aku chi

That obviously depends on what you do with Marcia. I assure you, it's easy to get even a 20/20 Marcia killed in the later chapters in PoR if you play aggressively. There are certain hot drops (notably in C25 and C28) that Jill (and Haar) can make safely that Marcia (and Tanith) cannot. In a tiered efficiency context, Marcia may well be slightly more valuable than Jill. But this has more to do with Marcia's C12 than her comparison with Jill in C13 and beyond (where they each have their pros and cons). On the other hand, in all comparisons where Marcia and Jill get fewer than 1000 Bexp, Jill is the more valuable unit.

Last I checked, there were only two Arms Scrolls in PoR, not the 3 that Marcia would need to wield the Sonic Sword. Plus, Marcia has worse Magic than Mia. The (non-Snowy) rationale for giving Mia, Stefan, or Ike the Sonic Sword is to give them some 1-2 range option. Sure, Tanith can make better use of the Sonic Sword on the whole, but letting one of these Sword-locked units use the Sonic Sword on occasion isn't without merit. Feeding them Spirit Dusts and equipping them with the Mage Band on the other hand....

Siege tomes. They're kind of a big deal.

A max-Mt Wind Tome forge is economic suicide (>15,000G). Soren prefers the Thunder Tome forge anyway. I don't know why there's any debate over whether Soren will be stronger or faster than Ilyana. He will. Level 6 Soren: 9 Mag, 10 Spd, 0 Str Level 6 Ilyana: 8 Mag, 9 Spd, 1 Str Soren and Ilyana will be equally fast to start. Soren will be a little more powerful. Soren has a higher Mag and Spd growth (by 0.1 a piece). Clearly, if we forge our Mage a 1 Wt Tome, Soren will be leading Ilyana in Atk and Spd forever. But Ilyana does have a higher Str growth, so lets see what happens if our Mages have to make due with generic Tomes and Ilyana has some time to develop Str. (In the relevant stats (Str, Mag, and Spd) Soren starts with 99 Mag growth points and Ilyana starts with 50 Mag growth points.) Level 14 Soren: 14 Mag, 13 Spd, 0 Str Level 14 Ilyana: 12 Mag, 11 Spd, 3 Str Behold! Ilyana has a potential 1 AS lead over Soren with heavier Tomes. So Ilyana can have 16 Atk and 11 AS with a Thunder Tome. But Soren can get 18 Atk and 11 AS with an Elwind. Or, if Soren needs the AS, he can use a Wind Tome for 16 Atk and 12 AS. And if Ilyana upgrades to Elthunder for 19 Atk and 8 AS, Soren can match that with Elfire (if he can wield it), or settle for Elwind's 18 Atk. And this is about as good as it gets for Ilyana. Soren is strictly better on offense (before even considering innate Adept). Ilyana's superior Str could theoretically be helpful when wielding siege tomes, but neither Ilyana nor Soren is going to be doubling with siege tomes anyway.

What's your point? It's not like Soren doesn't have the entirety of C8 (unlike Ilyana) and C5 to get easy Cexp. Soren can also positively contribute in C7's rout. It takes some strange logic to penalize Soren for contributions he can make before Ilyana joins. And it's pretty easy (if you make it a goal) to have a level 6 Soren before Ilyana is recruited, even in the most speedy of playthroughs.

Anouleth, this back and forth has diminishing returns. Allow me to close the matter (from my end) with the following: The portrayal of the Begnion Occupation Army in Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn was over-the-top. While there do exist some historical examples of military forces openly murdering civilians, these instances are rare and shocking. Even more rare are historical examples of a military officer executing its own soldiers for minor (or non-existent) misconduct openly and without a court-marshal. The fact that Begnion Occupation Army officers, from the commanding General on down, casually commits these acts and more, destroys the plausibility of the game world (for me, at least). I prefer a little bit of subtlety in my storytelling. You correctly point out that Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance features some "just plain bad" antagonists. But some restraint in their portrayal is demonstrated - as contrasted with RD. Are Petrine and Ashnard my favorite kinds of villains? No. But their portrayal did not destroy the plausibility of the game world as Jarod did in RD (again, for me). This is a distinction of degree and not of kind.

Othin, a single ordered list cannot convey the type of information you want it to (whom is best to deploy in each chapter). Let's take FE9 as an example, because it demonstrates a couple important dilemmas. FE9 has a bunch of units that have poor starts but become great->excellent with a large Bexp dump (Marcia, Jill, Astrid, and Makalov most prominently). Marcia and Jill are among the most valuable units in the game if they get a large Bexp dump. However, it's generally optimal to focus on training only one of these units (because they need a lot of Bexp, and two trained fliers before C18 has marginal use). How can you possibly convey this in a linear list. If you give Marcia a large Bexp dump and Jill none, Marcia is one of the best units to deploy and Jill a poor choice on most maps. If you give Jill a large Bexp dump and Marcia none, Jill is one of the best units to deploy and Marcia a poor choice on most maps. If you give both units a large Bexp dump, they are both among the best units to deploy. If you give neither of these units Bexp, they are both occasionally useful to deploy in chapters where a flying ferry is useful. How do you demonstrate this in a linear list? FE9 also has units that are considerably more valuable in early chapters and units that are more valuable in later chapters. Take the example of Lethe and Mist. Lethe is pretty valuable right off the bat. She's one of the best units to deploy for several chapters. But her value tapers off in lategame as her Atk doesn't scale up with the beorc. Mist, on the other hand, has an unspectacular start as a 5-mov staff user with low stats. She's one of the worst units to deploy in her early chapters. Whenever you promote Mist, she becomes considerably better (8-mov staff user with canto, a higher staff rank, and passable stats). Mist might further become better as higher level staves like Physic, Rescue, and Sleep become available. Mist can even take some lategame resources (most prominently, the Sonic Sword) to become a good combat unit on top of everything else. Mist can be one of the best units to deploy in later chapters. How do you demonstrate this in a linear list? Your style of tier list may very well be better at informing people which units to deploy in each chapter. But this is a hollow victory considering that isn't the purpose of a Serenes Forest tier list. A Serenes Forest tier list is a linear ranking of units' contributions towards some goal (commonly, completion efficiency or rank). It too, is an imperfect medium for the task at hand, because a unit's contributions are not independent of which other units are deployed and how resources are distributed. But it comes closer to this goal than any ordered list can become a concise unit guide.

It's certainly easier for FE9 Mia to become better at killing enemies than FE10 Edward. But most FE9 units can get to ORKOing at 1-range without breaking the Bexp bank. FE10 HM is tougher and has a host of terrible units that struggle to 2RKO. I don't think it's absurd that Edward would rank higher in FE10 than Mia in FE9. Still, I suspect that a lot of the people voting for Edward haven't played FE10 HM with efficiency in mind.

I said as much. Soldiers often operate in fear of Petrine's wrath. Interestingly, such wrath is never directly demonstrated. Indeed. The writers of PoR at least thought this one through. There is a downside to Petrine's threats; her aura of fear. Not so in RD. The Begnion soldiers in 1-E are as loyal to Jarod as ever, it would seem. And while PoR features two major villains that approach cartoon quality (Petrine and Ashnard), they are the norm in RD. It isn't just Jarod, it's nearly every featured commader in the Begnion Occupation Army. Also, Valtome is willing to publicly execute Zelgius for disobedience. If he had done so, isn't it 100% likely that Levail and a large portion of the Begnion Central Army would have mutinied? Zelgius is described as being a beloved General. Politicians don't get away with executing such Generals. I made a distinction between executing civilians publicly, and executing civilians outside of the public eye. From Wikipedia's entry on the Holocaust: Opinions differ on how much the civilian population of Germany knew about the government conspiracy against the Jewish population. Most historians claim that the civilian population was unaware of the atrocities that were carried out, especially in the extermination camps, which were located outside of Germany in Nazi-occupied Europe. The historian Robert Gellately, however, claims that the government openly announced the conspiracy through the media, and that civilians were aware of its every aspect except for the use of gas chambers.[11] Significant historical evidence points to the idea that the vast majority of Holocaust victims, prior to their deportation to concentration camps, were either unaware of the fate that awaited them, or were in disbelief; they honestly believed that they were to be resettled. There is always a limit to what those in power can get away with. Even the most heinous governments take efforts to hide civilian executions. And for obvious reasons. If civilians believe that they might be killed by their goverment, emmigration and rebellion become more attractive. Jarod, as the leader of an occupying force in a foreign nation, should be especially sensitive to this possibility. You are correct; civilian deaths are not a light matter. They happen very rarely and under extreme circumstances. Generally (as in the Sharpeville Massacre), the situation emerges from an initially civil protest movement becoming hostile. The authorities attempt non-lethal responses to subdue the crowd. Eventually, and most unfortunately, individual soldiers/policemen act in contradiction to given orders and open fire with lethal force. Compare this to the civilian execution in 1-1. The crowd is nothing but civil. The soldiers attempt no non-lethal means to intimidation or suppression. And the commanding officer orders the execution and takes part in it himself. This makes light of civilian execution. Antagonists don't have to be sympathetic or likeable, but they should have plausible objectives, and take rational actions in pursuit of those objectives. And if they do not act rationally, there should be realistic consequences. I agree. But if Micaiah foresaw her own capture (as she seemingly did in 1-3), why not ... evade it?

The consequence of a unit being valuable is deploying them. The consequence of a unit being deployed is not necessarily that they are valuable. I might deploy a unit for any number of reasons. They might be force-deployed. They might help me recruit someone - or even have a unique conversation I'd like to read. I might be interested in them building a support with some other unit. I might use them as an interchangeable shove-bot. I might just like the character. I might have more than enough deployment slots, so there's no reason not to. Or they might help me complete the chapter (or get valuables that help me complete subsequent chapters). Only the last issue is, in my opinion, worth debating. Debating a unit's contribution towards completing the game captures precisely what I care about when considering how "good" a unit is. Considering how likely a unit is to be deployed captures a host of qualities that I have no interest in considering; qualities that are irrelevant to how "good" a unit is. Are Fiona and Astrid better than Kyza because there is no competition for deployment in some of their chapters, and heavy competition for deployment in all of Kyza's? Is Janaff as good as Tanith in PoR's C19 because I'm just as likely to deploy him to talk to Naesala as I am to deploy her to ORKO Homasa? Of course not. What matters is not how likely a unit is to be fielded, but how much they can contribute when they are fielded.

I'd give Devdan one of my Occult scrolls if I happened to be using him. Luna lets him pull off ORKOs that he wouldn't otherwise be able to get.

That's passable for a Sunday morning cartoon. If that's the level of sophistication you hold the FE series to, then so be it. I prefer plausible antagonists. I'll even accept borderline sadists (like Petrine) every so often so long as they still behave rationally. What possible good could come from executing soldiers that commit the sin of reporting bad news? The logical end result is a reluctance of soldiers willing to report bad news truthfully. They might lie or simply fail to volunteer information. You could, in turn, execute those who lie or are reticent to volunteer information. But to what end? Now most soldiers would prefer to desert. Sure, the penalty of desertion is death, but so is the penalty of staying in the army. Execution is the ultimate penalty. Handing out the ultimate penalty for minor misconduct puts all misconduct on the same level, at which point desertion or mutiny can become the rational reaction for many soldiers. And what about murdering civilians as an occupational army? This is more obviously stupid. If civil disobedience is punished by death, rebellion becomes a lot more attractive. Even Hitler's Nazi regime didn't execute civilians openly. They coralled dissidents and undesirabled to "camps" whose true purpose (mass execution) was known by few. I'm pleased that the Begnion occupation narrative included denigrating work camps. This is realistic. This is rational (but still risky). Gather those most individuals most capable of rebellion and put them to work under heavy guard. Don't openly murder civilians. That's just dumb. Jarod's behavior is unexcusably irrational and implausible on its own. But as Onmi points out, it reaches a whole new level of ridiculousness when the narrative tries to incite some sympathy towards the Jarod character at the end of Part 1.

Petrine doesn't personally execute that soldier. That soldier isn't executed on-screen. The scene leaves open the possibility of a court-marshall (which may result in execution, but is in the realm of plausibility) or that Petrine was merely threatening. In the entirety of PoR, Daein executes zero of its soldiers on-screen. Many of the soldiers who interact with General Petrine seem to have some fear of execution, but their fear is never validated. It seems like Petrine knows how to inspire fear without killing her own soldiers. Unlike Jarod. No civilians are executed in the entirety of PoR. In fact, no civilian lives are directly threatened.

I'd like to register my support for this effort. Keep it up! I too was disappointed with Radiant Dawn's plot, especially after the solid Path of Radiance. I can lend some support in ripping apart 1-3 and 1-8, if needed. I believe that the weakest plot element so far is Jarod's introduction (and it gets worse in 1-1). Storytelling tip: if you have your antagonist casually killing his own soldiers and civilians in his first two scenes, you're doing something wrong. Jarod's characterization destroys the plausibility of the Begnion Occupation Army and the game world as a whole.

Maybe. I want to make a distinction between the magnitude of Edward's contribution in 1-P and the nature of contributions in smaller, simpler chapters. Without Edward, it may take 10 additional turns to complete 1-P (guesstimating). Yet I'd be hard pressed to argue that he is more valuable in this chapter than Rafiel is in 4-4 (who "saves" 1-2 turns, at most). But I suppose we might disagree here. The Black Knight in 1-9 represents a different problem to solve. It's almost impossible to complete the chapter without him, so evaluating his contribution with any "what does his absense cost?" metric would result in him garnering nearly infinite utility. So I think that there is something more fundamentally flawed in the "turns saved" mentality of evaluating a unit's worth; albeit, something that is seldom exposed. Either that, or the Black Knight is - by far - the most valuable unit in FE:RD. If you're going slower in 4-4, that means that you're facing double the number of enemies due to reinforcements. Units that help us complete 4-4 before the storm of reinforcement on turn 10 clearly help us complete the game. The ridiculous number of enemy reinforcements is, I believe, one of the reasons smash selected this chapter as his example. (Which is a little unwise, because it muddies two legitimate issues: (a) certain turns costing more than other turns, and (b) saving multiple turns with single-turn actions due to reinforcements.)

As I understand it, the goal of a tier list to to rank units by their contributions towards completing the game. From this point of view, all turns "saved" are not created equal. As smash fanatic points out: a unit that can single-handedly "save" a turn in 1-P saves us a minute or two of hard-to-lose gameplay. A unit that could single-handedly "save" a turn in 4-4 would save many more minutes of more challenging gameplay. All else being equal, the former unit is less valuable than the latter unit. Also, there is no need to sacrifice an objective measure to reflect that not all turns are equal. I have before suggested that the total number of unit actions per chapter would be a perfectly objective metric that closer captures the essence of a unit's contributions towards completing the game. With this metric, a turn-saving performance in 1-P might save ~4-8 actions, whereas a turn-saving performance in 4-4 might save ~20-40 actions. This would also reflect that, once you're worked out an efficient strategy, going stealth in FE9's C10 might be more efficient than the alternative, despite "costing" several turns. Such a metric is regrettably harder to keep track of (and impossible in maps with FOW), for all it's advantages.

If you have Marcia and Jill, why not use the 95% 2-turn player phase clear? Jill only needs a smidgen of training/Bexp for that clear.

With regards to the Laguzguard, I assumed it was a non-factor on Marcia for the following reason: - If you have the Laguzguard, you recruited Jill. - If you recruited Jill, there exists more reliable 2-turn strategies that involve them both. Surviving two attacks from Muarim and an attack a piece from the nearby Tigers is unfeasible without the Laguzguard. Even with the Laguzguard, it takes substantial durability. I calculated that Jill would need {36 HP, 15 Def} or equivalent to survive the aforementioned foes and two Hawk attacks. If you can lure the Hawk away, Jill/Marcia might only need 32 HP OR 14 Def. A 20/2 Marcia with a Dracoshield, then, might have sufficient durability for a turn 2 enemy phase clear. Vantage is also an option to remove the need to endure Muarim's enemy phase attack. Counting on an enemy missing is risky, because all enemies average at least 50% hit on Marcia (and Muarim more). So long as she doubles, Marcia has no problem offensively with a Steel Lance forge. However, you're almost guaranteed to lose the pacifism Bexp if you let this go to enemy phase; Marcia can ORKO most foes with a Steel Lance forge and Muarim attacks last. Of course, if you happen to have a Marcia with 22 Str, she can 2HKO Muarim on turn 2 player phase with a Steel Lance forge, resulting in one of the most reliable 2-turn clears. Obviously, the likelihood of this is low...

I agree with you, to an extent. When we rank a particular unit, we should absolutely consider the most efficient way to use that unit (what resources they could optimally be gifted, how they could efficiently be used on each map, etc...). But when we consider a unit, we do ourselves a disservice by assuming that all other units will be used and used optimally. Then we get a tier list that approaches an optimal playthrough 'tier list' - which isn't condusive to debate. The ideal solution, in my opinion, is to make no (or very limited) unit deployment assumptions - but assume efficient play at every other level (resource distribution and chapter strategy). So when we consider tiering Boyd (FE10), we shouldn't assume that the 1-E and 2-3 Speedwings are always going to Titania and Haar - even though they use them best. We should consider playthroughs where Titania and/or Haar are not used - in which case Boyd just might be the best candidate for a Speedwing (maybe). Under this logic, I have no qualms with seperate Seth-skip and Seth-less tier lists for FE8. In this game (it would seem), using Seth efficiently is so transformative to the contributions of other units that it dwarfs other substantive issues.

(Assuming that you're not just referring to FE10:) FE9 Marcia and Jill's current tier position is hugely dependent on Bexp. Without Bexp, a case could easily be made for Oscar, Kieran, Boyd, Ike, Reyson, Tanith, and Jill > Marcia at the very least (Lethe, Muarim, and Mordecai would also have a case). Now that I think about it, a no-Bexp FE9 tier list might be an interesting thought experiment.

Ilyana is also (relatively) better in SF drafts because participants often reset-abuse for good level-ups and Ilyana has a lot of level-ups.

Best: Light all objectives on fire. (FE:RD, 3-3) Worst: Survive. (FE:RD, 3-7)

None. But I do give favoritism to Mordecai, Skrimir, and Boyd (T). I want to give Kyza an honest chance (Energy Drop + Bexp & Blossom slowplay) next playthrough.

The point, I believe, is that the GM chapters are notably easier than the chapters that precede them - which is out of whack. I agree with Anouleth that the early Part 3 chapters are plenty difficult (especially 3-1) and that enemies don't scale up in dangerousness fast enough - especially when compounded by the ridiculous gains your units receive when promoting into tier 3. Either increasing enemy tier 2 growths or throwing higher level units in the later Part 3 chapters would be a partial solution. The rest of the solution, in my opinion, would be to tone down the tier 3 stat gains (even to the level of tier 2 gains). On the other hand, I already find it ridiculous from a story perspective how strong the enemies in 3-11 are. The enemies are tougher than Ashnard's handpicked elite guard in Path of Radiance. Hell, the Generals are at least as tough as Bryce! I know the story already tries to handwave this with the "increased morale" angle, but I'm not buying it. And I want to know where these generics were in Part 1. They could have helped a bunch!

There are plenty of artistic works that tell multiple unconnected stories (the film "The Godfather Part II" is the first that comes to mind). The good ones contain disparate stories that are linked thematically or in some other way. While I would never claim that Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn has a particularly good plot, Part II can be seen as a counterpart to Part 1. In Part 1 you lead a rebellion. In Part II, you take the other side of a rebellion in a different nation. The two parts are also linked causally; Queen Elincia's reaction to the events of Part 1 are the spark that ignites the Crimean rebellion of Part 2. In fact, you can interpret the plot of RD as an escalation of an initial conflict into increasingly vast conflicts.