Redwall

just off the top of my head, C3 takes very careful planning to clear in three turns. also, who said we're limiting this discussion to HM?

who exactly are these people? If you're gonna say GameFAQs users, then your argument is irrelevant since this thread isn't addressed towards GF users.

Sacrificing a lot of Mag for Armsthrift + forged Mire doesn't seem worth it to me. With Gregor's Despoil, I can't see you having any money problems. Using Henry instead with unforged Mire likely offers more punch without breaking the bank to any real extent.

What level is Ricken? Seems like getting him to 10/1 for Rescue would be a bit easier than getting Cordelia to 10/15 for a third Galeforcer, especially since rout maps dry up pretty soon.

Fox is right; Miracle is worthless, especially if you're using enemy-phase healing like Sol or Nosferatu.

Not sure, I can't tell whether you're enacting my second wildest wet dream or my third.

I don't think Olwen is saying that leisurely play is not worth discussing. Playing for fun certainly makes for valid discussion; however, when it comes to deciding which skills should be ranked above others, it is more objective to eschew our intuitive notions of what makes a character good in favor of well-defined, falsifiable ideas like turncounts or reliability.

what in the world are you talking about oh my goodness that is so wrong of him. What is this, Victim Blaming 101? Now with Elementary Smoke and Mirrors as a prerequisite, I guess. No one is saying they are. Um, except they can if they have the relevant training. Hay it's more unsubstantiated victim blaming These are arguments from Cracker Jack boxes. I thought this was Serious Discussion?

1. Final Fantasy Tactics--Oh man. It's not much of a tactics game, but the gameplay was still really fun, and the story and music were pretty solid. 2. Crash Bandicoot: Cortex Strikes Back--I didn't have a memory card when I played this, so I never got past World 4 or so. Haven't played any other PS1 games.

In an efficient Lunatic playthrough, Nosferatu doesn't do anything for your turncounts in stages other than C21, C23, and C24. While assassination missions are most quickly approached using Galeforce and/or Rescue, the fact remains that if you've been playing efficiently up to that point, your stats will be much too low to handle the bosses in a single turn (or even doubling Swordmasters) without Rallies. Galeforce alone is insufficient for the most efficient playthroughs of Lunatic.

Taboo, Pop Cranium, Trivial Pursuit, Chess...can't think of any others right now.

The fastest solutions (in terms of turncounts) to the lategame Lunatic levels absolutely demand Rallies assuming the preceding levels have been completed at a comparable pace.

1. The World Ends With You 2. The Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks 3. Advance Wars: Days of Ruin 4. Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin 5. Pokemon Pearl

Ninian. Honorable mention to Caeda.

CO2 doesn't actually do anything to thin the ozone layer.

You can use Rescue to move Tiki in range of the enemies to kill on turn 1 EP; this allows for a two-turn clear even on Normal mode. But if you're planning on recruiting Tiki, RFoF is right: Hard and Lunatic P17 can be cleared with lower turncounts than Normal P17.

No, that takes too much thinking.

I suppose it can be argued to be overrated in some of the harder DLC maps, where having a strong enemy phase bolstered by skills directly relevant to EP combat can give the player an "easier" time than would having an extra player phase. In the context of the main game, it's feasible to obtain and has no opportunity cost in terms of turn counts; it even saves you money since you won't have to burn as many Rescues. The problem is not only that people avoid specifying the context in which Galeforce is to be argued, but they also seem to disagree on what criteria should be used to rate skills.

getting Galeforce is totally doable in no-grind LTCs, whether it's Hard mode or Lunatic.

This is a sight-singing quiz on Disney songs. I missed one due to me being practically tone deaf, and three others since I haven't seen those movies (Peter Pan, Mulan, The Little Mermaid) in ages. Which questions did you miss, if any?

From a balance perspective, having an early Energy Drop is arguably bad for the tier list since it makes Sumia even more ridiculous; meanwhile, the Second Seal adds some spice in terms of making more characters usable. I feel like assuming a baseline of zero Renown is reasonably clean while making things a bit more balanced; OTOH, I'm sure others will disagree, hence my suggestion for a poll.

Perhaps you should just make a poll of some sort: do we allow Renown awards at all, and if so, what sort of ranges should we assumed for the baseline.

If you're going to allow Renown, assuming a baseline of 0 at the start of the game seems like the least arbitrary thing to do; if we make the rule by guessing how many playthroughs any given efficiency player has completed, it wouldn't be very precise since people might complete any number of playthroughs before deciding to do an efficiency run.

birthday sex, obviously.

As has been mentioned ad nauseam, tier list necessarily has subjective criteria, since a tier list ranks characters based on criteria we subjectively prefer; that doesn't mean we should add more criteria than we need. Although this set of criteria remains subjective, it at least makes some attempt to avoid such ill-defined guidelines as "you must play quickly, but not too quickly lest, gawds forbid, an actually-good unit eats Nowi's lunch." This tier list considers complexity-weighted turns and reliability. If a character costs turns and/or hurts reliability, and we tier rationally based on these criteria, he or she is a bad character under these criteria. Without adding more criteria, ignoring recruitment costs is inconsistent with the current set of criteria.