Naglfar

Hypothetical units like that are stupid anyway. Units don't exist in a vacuum, provide some context before posting your what-if. In what game does the general exist? What difficulty setting are we playing on? And no, this general can't do everything himself and be top tier because it's effortless and reliable. It's also slow. Speed is probably the most important part of any form of efficiency. Thus units that do things easily, reliably and also quickly (turn-wise, but let's face it, it's faster time-wise too) trump the unferriable movement-penalty-tastic 5 move general.

Your FPS is terrifying. Is this even playable? I laughed when Ike died. It's goddamn easy modo. Also thanks to it being easy modo, Shinon is worth your time as is mostly everyone else. By my recollection, EM Gatrie doubles. Do you know how to get Stefan? You should, since otherwise you can't give Kieran the Vague Katti.

That's basically 3-13.

Int, bro, update SFDTTHQ. :(

1 turn = 1 turn No matter how much stuff is going on, a turn is a turn. This doesn't invalidate turns as an objective measure. Real time is also an objective measure, it's used for speedruns. Time efficiency will never be the primary measure of quality in Fire Emblem though, because speedrunning doesn't reflect the essence of a strategy game. It's also a very complicated hobby that demands extensive planning and is thus much more difficult than playing for turns, which can be improvised for the most part. Guess which measure more people play by? It was rhetorical. That's just LTC with some extra shit tacked on anyway. It looks like a draft ruleset. Main tier lists will probably always be efficiency-based like they are now for obvious reasons but I'll explain it anyway. The main goal of any Fire Emblem game is to beat it. Thus units who help beat the game quickly are better than units who don't (speed represented by turns), units who help beat the game easily are better than units who struggle, and units who help beat the game reliably are better than units who need the RNG's favour. The only other measure of beating the game "better" in most FEs is speedrunning, but I already explained why a speedrun tier list is impractical. Concepts such as death, recruitment and the necessity to reset are already covered in existing tier lists because they impact the process of beating the game. Does the unit die easily? They go down the list for being inefficient (resetting is included in this, since most people reset when a unit dies). Does recruiting the unit slow you down? Inefficient, they drop. Money, on the other hand... money has no real bearing on this metric. You're never short on it, ever. If anything, actively saving money is inefficient. So what about ranked tier lists, that do take money into account? It should be noted that the only reason those are popular is that the game keeps track of it. Saving money without a game mechanic to back it up is a self-imposed challenge and thus it can never be standard. Here, some people would say, "LTC is self-imposed too!" And I would say again, there are no LTC tier lists, only efficiency. Playing efficiently, assuming a player of a level of skill worth discussing, is natural. The efficiency player is trying to beat the game, that's all. They aren't after the lowest turncount ever, they may use a few suboptimal units that they like, but they won't dawdle for no reason because they know they don't need to. When someone starts babying Sofiya to 20/20, they stop playing efficiently - their primary goal is not to beat the game. Their goal is to experience using Sofiya. This player's specific priorities are not worth tiering for the rest of us. What I can't understand is why people feel the need to challenge this. It's a set of values and characteristics the vast majority of us (including the naysayers) have, grouped into a solid, logical standard for us to debate and compare units with. It begs the question: what about this is inadequate? Why must our standards change? What is missing from "efficiency" that it fails to be an objective measure of the interests of the average, knowledgeable and unbiased Fire Emblem player? Yes, "average, knowledgeable and unbiased" is important. Remember that tier lists only really exist both for and because of the people who debate them as a hobby. To close, replacing efficiency as we know it with something else as our primary reference point for unit quality is the Fire Emblem equivalent of overthrowing government. A handful of short posts in a thread will not accomplish this. You would need to show us why what we have is not good enough for us (as a whole, not you specifically - lots of people seem to have a problem understanding this and some skip over it entirely), because if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Then you would need to show us a better way of thinking. If you think this is possible, which it probably isn't, don't bother responding to this post the way you normally would. Make a new thread and start writing an essay, because you won't rewrite something deep in our collective wisdom by whining about how nobody sees things your way. I sure hope I got my point across. Much as I hope I'll win the lottery, but oh well.

Rafiel is the best joke you can manage? Come on, admins.

that post is so bipolar I sort of laughed a bit in real life at the end Maybe I'm jumping the gun here. I've never played an FE9 draft. Just saying Jill and Marcia are clearly way ahead of the pack and there's a pretty obvious way to rein them in a bit. It's not OH THEY'RE THE BEST BAN THEM, in fact it was nothing like that so your thing doesn't even make sense. FE12 rules: Surely you can condense that somehow.

SFDTT FE8 done in 144 turns.

Chapter 20: 3 turns Name |Level|HP|ST|SK|SP|LK|DF|RS Eirika |20/05|36|14|21|24|22|18|12 Ephraim |18/04|41|19|20|21|14|12|16 Franz |16/20|49|19|19|24|19|17|10 Moulder |10/07|32|11|12|13| 2|10|12 Joshua |18/05|41|17|19|20|13|10| 7 Tethys |06/--|23| 1| 3|17|14| 5| 8 L'Arachel|05/00|20| 6| 7|11|14| 5| 9 Ewan |2/0/0|15| 4| 3| 5| 5| 0| 4 Rennac |--/03|29|10|17|19| 5| 9|11 Myrrh |08/--|27|22|20|11| 6|29|32 Syrene |--/05|29|15|17|17|12|14|15 Final Chapter: 5 turns Name |Level|HP|ST|SK|SP|LK|DF|RS Eirika |20/07|36|16|22|25|23|19|13 Ephraim |18/05|42|20|20|21|15|12|16 Franz |16/20|49|19|19|24|19|17|10 Moulder |10/09|33|11|12|15| 2|11|12 Joshua |18/05|41|17|19|20|13|10| 7 Tethys |07/--|24| 1| 3|17|15| 5| 9 L'Arachel|06/00|20| 6| 7|12|14| 6| 9 Ewan |2/0/0|15| 4| 3| 5| 5| 0| 4 Rennac |--/03|29|10|17|19| 5| 9|11 Myrrh |11/--|31|25|22|13| 7|34|33 Syrene |--/06|30|15|17|18|12|14|15 FINAL TURNCOUNT: 144 TURNS

yes the reason I said all that was so I could bask in the glory of your internet memes tier lists are not guides, they cannot perform adequately as guides a number or a tier placing says "this unit is this good relative to other units" that's not a guide a tier list explains what, a guide explains what, how and why I think the only reason this thread exists is that some people don't understand the concepts of efficiency or tier lists

Okay, this thread is retarded, so let me lay out some reasons why efficiency tier lists are generally accepted. -easily understood (turns, effort and reliability, what's not to get?) -all-encompassing (every single significant factor is evaluated) -goal-oriented (said factors are measured against the threefold values of efficiency, nothing justifies itself) -practical (units are analysed in context, not in a vacuum) If you have a problem with LTC tier lists, you're in luck, because I don't recall any LTC tier lists existing. If you have a problem with efficiency tier lists, please provide a standard superior to the above for us to use instead, otherwise shut the fuck up, do your own thing and let the rest of us do ours. I am sick and fucking tired of your shitty persecution complexes.

i suddenly miss nestling's threads

We don't all have space age computers and impeccable knowledge of how to deal with bios and ISO crap and whatever else might pop up.

Jesus dick, I'm done. I'll just go and have a look at what's happened while I wait for the deadline.

You got Dolphin to work?

Some people don't feel like memorising convoluted rulesets. Standard rulesets should be as simple as possible. BEXP Jill/Marcia >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone else non-BEXP Jill/Marcia > everyone else, or maybe even not Closing the ridiculous gap here and making winning even conceivable for whoever doesn't draft first or second is not the same result.

uh I'll update the OP like I should have now do me a favour, guys count the pages and tell me if it's even reasonable to ask for postgame here maybe if Proto helped, but I feel even less motivated to do this bullshit than I do most things

Surely they're still the best units in the game even without BEXP :/ also your fe12 rules are even more complicated than the ones we already have

no warp except on thieves, no hammerne done edit: and someone explain to me why fe9 marcia/jill are allowed bexp ever

Chapter 18: 7 turns Name |Level|HP|ST|SK|SP|LK|DF|RS Eirika |20/03|35|14|20|23|21|18|12 Ephraim |18/03|40|19|20|20|13|12|15 Franz |16/19|48|19|18|23|19|16|10 Moulder |10/06|31|10|12|13| 2|10|12 Joshua |18/05|41|17|19|20|13|10| 7 Tethys |06/--|23| 1| 3|17|14| 5| 8 L'Arachel|04/00|19| 6| 7|10|13| 5| 9 Ewan |2/0/0|15| 4| 3| 5| 5| 0| 4 Rennac |--/03|29|10|17|19| 5| 9|11 Myrrh |04/--|20|18|16| 8| 5|22|28 Syrene |--/04|28|14|16|17|12|14|14 Chapter 19: 2 turns Name |Level|HP|ST|SK|SP|LK|DF|RS Eirika |20/04|35|14|21|23|22|18|12 Ephraim |18/03|40|19|20|20|13|12|15 Franz |16/20|49|19|19|24|19|17|10 Moulder |10/06|31|10|12|13| 2|10|12 Joshua |18/05|41|17|19|20|13|10| 7 Tethys |06/--|23| 1| 3|17|14| 5| 8 L'Arachel|04/00|19| 6| 7|10|13| 5| 9 Ewan |2/0/0|15| 4| 3| 5| 5| 0| 4 Rennac |--/03|29|10|17|19| 5| 9|11 Myrrh |04/--|20|18|16| 8| 5|22|28 Syrene |--/04|28|14|16|17|12|14|14

Chapter 16: 4 turns Name |Level|HP|ST|SK|SP|LK|DF|RS Eirika |20/00|30|10|16|20|19|15| 7 Ephraim |18/00|34|15|15|17|13| 9|10 Franz |16/17|46|18|18|23|19|15|10 Moulder |10/03|29|10|11|13| 1| 9|11 Joshua |18/04|41|17|19|20|12|10| 6 Tethys |05/--|22| 1| 3|16|14| 5| 7 L'Arachel|04/00|19| 6| 7|10|13| 5| 9 Ewan |2/0/0|15| 4| 3| 5| 5| 0| 4 Rennac |--/02|29|10|17|18| 5| 9|11 Myrrh |02/--|16|16|14| 6| 4|19|27 Chapter 17: 2 turns Name |Level|HP|ST|SK|SP|LK|DF|RS Eirika |20/02|35|13|19|22|20|18|12 Ephraim |18/01|38|17|18|19|13|11|15 Franz |16/17|46|18|18|23|19|15|10 Moulder |10/04|29|10|11|13| 2| 9|11 Joshua |18/04|41|17|19|20|12|10| 6 Tethys |05/--|22| 1| 3|16|14| 5| 7 L'Arachel|04/00|19| 6| 7|10|13| 5| 9 Ewan |2/0/0|15| 4| 3| 5| 5| 0| 4 Rennac |--/02|29|10|17|18| 5| 9|11 Myrrh |02/--|16|16|14| 6| 4|19|27

Acquire Item? Break Perimeter (backwards 3-13)? Vandalise Property (3-3 was fun)?

Dark magic. And he would have been the best lord ever if he were actually a lord.

Wait, last I checked FE1 Excalibur doesn't get an effective bonus.

How do you take someone talking about bonus damage and think they're talking about magic? Holy fuck this is poorly set out. Why do you think weapons that work off STR are any different to those that work off MAG? okay FE10 system: Fire (coded by category): bonus damage versus beasts Thunder (coded by category): bonus damage versus dragons Wind (coded by category): bonus damage versus fliers minus dragons hypothetical bonus damage system with FE13 weapon ranks: Fire/Elfire/etc (coded individually): bonus damage versus beasts, gryphons? Thunder/Elthunder/etc (coded individually): bonus damage versus dragons Wind/Elwind/etc (coded individually): bonus damage versus fliers minus dragons, gryphons? To be honest, I would hazard a guess that even the entire categories of weapons that get the same bonus damage (ie bows) are programmed one by one. I'm not a romhacker so someone else will have to clarify that. My point: effective damage is not tied to weapon type, which should be plainly obvious given the extensive list of weapons in every game that get special bonuses.