Tier Lists and 'Availability': What do?

[Jotari]

On 12/9/2020 at 3:56 AM, Imuabicus said:

That is all I meant. I was not specifically referring to the quality of a unit, but to the utility recruiting a unit may bring to your army. A utility that should most certainly be part of a tier list, unless the purpose behind said tier list is not in need of such utility, no? 

But we're grading recruitments over actual unit performance, then that goes back to the Bantu argument. Should he be rated as equally high as Tiki, a fairly good unit, because she can't be recruited withoutI know what your point is. I summed it up in my previous comment identical to how you summed it up here near as I can tell. Thing is I don't agree. I don't judge Arran as better than Samson if he came with a better weapon. Because Arran won't be the one using that weapon. I could rank his village as better than Samson"s village, but ranking the benefits of recruitments is a different thing in my book. One that would put Bantu much higher as his recruitment leads to one of the most viable ways to beat the final boss. The quality of a unit's starting weapons are only relevant for how many turns it takes for them to get to a convoy. Prf weapons are an exception of course because only the unit in question (or like one or two other individuals) can use it. Jagen isn't good because he has a silver lance, he's good because he has A rank lances and a silver lance is available. If you got that silver lance from the first village or it came equipped to Draug it wouldn't make a difference to Jagen's overall utility as a unit (beyond the miniscule amount of time it'd take to get it to him on the first turn). I know you're not saying the equipment is more important than the unit. You're saying it has some importance bas a factor combined with the unit. I, personally disagree, I think it has no importance at all except under very strict LTC conditions where you can't afford visiting the convoy.

[Jotari]

So Serenes won't let me edit that previous post which is irksome. I added in mobile and it auto loaded some text of the last comment I added on mobile on this thread. So uh, ignore the first line of that previous comment. The one that lead to some confusion on the subject that I was trying to clear up with that post.

[Baldrick]

On 12/8/2020 at 5:30 AM, Imuabicus said:

So, who is the best user? The unit who starts off strong or the unit who needs help to get up into shape? Keep in mind the immediate effect as well as the potential long term pay-off.

That depends on your playstyle and the context of your tier list. Note that who actually has the Thunderbrand in their inventory is completely irrelevant.

On 12/8/2020 at 5:30 AM, Imuabicus said:

Since you are arguing hypotheticals anyway - if recruting Leo would allow you to get Siegfried for Xander would you then give credit for that in a tier list?

Of course not. The purpose of a tier list is to tell you what units to deploy and give resources to. Their starting inventory is grouped with who they recruit; they are reasons to recruit that unit, not reasons to deploy and give resources to them.

Tiki comes with Banutu. She doesn’t come immediately, but like you can’t use the Thunderbrand without recruiting Catherine, you can’t recruit Tiki without recruiting Banutu.

 

 

 

[Imuabicus der Fertige]

18 hours ago, Baldrick said:

That depends on your playstyle and the context of your tier list. Note that who actually has the Thunderbrand in their inventory is completely irrelevant.

Okay, to continue this spin-off, who is, according to the standards of your own playstyle, the best user of Thunderbrand between Catherine and Ingrid beyond the immediate power-spike of Catherine joining?

18 hours ago, Baldrick said:

Of course not. The purpose of a tier list is to tell you what units to deploy and give resources to. Their starting inventory is grouped with who they recruit; they are reasons to recruit that unit, not reasons to deploy and give resources to them.

Tiki comes with Banutu. She doesn’t come immediately, but like you can’t use the Thunderbrand without recruiting Catherine, you can’t recruit Tiki without recruiting Banutu.

Bolded: That was my point.

So, your tier lists would never tell a player which characters recruitment would grant them access to new/better/special equipment, or later joining characters?

So your evaluation of, let´s say Bantu would be: [Weak, Slow, Frail, 1-range-locked; F-tier.] That´s it? No mention of Bantu being required to recruit Tiki whatsoever? 

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

6 hours ago, Imuabicus said:

So, your tier lists would never tell a player which characters recruitment would grant them access to new/better/special equipment, or later joining characters?

So your evaluation of, let´s say Bantu would be: [Weak, Slow, Frail, 1-range-locked; F-tier.] That´s it? No mention of Bantu being required to recruit Tiki whatsoever? 

Tier lists don't come with any additional information inherent. What you're describing is more like a "unit guide", perhaps as part of a larger "walkthrough". In most cases, full/maximum recruitment is both desirable and achievable - it rarely makes sense to say "oh, I shouldn't bother recruiting anyone in the lowest two tiers". Like, Arden is likely the worst unit in FE4 Gen I, but seeing him at the bottom, and thinking "oh I should never field him" is a fundamental misreading (namely in context of the Pursuit Band).

[Baldrick]

10 hours ago, Imuabicus said:

Okay, to continue this spin-off, who is, according to the standards of your own playstyle, the best user of Thunderbrand between Catherine and Ingrid beyond the immediate power-spike of Catherine joining?

I haven’t played Three Houses so I can’t be specific, but both Catherine and Ingrid would always use an Iron Sword unless they need to use a stronger weapon.

Quote

So, your tier lists would never tell a player which characters recruitment would grant them access to new/better/special equipment, or later joining characters?

Outside of drafting/LTC, which is a self-imposed restriction, tier lists always assume everyone is recruited. Even in drafting/LTC, it’s less that Banutu gets credit for recruiting Tiki, than Tiki is penalised for needing to be recruited by Banutu, if he costs turns.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Baldrick

[Imuabicus der Fertige]

13 hours ago, Baldrick said:

I haven’t played Three Houses so I can’t be specific, but both Catherine and Ingrid would always use an Iron Sword unless they need to use a stronger weapon.

A few things in regard to this:

1) That´s not an answer to my question.

2) I was expecting to have this discussion with you about Catherine/IngridxThunderbrand assuming TH Maddening specifically but seeing as you don´t know the game, eh. And looking at Maddening, I´m fairly certain that Catherine encounters enemies she doesn´t 1RKO and Ingrid with an Iron Sword sounds like a good way to deal little damage and get doubled. But w/e it´s been some time for me playing TH, too.

3) Thunderbrand is a stronger weapon than an Iron Sword. Considerably stronger.

Anyway, onwards to a better example. Sonya or Dean – I assume you know these two judging by your favourite FE game. If you were to make a tier list – would you account for the differing equipment they come with?

13 hours ago, Baldrick said:

Outside of drafting/LTC, which is a self-imposed restriction, tier lists always assume everyone is recruited. Even in drafting/LTC, it’s less that Banutu gets credit for recruiting Tiki, than Tiki is penalised for needing to be recruited by Banutu, if he costs turns.

That has nothing to do with what i asked you.

The only list that i could find that even talks about what a character does is Mangs unit review video, where Bantu is credited with recruiting Tiki. Additionaly, I looked at Dondons 0% LTC run and Bantu doesn´t cost turns. Neither he nor Mekkah talk about why they recruit Bantu, unless i missed it.

16 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Tier lists don't come with any additional information inherent. What you're describing is more like a "unit guide", perhaps as part of a larger "walkthrough". In most cases, full/maximum recruitment is both desirable and achievable - it rarely makes sense to say "oh, I shouldn't bother recruiting anyone in the lowest two tiers". Like, Arden is likely the worst unit in FE4 Gen I, but seeing him at the bottom, and thinking "oh I should never field him" is a fundamental misreading (namely in context of the Pursuit Band).

Have you seen any of the more recent tier lists on this very forum for Three Houses? Or watched any youtube tier lists? Where does a tier list cross the border to a unit guide? Is there an actual difference or is this arguing semantics?

So in most cases full/maximum recruitment is desireable and achievable but not in all of them? In that case let me give you my initial post - the bolded being relevant to your statement:

On 12/4/2020 at 11:12 AM, Imuabicus said:

I think there is (at least) one more aspect to “Availability”, more so in the context of Fates/Awakening/Three Houses (and maybe Echoes?).

And that is, what comes with the available character?

With that in mind, I ask you, why do you recruit Ignatius, Shiro, Dwyer, Siegbert, Raphael, Ignatius, Bernadetta - as a few examples.

I also do not know Thracia, hence i got no idea what you mean with your Arden-example, but I assume it has to do with my Bantu-example omitting Bantu being the requirement to recruit Tiki. I´m well aware that is the case as well as it having only been an example for Baldrick, that was intentionally written that way. 

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

35 minutes ago, Imuabicus said:

So in most cases full/maximum recruitment is desireable and achievable but not in all of them? In that case let me give you my initial post - the bolded being relevant to your statement:

It depends on the kind of tierlist. If I were, say, making a "recruitment tierlist" for Three Houses, Lorenz would be near the top, for giving the player access to Thyrsus. But saying "you should recruit Lorenz" is different from saying "you should train and use Lorenz". Looked at in terms of combat and utility to allies (i.e. a more traditional "tierlist"), I'd put him in the lower tiers.

38 minutes ago, Imuabicus said:

With that in mind, I ask you, why do you recruit Ignatius, Shiro, Dwyer, Siegbert, Raphael, Ignatius, Bernadetta - as a few examples.

I... because I want to use them? I don't know. For the kids, maybe I just want to go to their chapter for the experience. If I rate them, it's how they perform as units, relative to their allies. Unless it's, say, a "pairings tierlist".

41 minutes ago, Imuabicus said:

also do not know Thracia, hence i got no idea what you mean with your Arden-example, but I assume it has to do with my Bantu-example omitting Bantu being the requirement to recruit Tiki. I´m well aware that is the case as well as it having only been an example for Baldrick, that was intentionally written that way. 

Arden shows up in Genealogy, not Thracia. He has low mobility and can't double, in a game where those two traits are king. His stats, weapon ranks, and skills are nothing special. But, like Bantu, he gives the player access to something cool. In Arden's case, it's an equippable item that lets him double! So he's good now, right? Not quite - anyone can use the Pursuit Band, if they have the money to buy it. And he still faces his mobility issues.

The point is, Arden is totally worth fielding in chapter 2, in order to access the event that offers the Pursuit Band. Just like Bantu is worth recruiting, and fielding in the Fane if Ranan, to recruit Tiki. But in both cases, you generally wouldn't want to field them otherwise - they offer no supporting utility, and their combat is worse than most units you could field over them. So I can't, in good faith, rank them above units who perform better for the player at all other times.

[Baldrick]

8 hours ago, Imuabicus said:

2) I was expecting to have this discussion with you about Catherine/IngridxThunderbrand assuming TH Maddening specifically but seeing as you don´t know the game, eh. And looking at Maddening, I´m fairly certain that Catherine encounters enemies she doesn´t 1RKO and Ingrid with an Iron Sword sounds like a good way to deal little damage and get doubled.
 

OK, say Catherine is the best user of Thunderbrand in TH maddening. If Ingrid is the one that is recruited with Thunderbrand, Catherine is still the best user.

Do you agree or disagree?

Quote

Anyway, onwards to a better example. Sonya or Dean – I assume you know these two judging by your favourite FE game. If you were to make a tier list – would you account for the differing equipment they come with?

Deen and Sonya are mutually exclusive, so the opportunity cost of recruiting one is that you can’t recruit the other. Most units are only competing for deployment slots and resources, whereas those two (and other cases such as Harken/Karel) are competing to be recruited.

Deen and Sonya drop their equipment if you fight them, but even so, it has no bearing on how they compare to any other unit except each other. For example, in tiering Harken, I would account for Karel’s performance, but I would not account for Sain’s performance with the Brave Sword. 

 

Edited December 15, 2020 by Baldrick

[Imuabicus der Fertige]

On 12/14/2020 at 5:34 PM, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Arden shows up in Genealogy, not Thracia. He has low mobility and can't double, in a game where those two traits are king. His stats, weapon ranks, and skills are nothing special. But, like Bantu, he gives the player access to something cool. In Arden's case, it's an equippable item that lets him double! So he's good now, right? Not quite - anyone can use the Pursuit Band, if they have the money to buy it. And he still faces his mobility issues.

The point is, Arden is totally worth fielding in chapter 2, in order to access the event that offers the Pursuit Band. Just like Bantu is worth recruiting, and fielding in the Fane if Ranan, to recruit Tiki. But in both cases, you generally wouldn't want to field them otherwise - they offer no supporting utility, and their combat is worse than most units you could field over them. So I can't, in good faith, rank them above units who perform better for the player at all other times.

Bolded: And that is my point. If you wrote your tier list entry for Arden would you then include the bit about the Pursuit Ring, or naw? Because if yes, then you are doing exactly what I had suggested. I think this whole discussion derailed because folks saw it as must rank high because utility?

On 12/14/2020 at 11:47 PM, Baldrick said:

OK, say Catherine is the best user of Thunderbrand in TH maddening. If Ingrid is the one that is recruited with Thunderbrand, Catherine is still the best user.

Do you agree or disagree?

I disagree; the decision who is the best user of what weapon, unless said weapon is restricted to one unit, is to be made on a turn to turn basis, whilst considering immediate effects of usage and the long term pay-off from said usage. 

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

9 minutes ago, Imuabicus said:

Bolded: And that is my point. If you wrote your tier list entry for Arden would you then include the bit about the Pursuit Ring, or naw? Because if yes, then you are doing exactly what I had suggested. I think this whole discussion derailed because folks saw it as must rank high because utility?

I might mention the Pursuit Ring, but in the same way I might mention really enjoying a unit's support conversations, or finding them "fun to use". It wouldn't factor into how I rate him, at least assuming Utility is the tier list metric.

EDIT: Reconsidering this, slightly. I would factor "how much does getting the Pursuit Band help Arden" into his score. I would NOT factor "how much does getting the Pursuit Band help anyone else in my army" in rating Arden.

Edited December 17, 2020 by Shanty Pete's 1st Mate
Adjustment.

[Whisky]

If Thieves are rated for their ability to obtain items from stealing and lock picking, then don’t other units also need to be rated by their ability to obtain any items, if there are any? Such as Sophia getting the Guiding Ring, and apparently Arden getting the Pursuit Ring. 

[Baldrick]

3 hours ago, Imuabicus said:

I disagree; the decision who is the best user of what weapon, unless said weapon is restricted to one unit, is to be made on a turn to turn basis, whilst considering immediate effects of usage and the long term pay-off from said usage. 

You’re missing the point.
Again, I have not played 3H.

The Thunderbrand is traded to whoever gets the best use of it on any given turn. So, once you have the opportunity to trade weapons, who initially starts with the Thunderbrand is objectively irrelevant.

In situations where unit A is the best user of Weapon B, credit goes to A, not to who was recruited with B in their inventory.

Edited December 17, 2020 by Baldrick

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

3 hours ago, Whisky said:

If Thieves are rated for their ability to obtain items from stealing and lock picking, then don’t other units also need to be rated by their ability to obtain any items, if there are any? Such as Sophia getting the Guiding Ring, and apparently Arden getting the Pursuit Ring. 

You know what?

...

...I don't have a cogent counter to this.

When talking thieves, we do certainly consider their ability to acquire items, via chests and stealing, as part of their value on a tier list. Their combat, while often lacking, can be factored in as well. So - in example - if Matthew steals a Guiding Ring, that Lucius then uses to promote, then Matthew gets at least some credit for Lucius offering staff support. So then, should Arden get some credit for, say, Noish's performance with the Pursuit Band? That would be... consistent.

Perhaps I could counter that passively stumbling upon an item, versus acquiring it through a chosen action (Steal, Pick), is different. But, I'm very vocal in my high regard of RD Sothe. And one of the credits I consider to his name, is that he has an easier time finding the "hidden items". Now, RD and Genealogy may be quite different games, but not so different that a sauce for the goose is unsuitable for the gander.

Still, how far can it go? If Lewyn!Arthur is mowing down enemies, with Forseti and the Pursuit Band - does Arden get credit for that, long after he's left the game entirely? At what point, if ever, does the Pursuit Band just become "an item", rather than "Arden's contribution"? Still, maybe this question snould be chalked up to the weirdness of FE4's structure, more than anything else.

Bottom-line, Arden getting credit for the Pursuit Band still doesn't quite sit right with me. Same with the general case of units getting a special item, just for being the right person in the right place. But, I acknowledge that such would be consistent with the traditional manner in which thief-type units are tiered.

[Baldrick]

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

You know what?

...

...I don't have a cogent counter to this.

When talking thieves, we do certainly consider their ability to acquire items, via chests and stealing, as part of their value on a tier list. Their combat, while often lacking, can be factored in as well. So - in example - if Matthew steals a Guiding Ring, that Lucius then uses to promote, then Matthew gets at least some credit for Lucius offering staff support. So then, should Arden get some credit for, say, Noish's performance with the Pursuit Band? That would be... consistent.

Perhaps I could counter that passively stumbling upon an item, versus acquiring it through a chosen action (Steal, Pick), is different. But, I'm very vocal in my high regard of RD Sothe. And one of the credits I consider to his name, is that he has an easier time finding the "hidden items". Now, RD and Genealogy may be quite different games, but not so different that a sauce for the goose is unsuitable for the gander.

Possibly you feel they are different cases because for Matthew and Sothe, acquiring items is part of their job description, whereas Arden is (meant to be) a combat unit/castle defender who happens to have an event hard coded to him reaching a certain spot in the map.

Personally, I feel a tier list has a different purpose to a walkthrough. Both thief utility and character events should be covered in the latter.

Edited December 18, 2020 by Baldrick

[Jotari]

2 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

You know what?

...

...I don't have a cogent counter to this.

When talking thieves, we do certainly consider their ability to acquire items, via chests and stealing, as part of their value on a tier list. Their combat, while often lacking, can be factored in as well. So - in example - if Matthew steals a Guiding Ring, that Lucius then uses to promote, then Matthew gets at least some credit for Lucius offering staff support. So then, should Arden get some credit for, say, Noish's performance with the Pursuit Band? That would be... consistent.

Perhaps I could counter that passively stumbling upon an item, versus acquiring it through a chosen action (Steal, Pick), is different. But, I'm very vocal in my high regard of RD Sothe. And one of the credits I consider to his name, is that he has an easier time finding the "hidden items". Now, RD and Genealogy may be quite different games, but not so different that a sauce for the goose is unsuitable for the gander.

Still, how far can it go? If Lewyn!Arthur is mowing down enemies, with Forseti and the Pursuit Band - does Arden get credit for that, long after he's left the game entirely? At what point, if ever, does the Pursuit Band just become "an item", rather than "Arden's contribution"? Still, maybe this question snould be chalked up to the weirdness of FE4's structure, more than anything else.

Bottom-line, Arden getting credit for the Pursuit Band still doesn't quite sit right with me. Same with the general case of units getting a special item, just for being the right person in the right place. But, I acknowledge that such would be consistent with the traditional manner in which thief-type units are tiered.

Yeah, I'm feeling exactly like you here. I want to refute that line of logic, but I kind of can't? Well first off I'd establish that obtaining an item and coming with an item are two different things. As the character is doing nothing in terms of gameplay beyond initating the trade function if they come with an item. Second aside from thieves do we have any good examples of this outside of Arden  and Sophia? Lex gets the Brave Axe but that's a bit different as he's the only real viable user of it in Gen 1 (well I guess Laches has the weapon rank for it if you really favorite her), so it's always going to be judged with him. Mayve Arden and Sophia do deserve some credit for getting their stuff, but not a whole lot since A) You have literally nothing better to do with Arden while he slowly walks over there to get it, and B) Sophia is forced deployed any way, so you'll pick up the Guiding Ring regardless.

Now, consider something different. If a unit has to fight someone to get an item. Like say Starlight was a Wendell prf weapon, then Wendell is directly getting you Falchion. If he was the only one in the game who could (and Falchion was actually worth using since it's not in most of Marth's games) then I think people absolutely would be giving him the credit. But there's no real different between fighting an enemy and randomly being the only unit who can pick up a hidden item in an unmarked spot. Both are acquiring an item, just one is done with more flash and difficulty. So...yeah? A unit's capacity to get an item should be considered? But walking over to a certain spot when there's no cost of deployment isn't worth a whole lot since it's so easy to do, regardless of how good the item is (course then we need to factor in keeping that unit alive, which brings us back to "Does Bantu get credit for recruiting Tiki train of logic").

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

8 minutes ago, Jotari said:

So...yeah? A unit's capacity to get an item should be considered? But walking over to a certain spot when there's no cost of deployment isn't worth a whole lot since it's so easy to do, regardless of how good the item is (course then we need to factor in keeping that unit alive, which brings us back to "Does Bantu get credit for recruiting Tiki train of logic").

Obviously, Marth is the best unit in the game. Without him siezing, the game literally cannot progress! As such, he deserves some credit for the performance of every unit past chapter 2.

...Obviously, this is taking things to an absurdity, but it highlight the needs for clear standards ("what are we grading these units on? What should count, what shouldn't?") anytime a tierlist is being made.

[Whisky]

To take it a step further (or to the side perhaps), how about recruiting other units. For example, should Lilina get credit for being able to recruit Gonzalez and Garret? You have to actively choose to deploy her and then move her in position to be able to talk to them, so you’re using her past her recruitment. Should Elphin/Lalum get credit for recruiting Percival? Or Nino for recruiting Jaffar? If any of these units die then you can never recruit their respective recruitables. It’s a bit weird in terms of rating, but it’s something to consider.

[Baldrick]

IMO the purpose of a tier list is to help a player make a more informed choice regarding “which unit should I (deploy, promote, give strong weapons/exp/statboosters to)”. If it’s something only one or two characters can do, the player doesn’t have much of a choice. It’s information a walkthrough should provide.

[Whisky]

7 minutes ago, Baldrick said:

IMO the purpose of a tier list is to help a player make a more informed choice regarding “which unit should I (deploy, promote, give strong weapons/exp/statboosters to)”. If it’s something only one or two characters can do, the player doesn’t have much of a choice. It’s information a walkthrough should provide.

A tier list on its own doesn’t do much to help players with those decisions, without explanations for why each unit is rated how they are. There are too many variables that determine a unit’s overall rating for that rating to give the player the information they need to make an informed decision. In my opinion, some sort of explaining or brief walkthrough is required for players to have the information they need to make those decisions.
 

I find tier lists or unit ratings on their own to be rather pointless honestly, beyond the fun of discussing them. One unit can be rated highly because they’re the strongest unit in the early game, but may not be worth using past the half way point, a second unit because they’re strong when they join but they don’t join until later on, a third unit could be rated highly because they’re generally strong throughout the game, but not as strong as the previous two at their best points. There are too many possible reasons for why a unit is rated how they are for the rating on its own to actually mean anything without an explanation.

[Jotari]

11 minutes ago, Baldrick said:

IMO the purpose of a tier list is to help a player make a more informed choice regarding “which unit should I (deploy, promote, give strong weapons/exp/statboosters to)”. If it’s something only one or two characters can do, the player doesn’t have much of a choice. It’s information a walkthrough should provide.

That is a pretty good metric and I think it strikes at the heart of what many of us are feeling. Who should I use as a unit. Arden isn't really being used as a unit to get the pursuit ring. It's a safe walk to an obscure spot that is influenced by nothing but how quickly his movement stat gets him there. It could be a timed event at the castle for all the worth it actually has. If Wendell had exclusive access to Starlight and had to fight Gharnef for Falchion though, then we're actually using Wendell more throughout the playthrough to accomplish that goal of what he can achieve. A unit that can pick something up doesn't require much actual use. Thieves however you are using as it's not a once off for them, it's multiple chapters in the game that need doors or chests opened and they save you on other resources like keys. If there was one thief in the game and only a single chest in the entire game that was in a safe place, then you wouldn't have much use for deploying a thief and they probably would be ranked as low as Arden if their stats were useless.