shouldn't ya'll be asleep now?

That's just, like, your opinion, man. The sun is shining and I'm about to go to work.

[eclipse]

48 minutes ago, This boi uses Nino said:

Hiya what did I miss? It's 2 AM Shouldn't ya'll be asleep now?

I mean, this topic is about opinions, and in my opinion, it's 10 PM.

[MacLovin]

3 hours ago, DiogoJorge said:

Well, at least you said with all due respect, that's an vast improvement over how the others have been behaving here.

I don't have any problems with being melee locked, since the damage she takes from lances is acceptable and Mani Katti is  almost godlike how it destroys nomads Knights, Cavaliers and other annoying enemies and you have enough uses for the entire game. Rebecca and Wil are good, Rebecca is faster while Wil is stronger, Rebecca is the preferable one, since she doubles easily even with heavier weapons like Brave Bow (meaning 4x attacks) as a Sniper, Nino is bad however, because of her poor availability, she would need to join at chapter 26H at the very least or before to be of any use.

No it's not, 1-2 range is not that much of a thing other than a few chapters and Barte's averages show that he's going to take a long time before doubling. Also you have more than enough units to kill everything that survives during Player Phase, and those times you can't kill all of them, you usually can't do it with 1-2 range weapon either due to their meh accuracy and MT. Not to mention that a large portion of enemies attack at 1 range, meaning that you will find yourself wasting javelin and handaxes on enemies that have 1 range. 1-2 range is usefull, but a unit can easily compensate by being better in other areas.

You shouldn't play it whitout LHM to begin with, you are only handicapping yourself. And if you want to skip Lyn mode, there's  a better way to do it, by keeping a save of chapter 10 or 11 around.

seriously you reply to me fucking around but not to everyone who posts a proper reply.

that's real mature.

Do you realize that your opinion means all of jack shit to me since I've been playing fe7 HHM for a long ass time, have done a shitload of runs with drafted teams (I'm bad at ltc, but not so bad as to not be able to hit the S rank ingame. That's fairly doable). I'm not some newcomer to the series that's asking for advice , but rather another fan that's seen the value of Marcus and acknowledges that he's pretty much the best unit due to his value in every applicable metric.

my playstyle is pretty much no-grind. that means i use marcus to lift the shitty earlygame on his shoulders to get to where hawkeye and pent are. at that point, everyone's levelled and i can deal with the swarms much easier. Lowen/Bartre/etc. get an easier time when marcus lifts the game since they get the exp funneled into them and the lords  AND they can take a few hits.

this, ergo, means Lowen/Bartre/Erk/etc. can easily be at a substantially higher level by midgame. if they've hit above their averages, that often means they've earned a promotion come level 15 or so since I don't give a fuck about endgame stats. (Base Athos can solo that. What does it matter)

 

LHM is nice and all, but telling me that playing without it is handicapping is fucking arrogant. Not everyone has a Lyn fetish, and the mode's a pain. If I'm not gonna be using anyone from Lyn mode then why would I go through it? Lowen/Marcus can easily replicate what Kent/Sain can do without lyn mode. In fact the only ones who have a hard time without lyn mode are lyn, maybe wil, and maybe kent. Sain/Florina are easy enough to use since one 2HKO'd every swordie at base and the other can ferry dudes and snipe stuff that marcus/oswin leave on life support.

 

 

and stop trying to shove bullshit onto me. I know very well what units are capable of what given averages and enemy stats from past experience. More time playing a game doesn't mean you're better at it. It just means you've spent more time on it. And judging from you talking shit here, it 's apparent that you're not very good at anything outside of turtling.

[Ironthunder]

7 hours ago, DiogoJorge said:

Well, at least you said with all due respect, that's an vast improvement over how the others have been behaving here.

I don't have any problems with being melee locked, since the damage she takes from lances is acceptable and Mani Katti is  almost godlike how it destroys nomads Knights, Cavaliers and other annoying enemies and you have enough uses for the entire game. Rebecca and Wil are good, Rebecca is faster while Wil is stronger, Rebecca is the preferable one, since she doubles easily even with heavier weapons like Brave Bow (meaning 4x attacks) as a Sniper, Nino is bad however, because of her poor availability, she would need to join at chapter 26H at the very least or before to be of any use.

No it's not, 1-2 range is not that much of a thing other than a few chapters and Barte's averages show that he's going to take a long time before doubling. Also you have more than enough units to kill everything that survives during Player Phase, and those times you can't kill all of them, you usually can't do it with 1-2 range weapon either due to their meh accuracy and MT. Not to mention that a large portion of enemies attack at 1 range, meaning that you will find yourself wasting javelin and handaxes on enemies that have 1 range. 1-2 range is usefull, but a unit can easily compensate by being better in other areas.

You shouldn't play it whitout LHM to begin with, you are only handicapping yourself. And if you want to skip Lyn mode, there's  a better way to do it, by keeping a save of chapter 10 or 11 around.

1-2 range is quite possibly the single most dominating factor in whether a unit is good or not. Being able to take both melee and archers/mages on EP is by far the best way to get through the game, and is almost always going to be faster because you get hits in on EP that normally you can't. Managing EP is as important if not more so than PP. You'll survive EP just as well with 1-2 as without, if not more so because it means you're clearing the board quicker. Explain how 1-2 range is not beneficial in basically any situation.

[Rose482]

Just because a character can use 1-2 range weapons, doesn't make them automatically better  than a character who can't use any.

 

And if you were smart in how you place Lyn, you can force magic users or other units with long range weapons to attack her from range, so her being able to use bows IS useful. 

 

 

[Interdimensional Observer]

6 minutes ago, Rose482 said:

And if you were smart in how you place Lyn, you can force magic users or other units with long range weapons to attack her from range, so her being able to use bows IS useful. 

People tend to point this out to stay 2-range lock isn't so bad. The issue is that barring an indoors map with walls to be shot over, or maybe a river, the number of enemies you'll be able to enemy phase will still be lower than that of one with 1-2 range. You have to intentionally skim the very edge of enemy ranges, a 1-2 ranger can move in however far they want and not care if they can live through it. Rebecca can move 2 spaces into the enemy's range, Marcus can move 5, which can significantly affect your options on the next turn having a unit that much further ahead.

And 1-2 range does not automatically make a unit superior to one without it, but if we have two units, both have the stats to do the same thing to the same degree, which in this case is attacking enemies on the enemy phase and living through it all. They both 2RKO the enemies, ORKO them, they can live through four rounds of combat, six, whatever it is, they can both do it. Then in these circumstances the 1-2 range unit is superior, if they can survive the additional attacks of moving in further, if this is possible. If the 1-2 unit cannot move in any further due to lacking durability or obstacles, it's a tie at worst for the 1-2 unit.

In what scenario would the 2 range-locked unit be superior? Never, I think. Which is why FE tries to make 1-2 weaker than pure 2 range, pure 1 range, or softlocked 2-range units, like Lucius, in ways situationally stronger than 1-2 could be. Bows are effective on fliers, Magic targets Resistance, the frail Ninjas of Fates debuff their foes and almost always have access to Poison Strike. New Mystery crippled the stats on Javelins and Hand Axes, but this didn't stop Awakening, which inherited these nerfed stats, from making 1-2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 range on non-Lunatic+ difficulties and optimal Galeforce teams. Fates on the other hand largely did do a better job of making 1-2 range not so great, except on the elder brothers with their legendaries.

But I think I've gone off enough of a tangent. 

[Ironthunder]

It's not automatic but it's a significant advantage, and one that becomes larger the further into the game you get. 1-lock and 2-lock are perfectly fine and usable, but they have the advantage of a slight power boost over the ability to counter at multiple ranges, which isn't really comparable. The only bad range is 0-range. 

[Balcerzak]

On 7/22/2018 at 11:37 AM, DiogoJorge said:

He's good enough, but I bet his party was poorly trained. He put too much effort to make it faster, there are easier ways to acomplish the same thing. If you can finish the game and get an A rank, then you are a good player. Balcerzak's flaw is that he's putting more effort in finishing the game faster rather than focus on finding a easier way to play the game (that doesn't involve exploits by the way). If he S ranked this way, good for him, but I have another way that works just as well.

I'm one of the more experienced FE players though. Not really, I seriously doubt I'm the only one, when I've met players before that prefer to have a balance between having a powerful team and efficiency. Would you rather put more effort into solving a problem, or choose a method that is slower but works better and easier? Because that's common sense, specially on a job. They want a job done well, not one done fast.

Here's the snapshot of my Victory or Death team from the run/

Canas and Erk were just there to collect XP, IIRC. I really should have used a different notation for promoted/unpromoted.

I mean, I think my main squad was handling things pretty well, as far as growing went, and were all well into the 20/10s. A lot of good units hit 20 unpromoted and then were benched because I wanted to do things like use Farina, etc instead. I don't think that 'poorly trained' is an apt descriptor. 

On 7/22/2018 at 6:38 AM, DiogoJorge said:

If you have 20 turns to spare, than you overdid it in your rushing. 10 turns and close to that is what you should have aimed for, for the purpose of there being extra in case something goes wrong, 20 is overkill and should be sacrificed for more experience, treasures that you might missed and kills. It's pretty clear that you could have avoided using Marcus more as a result.

At the end of the day I did only have ~10 turns to spare, so building up that extra surplus of turns early on was definitely not overkill. I'm not sure you fully understand, but saving turns in chapters that don't have good sources of XP in order to trade them in for extra turns on chapters that do (either very good streams of reinforcements, arenas, or both) is a much more effective use of time and energy. So looking at a turn count at any particular snapshot of the game and rendering a snap judgement on it really isn't doing you any favors. There's no need to take all of the turns available on every given map, if the reward isn't going to be worth it.

(These were the final stats of the run, btw, at the very end)
Total Tactics: 314/328 (5 Star)
Total XP: ~42000/40000 (5 Star)
Net worth Assets: 934047 / 847200

---

On 7/22/2018 at 12:27 PM, ping said:

The advantage of the "efficient" criteria is that it is considerably more objective. How can the game be beaten with the least required effort? This, of course is pretty much a platonic ideal. I'd wager that very few players will only have "effort" in mind - it's a game, after all, and usually, the primary reason to play is to have fun - another highly subjective term, unfortunately. In any case, assuming a modicum of mental flexibility, people can now discuss what the most efficient playstyle entails - which units to use, which items to get, where to slow down and where to warp skip - and how much one can deviate from that playstype before the needed effort increases noticeably. Like, how much harder is the game if one doesn't use Marcus, but plays efficient otherwise? How much more tedious does the earlygame get if one were to train Rebecca? How impactful is that Speedwings/Body Ring combo on Athos?

There might need to be some qualifier to your bold. I'm reminded of Fionorde's strategy of feeding kills to a slim sword in chapter 1 on FE4 until it got max crit, which he then would use to trivialize arenas for almost everybody. I don't remember how many extra turns he put into it, but even if it was helpful, that kind of reinforcement/boss abuse seems to me to deviate away from what a realistic person would consider "most efficient" even if it does take less effort. It feels similar to how it doesn't take any effort to just grind to godly levels in one portion of an RPG until you can one-shot everything afterwards. I'm not sure how to properly quantify this objection though.

21 hours ago, Ironthunder said:

First off, experience in absolutely no way, shape or form guarantees quality. Let's just get that out of the way. Second of all, there's a tradeoff between speed and effort. People want to do it in the easiest and best way, yes, but they also don't want to be sat killfeeding for a good ten chapters and would rather get those chapters out of the way so they can get to the part with the actual good units like Pent and Hawkeye. Which is basically what happens to have Lyndis, Rebecca, or anyone in the usual 'suboptimal' group come out as good. Yes people want a strong and effective team, but they also want to actually get on with the game instead of having to play a certain way to get the (extremely subjective) 'Most Optimal' squad. I'd much rather use Marcus and get through the game than sit there killfeeding to grind Lyndis up and hope she doesn't get boned on the growths.

The fact you're still trumpeting growth units as the be-all and end-all means that despite your 'experience', you're still not very good at this. 

This is actually a pretty well-phrased line of thought along the same vein, actually. While some 'killfeeding' is bound to happen, even in 'efficiency' play, I would tend to suggest that those units who are naturally more self-sufficient from the getgo fit the definition better, even if they do peter off eventually.

---

22 hours ago, Mister Rogers said:

also did he just shit talk a mod who's had a logged S rank run playthrough for focusing on making sure it was an s rank run?

I mean, I do appreciate the defense, but this feels a little bit like appeal to authority. Just because I'm a forum moderator doesn't mean my strategies are intrinsically better. The run should be evaluated on its own terms (which I doubt diogo would actually do, which is maybe the more pertinent point).

[sauce]

1 hour ago, Rose482 said:

Just because a character can use 1-2 range weapons, doesn't make them automatically better  than a character who can't use any.

It's not an "automatically better". Some units have 1-2 range, like Wallace or Bartre, but that doesn't mean they're automatically better than someone like Guy or unpromoted Raven. However, you can't deny that it's a straight up advantage. I don't see how you can think, in any regard, that being able to counter any unit on enemy phase, and also being able to avoid any combat whatsoever on player phase (unless it's also a 1-2 range unit) is anything but an extreme advantage. 

[Rose482]

48 minutes ago, saucegoblin said:

It's not an "automatically better". Some units have 1-2 range, like Wallace or Bartre, but that doesn't mean they're automatically better than someone like Guy or unpromoted Raven. However, you can't deny that it's a straight up advantage. I don't see how you can think, in any regard, that being able to counter any unit on enemy phase, and also being able to avoid any combat whatsoever on player phase (unless it's also a 1-2 range unit) is anything but an extreme advantage. 

 

Well i'm pretty sure no one is saying it's NOT a an advantage, but that wouldn't make me think Wallace or Bartre are better than Lyn in any day of the month lol.

 

 

[ping]

17 minutes ago, Balcerzak said:

There might need to be some qualifier to your bold. I'm reminded of Fionorde's strategy of feeding kills to a slim sword in chapter 1 on FE4 until it got max crit, which he then would use to trivialize arenas for almost everybody. I don't remember how many extra turns he put into it, but even if it was helpful, that kind of reinforcement/boss abuse seems to me to deviate away from what a realistic person would consider "most efficient" even if it does take less effort. It feels similar to how it doesn't take any effort to just grind to godly levels in one portion of an RPG until you can one-shot everything afterwards. I'm not sure how to properly quantify this objection though.

I can't really comment on the specific case since FE6 is the oldest that I've played until now. But I'm tempted to say that if that initial grindfest takes less effort than it saves over the course of the game, it would be the "most efficient", just not the "most fun", at least for me as someone who generally can't stand grinding in a videogame.

It's still a very good point to think about, though. There is no objective exchange rate for "tedium vs difficulty" - for example, if this Slim Sword griding (I wasn't even aware that you can grind weapons in FE4) only simplifies parts of the game that have already been easy beforehand, I would not call it "efficient", even if it would take less real time than the standard approach. It's certainly not as simple as "effort = time", since generally speaking, people play games in order to have fun (and/or to argue about it on the internet).

However, Fire Emblem is still a game with very clear victory conditions - seize, kill a boss, defend etc. pp. - which I believe might be an approach to a good definition for "efficiency". Basically, how much do you have to invest into a unit (that in itself does not help to reach the VC) in order to make it have a certain amount of positive impact? For example, Rebecca needs virtually no investment to be somewhat helpful in the earlygame, but in order to get more help out of her (i.e. get her to a point where she consistently helps reaching the VC), she needs significant amount of time for self-improvement or, even worse, requires other units and/or slower playstyle in order to gain sufficient XP). As such, she would be considered to be a worse unit than Guy, who has a similar usefulness curve, just higher (helpful in the earlygame without any investment, but come midgame, fielding him often isn't the best choice, especially after Raven joins).

I'm not under the illusion that we'd reach any real consensus about unit ratings, even if everyone would agree on this metric. There's still a lot of subjectiveness involved - how significant is the payoff of a trained {insert growth unit}; is a specific kill in a Seize map really helpful for clearing the map, or is it just self-improvement; and so on. But I am convinced that the question "What does a unit actually do?", while often more harder to answer, is still a more useful one to ask than "Which unit is stronger".

[sauce]

2 hours ago, Rose482 said:

Well i'm pretty sure no one is saying it's NOT a an advantage, but that wouldn't make me think Wallace or Bartre are better than Lyn in any day of the month lol.

Yeah nice that's literally what I just said. 1-2 range isn't an automatic "This unit is great" modifier, cause it applies to any magic, axe or lance user, no matter how good. It's just a point that it provides a lot more utility and combat potential, allowing units to operate on both phases.

[MacLovin]

5 hours ago, Balcerzak said:

Here's the snapshot of my Victory or Death team from the run/

  Reveal hidden contents

Canas and Erk were just there to collect XP, IIRC. I really should have used a different notation for promoted/unpromoted.

 

I mean, I think my main squad was handling things pretty well, as far as growing went, and were all well into the 20/10s. A lot of good units hit 20 unpromoted and then were benched because I wanted to do things like use Farina, etc instead. I don't think that 'poorly trained' is an apt descriptor. 

At the end of the day I did only have ~10 turns to spare, so building up that extra surplus of turns early on was definitely not overkill. I'm not sure you fully understand, but saving turns in chapters that don't have good sources of XP in order to trade them in for extra turns on chapters that do (either very good streams of reinforcements, arenas, or both) is a much more effective use of time and energy. So looking at a turn count at any particular snapshot of the game and rendering a snap judgement on it really isn't doing you any favors. There's no need to take all of the turns available on every given map, if the reward isn't going to be worth it.

(These were the final stats of the run, btw, at the very end)
Total Tactics: 314/328 (5 Star)
Total XP: ~42000/40000 (5 Star)
Net worth Assets: 934047 / 847200

---

 

There might need to be some qualifier to your bold. I'm reminded of Fionorde's strategy of feeding kills to a slim sword in chapter 1 on FE4 until it got max crit, which he then would use to trivialize arenas for almost everybody. I don't remember how many extra turns he put into it, but even if it was helpful, that kind of reinforcement/boss abuse seems to me to deviate away from what a realistic person would consider "most efficient" even if it does take less effort. It feels similar to how it doesn't take any effort to just grind to godly levels in one portion of an RPG until you can one-shot everything afterwards. I'm not sure how to properly quantify this objection though.

This is actually a pretty well-phrased line of thought along the same vein, actually. While some 'killfeeding' is bound to happen, even in 'efficiency' play, I would tend to suggest that those units who are naturally more self-sufficient from the getgo fit the definition better, even if they do peter off eventually.

---

 

I mean, I do appreciate the defense, but this feels a little bit like appeal to authority. Just because I'm a forum moderator doesn't mean my strategies are intrinsically better. The run should be evaluated on its own terms (which I doubt diogo would actually do, which is maybe the more pertinent point).

Spoiler

I was kinda doing that in a sorta tongue in cheek manner.

but yeah while your run isn't perfect, it is logged.

4 hours ago, Rose482 said:

 

Well i'm pretty sure no one is saying it's NOT a an advantage, but that wouldn't make me think Wallace or Bartre are better than Lyn in any day of the month lol.

 

 

even in Bartre's case, he's still very much the average joe and doesn't get shat all over by enemy swarms of lance cavs/wyverns and 2HKO'd.

 

but noone' s saying that 1-2 range is the sole qualifier of making a unit amazing. it's just more of one of the major points for making a dude like Raven qualify for top tier since it fixes his one biggest flaw with promotion.

[DiogoJorge]

14 hours ago, Balcerzak said:

Here's the snapshot of my Victory or Death team from the run/

  Hide contents

Canas and Erk were just there to collect XP, IIRC. I really should have used a different notation for promoted/unpromoted.

 

I mean, I think my main squad was handling things pretty well, as far as growing went, and were all well into the 20/10s. A lot of good units hit 20 unpromoted and then were benched because I wanted to do things like use Farina, etc instead. I don't think that 'poorly trained' is an apt descriptor. 

At the end of the day I did only have ~10 turns to spare, so building up that extra surplus of turns early on was definitely not overkill. I'm not sure you fully understand, but saving turns in chapters that don't have good sources of XP in order to trade them in for extra turns on chapters that do (either very good streams of reinforcements, arenas, or both) is a much more effective use of time and energy. So looking at a turn count at any particular snapshot of the game and rendering a snap judgement on it really isn't doing you any favors. There's no need to take all of the turns available on every given map, if the reward isn't going to be worth it.

(These were the final stats of the run, btw, at the very end)
Total Tactics: 314/328 (5 Star)
Total XP: ~42000/40000 (5 Star)
Net worth Assets: 934047 / 847200

---

 

There might need to be some qualifier to your bold. I'm reminded of Fionorde's strategy of feeding kills to a slim sword in chapter 1 on FE4 until it got max crit, which he then would use to trivialize arenas for almost everybody. I don't remember how many extra turns he put into it, but even if it was helpful, that kind of reinforcement/boss abuse seems to me to deviate away from what a realistic person would consider "most efficient" even if it does take less effort. It feels similar to how it doesn't take any effort to just grind to godly levels in one portion of an RPG until you can one-shot everything afterwards. I'm not sure how to properly quantify this objection though.

This is actually a pretty well-phrased line of thought along the same vein, actually. While some 'killfeeding' is bound to happen, even in 'efficiency' play, I would tend to suggest that those units who are naturally more self-sufficient from the getgo fit the definition better, even if they do peter off eventually.

---

 

I mean, I do appreciate the defense, but this feels a little bit like appeal to authority. Just because I'm a forum moderator doesn't mean my strategies are intrinsically better. The run should be evaluated on its own terms (which I doubt diogo would actually do, which is maybe the more pertinent point).

Seems like your team is somewhat passable in terms of power, but I see some units whose stats make little sense though, Hector being lv 7 Great Lord for instance, he should be lv 18 or so, if you only had 10 turns to spare then that's alright and  I thank you for your effort into posting this.

Once I  make my S-rank playthrough after finishing my regular playthrough, It will show you how to do a more balanced playstyle between effectiveness and efficiency and see if it might be of some help to you.

 

[Just call me AL]

On 7/22/2018 at 10:06 AM, DiogoJorge said:

It is since he is the one to mention Pokemon when nobody asked about that, we were talking about FE here.

I only mentioned it because this whole exchange just now reminded me of a Pokémon G1 debate I ended up getting into. The fact that we're talking about FE is precisely why I asked to be PM'd by anyone who wanted more details, since I obviously didn't want to detail the topic any further than it already has been.

Quote

Not really, all I keep seeing is 8-14 SPD for the most part of midgame. He certain doubles a lot before chapter 19, but considering that his SPD is stuck at 11 SPD and that it takes him lv 17 to reach 15 SPD which is mediocre by endgame, I have no reason to keep using him.

You should be thinking about what's happening before endgame, though. Judging from the numbers @Aut provided, assuming that Marcus is used liberally, between Ch 19 and Ch 32 with Paralogues considered, Marcus is doubling about 9 enemy types within each map. That's amounting to 153 enemy types total. And considering that there's multiple enemies of each type in each map, that number is likely higher. Point is, if Marcus' speed is so "mediocre", then why does he double so many enemies? Food for thought.

On 7/22/2018 at 12:37 PM, DiogoJorge said:

I'm one of the more experienced FE players though. 

No. What you are is a player that hasn't really changed his views and playstyle from when he first started playing, drags down the performance of his entire team due to his lack of skill, never really owns up to his mistakes, gives out advice that is obvious to the more experienced players, is obnoxious and overconfident to the point where he thinks he's more skilled than players who are legitimately more skilled than him, and tries to convince said experienced players that they're the ones who are wrong via a torturous use of mental gymnastics not unlike what's employed by the infamous YouTuber known as ShockOfGod. There's a name used to describe such a player. But for the sake of being civil, I'm not gonna say it here.

Quote

Not really, I seriously doubt I'm the only one, when I've met players before that prefer to have a balance between having a powerful team and efficiency.

But again, why choose when you can have both? Especially when, by endgame, as proven by Balcerzak earlier, you have a powerful team regardless of how you play?

Quote

Would you rather put more effort into solving a problem, or choose a method that is slower but works better and easier? 

The fact that there's players looking for a more efficient way to do things suggests that the faster method is the more easier one. This is literally true for any FE. However, what is easier isn't always obvious to newer players. To put it in one way, sure, you can turtle. But why do so when there's a faster and simpler solution?

Quote

Because that's common sense, specially on a job. They want a job done well, not one done fast.

However, a person can and will get fired if a person takes a longer than necessary time to fulfill a job's duty. I can't even begin to recount how many times my supervisors were wondering about my speed because they felt that I wasn't fulfilling my duties fast enough.

1 hour ago, DiogoJorge said:

Seems like your team is somewhat passable in terms of power, but I see some units whose stats make little sense though

"Somewhat passable"? Even though they're at expected levels for that point in the game?

1 hour ago, DiogoJorge said:

Hector being lv 7 Great Lord for instance, he should be lv 18 or so, if you only had 10 turns to spare

>Implying that gaining 11 levels within 10 turns is realistically possible. Which it isn't, even if you turtle.

[DiogoJorge]

1 hour ago, Just call me AL said:

I only mentioned it because this whole exchange just now reminded me of a Pokémon G1 debate I ended up getting into. The fact that we're talking about FE is precisely why I asked to be PM'd by anyone who wanted more details, since I obviously didn't want to detail the topic any further than it already has been.

You should be thinking about what's happening before endgame, though. Judging from the numbers @Aut provided, assuming that Marcus is used liberally, between Ch 19 and Ch 32 with Paralogues considered, Marcus is doubling about 9 enemy types within each map. That's amounting to 153 enemy types total. And considering that there's multiple enemies of each type in each map, that number is likely higher. Point is, if Marcus' speed is so "mediocre", then why does he double so many enemies? Food for thought.

No. What you are is a player that hasn't really changed his views and playstyle from when he first started playing, drags down the performance of his entire team due to his lack of skill, never really owns up to his mistakes, gives out advice that is obvious to the more experienced players, is obnoxious and overconfident to the point where he thinks he's more skilled than players who are legitimately more skilled than him, and tries to convince said experienced players that they're the ones who are wrong via a torturous use of mental gymnastics not unlike what's employed by the infamous YouTuber known as ShockOfGod. There's a name used to describe such a player. But for the sake of being civil, I'm not gonna say it here.

But again, why choose when you can have both? Especially when, by endgame, as proven by Balcerzak earlier, you have a powerful team regardless of how you play?

The fact that there's players looking for a more efficient way to do things suggests that the faster method is the more easier one. This is literally true for any FE. However, what is easier isn't always obvious to newer players. To put it in one way, sure, you can turtle. But why do so when there's a faster and simpler solution?

However, a person can and will get fired if a person takes a longer than necessary time to fulfill a job's duty. I can't even begin to recount how many times my supervisors were wondering about my speed because they felt that I wasn't fulfilling my duties fast enough.

"Somewhat passable"? Even though they're at expected levels for that point in the game?

>Implying that gaining 11 levels within 10 turns is realistically possible. Which it isn't, even if you turtle.

Alright them, then I accept your explanation about bringing pokemon and apologize for calling you out on it.

I do think before endgame though. That's precisely why I use growth units. Since there's Battle Before Dawn, Night of Farewells, Cog of Destiny, Four Fanged Offense (Linus) etc...

 

Not really. I don't drag the team down, on contrary, I make sure the team is propely built instead of dragging the team by overelying on Marcus, it doesn't take skill to use Marcus, to have a proper team does. If it's so obvious, but I still give it, is probably because you sound like you don't get it. Considering that I am reading here, I should state those pieces of advices, regardless if it's obvious or not. 

And what's wrong with that,?  Mental gymnastics? It takes little effort to state what is common sense to me. I will give advice whetever you like it or not, I'm not pointing a gun at your head to heed it. I am a veteran, and thus I will dispense advice if I feel like they need to hear it and I won't let anyone stop me from doing so. I don't know this shockgod guy, but I do know that I'm a FE veteran, that's the proper label to give to someone as me. Anything less is wrong by default.

 

The problem with Marcus is that he only doubles early enemies often enough. He has 11 SPD, that might seem good, but reminder that means that he only doubles enemies with SPD 7 or less, which from that very list presented here, aren't as common as you make it seem, the worst part is that considering Marcus' growths, his SPD won't be able raise much further, if he reaches lv 17 he might double a bit more, but he's not reaching lv 17 when there are better units with better stats by then. Kent is going to end up taking most kills that would go to Marcus (assuming one would only use Marcus and Kent and not the myriad of other good units that are available) since Kent is just as good as Marcus before even promoting if we list averages. And yes, that's mediocre SPD, he should be doubling more enemies than those he can. Even Kent's SPD isn't that impressive until he promotes.

Lv 15 Kent Cavalier:

HP 31 STR 11 SKL 13 SPD 13 LUK 4 DEF 8 RES 4

Lv 5 Marcus Paladin (the more likely level for him to be at by then, assuming one uses him as one should)

HP 33 STR 16 SKL 17 SPD 12 LUK 9 DEF 10 RES 9

This is what one should expect around chapter 19.

As one can see, STR, SKL and RES are the only things he truely has going for him. A cavalier is catching up to him before even promoting, if we take into account promotion gains later on, it becomes quite obvious why Marcus can't compete, specially since Kent deserves the Dracoshield more than Marcus does, since he's the one with the growths. Meaning that at this point Kent would have 10 DEF, the same as Marcus is. This isn't to say he's useless, only that he's not as great as people stated before.

Balcerzark's team wasn't what I would call powerfull, only decent, barely so in terms of power.  Why have both, when Sain, Kent and Lowen are better than Marcus? That's already 3 Paladins, more than you will ever need. Marcus is just as waste of a deployment slot at that point even if we just take into account Kent and Sain only, since you will want your mages, Lyn, Raven, Rebecca, Serra, Lucius and possibly bench Guy in favor of Pent if one wants an extra mage. Just those units alone take all or almost all deployment slots in a lot of chapters, sometimes even forcing you to bench Lyn in favor of Raven in chapter 18H.

Not at all, the more you rush it, the more effort it takes, specially if you have to drag yourself down by using units like Marcus and Louise. If you are going to use pre-promotes, use good ones like Geitz and Pent who at least have some growths, specially Geitz who is pretty much Lyn with axes. They are looking to make it faster not to make it easier, but to further challenge themselves, I on the other hand I'm not interested on it, since there's no profit in me to do it faster. For regular playthroughs, A rank is good enough, and for a S rank run, the closer one is to the minimum turn,combat and funds requirements, the better, not so much for experience, since more trained units means more power, which is always a good thing.

But your bosses aren't demanding you to be ridiculously fast do they? Because that's what happens in those LTC runs. I never had such problems, since I do my work fast enough, now that I'm doing some temporary work, but I hear complaints about other workers trying to rush the job only to have pallets poorly sorted or have a plastic film that isn't tight enough due to such rushing. It doesn't require you to be very fast to do those propely.

That's not what I meant in that phrase though. 10 turns to spare, refers to Balcerzark having close to the requirement limit, which as I said before is a good thing, since the more of those turns you consume to make your team more powerfull and well equipped, the better. Just on the Ostia's defense chapter, Hector should easily gain levels due to his great DEF. He doesn't need too many turns when there are enemies crawling everywhere. By the end of it, he would be around lv 10 Great Lord or so, specially since he already gains 3-4 or so levels in the Thunder Axe chapter.

 

Edited July 24, 2018 by DiogoJorge

[ping]

Balcerzak had two goals: 1) beat the game and 2) reach an S rank. He reached both those goals with that team, so it is as effective as a team can be. Source: The actual definition of the word "effective".

You keep insisting that the game SHOULD be played in the way you are playing it, and dismiss that other players have been successfully using Marcus (i.e. beaten the game while getting mileage out of his abilities, including Ranked runs) because he isn't "supposed" to be used that way.

If others bring up ways in which a unit can contribute, you always just dismiss it as "it shouldn't be used that way". You either lack the mental flexibility and mathematic ability to gauge how a unit that you haven't been using would perform if you had - or you deliberately refuse to acknowledge valid arguments against your position (i.e. you're bullshitting, cherrypicking and just being generally dishonest)

You keep making illogical arguments - how does one get from "Kent has higher growths" to "Kent deserves statboosters"?

Basically, you're "winning" your arguments simply by postulating your claims as true.
"Kent is better because he has better growths, therefore he deserves the dracoshield, therefore his defence catches up to Marcus quickly, therefore Marcus' bases are too low." - do you recognize why this is not a valid argument? Do you recognize where I am just silently assuming things? Or where I'm smuggling in a logical conclusion where there shouldn't be one?

 

Also, your advice is terrible. Following it would make both beating the game and getting an S rank more difficult.

Edited July 24, 2018 by ping

[Tryhard]

There is an obvious disconnect between "good enough" and "better late-game" here. Fire Emblem is (generally) not so difficult as to prevent a skilled player from advancing completely while using at least some low-effort early/mid-return units.

This does remind me of myself before I discovered the majesty of characters like Dagdar, though. No wonder I was having trouble with Thracia until I used the beast.

Who would win? A horde of angry internet denizens vs one stubborn boi.

[redlight]

6 minutes ago, Edgelord said:

Who would win? A horde of angry internet denizens vs one stubborn boi.

Extra-link board vs one round boi. sorry, i had to

[MacLovin]

how fucking arrogant do you have to be to dismiss someone's logged and successfully done HHM S ranked run with the argument of "you shouldn't be doing it that way".

[Aut]

3 hours ago, DiogoJorge said:

Lv 15 Kent Cavalier:

HP 31 STR 11 SKL 13 SPD 13 LUK 4 DEF 8 RES 4

Lv 5 Marcus Paladin (the more likely level for him to be at by then, assuming one uses him as one should)

HP 33 STR 16 SKL 17 SPD 12 LUK 9 DEF 10 RES 9

Holy shit do you have no self awareness? This comparison makes Marcus look blatantly better than Kent by a long shot. The only thing Kent has over him is +1 AS with weapons w/ less than 10 weight, but considering the javelin weighs 11, I see that Marcus has +1 AS using the best weapon. And this Marcus doubles so much of Midgame that it’s laughable to call these stats bad. Not to mention the +5 strength difference - shockingly enough this does make a big difference, especially when using weaker weapons like the javelin.

Anyways, you say his speed isn’t impressive, but it doubles

Basically all cavaliers

All pegasus/Falcoknights (except the slim lance ones, and lol at those ones)

all armors

Basically all magic enemies (except the Valkyries, but he’s hitting a 2HKO w/ a brave lance at base, so...)

all fighters/brigands

Basically all archers/Snipers (the ones that come w/ Kishuna maybe not, as well as the ones in 24W, but the rest are easy doubles)

Wyverns that are weighed down (like w/ axereavers or steel lance)

 

Can double/might be borderline doubling

Nomads

Wyverns that aren’t weighed down

Really weighed down units that aren’t mentioned above (I.E. mercenaries, Myrmidons, Paladins, Wyvern Lords)

 

Will probably double Marcus

Swordmasters

Valkyries

Some bosses

 

Something of note is that of the units that Marcus doesn’t double, quite a few are unpromoted sword users (Myrms, Mercs, thieves) which are quite awful against Marcus, most are rare as hell (Nomad troopers only appear in like 2 maps, one of which is the worse choice of a route split, Valkyries also appear in 2 maps, although you can beat one of the maps before they even show up, Warriors and Berserkers to my knowledge only appear in one map each, Wyvern Lords, Swordmasters, and Paladins I’m fairly sure number 5 or less each) and Heroes, while somewhat common, don’t exactly appear in super large numbers (it’s like 1-3 per map they show up in). All in all I don’t see how Marcus’s speed is all that bad, considering all of this

Spoiler

Also I wouldn’t be surprised if I made this same argument before and he just ignored it, but whatever