Sylvan

You were talking about horsemen. Where do snipers come in? If your using snipers, then your not using horsemen, so horsemen are not needed in this case. You prove my point. If you have to weaken the unit first with a sniper, then any unit can finish the berserker off, it doesn't have to be a horseman. The horseman doesn't have an approach and your relying on a sniper to do the work. There is nothing in what you say that makes me want to use a horseman over a swordmaster. And you've also ignored what I said in response to this. 1) Since horsemen have counters they won't be used. because they can't both attack at a range and in close at the same time, making them no better than swordmasters in this case. Range weapons deal with swordmasters is like saying "melee or range weapons deal with horsemen". Range weapons don't 1 hit KO a swordmaster, therefore don't "deal with" swordmasters. Conversly, melee weapons will 1hit KO a horseman. Meaning Swordmaster is preferred. 2)I don't know why you'd be using it, but a Levin sword can crit if your using your scenario. In which case, it is going to do enough damage to not be washed away with a fortify. The swordmaster does have max magic, and most units have low RES caps. The only time a levin sword can be ignored is with dazzle on. If what your saying really was the truth, then Berserkers would never be used because they can't attack at a range. Point taken, different seed = different random number. No, it's not true random. No computer can possibly do that. But it's random enough. Each clock increment the DS has a new random number, meaning that it's 100% independent from the player. So it can be considered random. The GBA relies on things like movement. Now, a character can't move that many different ways, so the randomness is removed. People can, and will, do things the same way each time. If you play through a map and make the same opening move each time, you'll be fixing the RNG, even if your not aware of it or are trying not to abuse it. This does not happen on the DS. The RNG on the GBA cannot have the same scrutiny applied to it as the DS. My point was completely un-related to RNG abuse. If I have to spell it out, you can break averages without RNG abuse in a GBA game, because the RNG system is not true RNG. Without RNG abuse, the DS will stick to the averages. The GBA will not. This makes it easy to tell who is abusing and who is not. Something I can not say about the GBA games. So tell me who is worse? General or Warrior? When fighting the top tier, both can be hit 4x, both can use similar (basically the same) weapons, both have similar stats. So I guess Warriors go in bottom to. . . . Hmm, what about Heroes? They go into the same group too, no outstanding traits. . . let me think, who else. . .All the fliers, paladins, manaketes. . . everyone else for that matter. . . That's two groups. Sure, you can go and order those two groups if you like. Sure you could "call" it a tier list, but the point is if they aren't in top. They aren't going to be used. So ordering the list has no effect on the gameplay, so the list is defunct. edit: lol, then stop arguing against me if your not arguing the same thing. What I've said/proposed is realistic. I've shown it's realistic. And I am trying to keep the game balanced.

Wasn't going to reply, but since the debate continues without me: Tier list doesn't exist due to no viable counterpicks. Taken straight from brawl, MK was going to be banned, because he had no counterpicks, thus it cause an infinite gap between MK and the rest of the cast. In the end MK was not banned, because they deemed brawl was able to develop further and as such, there was potential for MK to develop a counter. Now, In FE the top tier has no counters. So there is an equal gap between them and the rest of the cast, but opposed to brawl, there is no more development that can be done to change this. No matter what, a general will get hit 4x by a berserker. No amount of tactics can possibly change this. Since this fact applies equally well to all units with 26 or less speed. There is the rift that no character can overcome, therefore, they do not need to be sorted into a tier list. A tier list could exist, but it would basically be a waste of space. Unlike single player, which can be cleared by basically any character, Wi-Fi cannot. You are either using the top, and winning, or using the bottom and loosing. There is no "How well did I win" as there is in single player, there is only win or loose. Long story short. You can clear single player with Ougma or Barts, so there is a tier list. You cannot clear wifi with a general, so there is no tier list. Even in non-RNG wifi, there would be a list, because certain characters perform better than others. This is not the case with RNG-abused classes. Some will be used, others will not. That's all there is. I've provided more than enough evidence to support this. I could continue to argue if horsemen are or are not usable given the ban on all cards. But, even if I did. Then my points about crits come into play, which will make much more of an impact than the horseman vs swordmaster debate. Games will be then decided by luck. In other words: This, completely negated by: Berserkers using a hand axe against a horseman: 24% crit rate. The berserker is unapproachable, because any unit, brave weapons or no, will have to take at least 1 hit. That's 1/4 chance of getting killed. Thi makes a much more prominent impact to the game than if apotrope is or isn't in play. One more thing that I didn't really answer before: GBA=/=DS GBA does not hold the time in it's memory, it does not have a true random number generator in it. Standard deviations don't apply to something that isn't random. The DS has a 24 hour clock, which seeds the random number generator, so every mili-second a new random number is created. The GBA does not keep the time, which means, every time you turn it on, it will generate the same random numbers as last time. This is why the GBA games had things like movement-affect growth rates. The RNG is not true random. It's appears random, but isn't random.

Except, generals, paladins, flyers etc still suffer. And how do you ban 1 card? You can't even see what card the opponent is using. I've made points about this before. Tier lists become defunct when everyone has all max stats. There are 2 classes. The ones that win and the ones that do not. With apotrope: Swordmaster < horseman. See above point, swordmaster is never used. Without apotrope: Horseman < Swordmaster. See above point, Horseman is never used. Berserker/Sniper: Always used. Mages etc used, but not for combat. Everyone else: Not used, since one of the above 3 can replace them. The only time someone other than those listed should be used is a ) personal preference (akin to entering a brawl tourney with Captain Falcon, the player knows it's very likely they won't win. But does it none the less) B ) Non-competitive play. In which case, this doesn't apply so there is no reason to even consider anything I've said.

You need to either sit down and read what I wrote, or heck, even go read what you wrote. - dazzle Which you are proposing to ban. I've seen hypocritical statements before, but that takes the cake. If you can't be consistent with your own logic, then your not following mine. @ the above. Warriors are inferior to berserkers. Berserkers are strictly better. Generals without apotrope, can be beaten by swordmasters. I can't see what our point is. All you've done is re-enforce my last few posts, by saying horsemen get bumped off, swordmasters get bumped up, and everything else stays the same except now you can't even use cards. All I've done for the last like 10 posts is repeat myself. Unless your going to post something that actually goes against what I say, I don't really see the point posting more.

http://www.feplanet.net/games-11-characters-averages If someone can get a team of 5 characters who's averages consistently go beyond the deviations listed without RNG abusing, i'll be a monkey's uncle. I've played through the game countless times now, probably close to 15 times. Not once have I gotten any character to breach the deviations listed. I can win the lotto, am I going to? No, if I'm very lucky, maybe. Am I going to win 5 times in a row? 100% no. It's not improbable. It's impossible. It is only possible with RNG abuse or hacking. I already showed why this doesn't work. The "Horseman problem" isn't the problem that Horsemen are the best, it's a problem that 2/3 of the classes become unusable. Ok, think that through for two minutes. That doesn't rebut my point at all. You can't compensate random chance with skill. If you could, items would be allowed in smash bros. I am sure. But, on the assumption your right. Ok, so now we have 1 more usable character. Meanwhile, all the others are 100% dead and buried. Poleaxes and etc also only do 3x damage, which is less than a brave weapon's 4x damage. So if you equip your lace user (not general, because weak to swords, not paladin, weak to axes, not flying weak to bows) with an anti-horsemen weapon, they will not 1 hit KO the horseman anyway. And the horseman still has the hit x4 advantage. If you go up against a horseman with a brave sword. How do you propose to beat them? Your super-effective weapon is not a 1 hit ko, and they will strike you back x4. Meaning your in a worse situation than before. Why not make all the classes usable, and simply stop people RNG abusing. And then you still have cards, which add to competitive play. That's why I'm trying to make it one. No, it really isn't possible. Not without abusing. I'm not trying to limit others. If you don't want to play competitively, that's fine by me. I'm not forcing people to stop play casually, but if people were to play this game on a competitive level, then what I propose is in the best interest of the competitive scene.

@ sek, When I said team of thieves, I meant a team with thieves in it. (a good team) That's not the best answer. The best answer is to stop RNG abuse. Think about it. Lets say cards are banned. That means every attack of every character has a 15% crit rate. This just results in complete blind luck determining the outcome of matches. 15% by the number of attacks (especially with brave weps) will effectively mean a guaranteed crit per match. Since both players have homogeneous(identical) units, then the deciding fact is who gets crits and who doesn't. Skill is completely removed. Under those conditions, it doesn't matter who is superior, because the match will just be blind luck. I've done crit teams before. It's 100% impossible to tell who will win when you fight equal teams. Horsemen can't use longbows, I learnt that the hard way. I forged 3 longbows, only to find I couldn't use them >.>;; EDIT: Just as a general observation, when you play "with anyone" forged names are not displayed. Like if you fight me and I have my Blazing Axe equipped, it will show Killer Axe on your screen. You'll still see the names of your own weapons, just not the names of other people's weapons. You'll only see the names of their weapons in "With Friends".

You can only get 2 berserkers, doesn't stop people using them.

It's not impossible to win with generals. But it's just sooooo much easier to without them. Replace the general with any other unit with > 26 speed and your team will be 100x better. Honestly, saying you can win with generals against berserkers is like saying you can beat my current team, with a team of thieves. It's still possible. But it's just MUCH harder. There is a reason nobody uses thieves.

Is it a huge gap? Yes. It's like going from a 30-70 match to a 95-5 match. Sure, you can still win the second one. Is it going to happen? No. Good in theory. But one problem. How exactly do you propose to do this? No using Snipers, Berserkser Horsemen or Swordmasters. I can guarantee, any team you list can be made better with those three. Sedgar can be a hero. Sedgar has good growths. Hence Hero is usable. Sedgar's growths make up for the shortcomings of the class, because not every stat is maxed. non-RNG abused classes are not subject to the same criteria, as they are not all homogeneous. Even then, Sedgar might make a good hero, but the whitewings make good swordmasters. But nothing stops you using both sedgar and the whitewings together. Thus, both classes are usable. *technically* Horsemen still beat swordmasters in non-rng abused files. But any actual unit that becomes a horseman has much worse growths than the swordmaster counterpart. So, swordmasters are again, still usable since a team of 100% swordmasters is possible. Where as a team of 100% horsemen is not. Same for berserkers. Maxing a berserker means not maxing another unit, so the game automatically balances due to the growth rates. Your posting in a topic that complains about hackers. And your honestly trying to tell me it won't ruin multi-player? Sorry, this topic wouldn't exist if people found fighting maxed characters fun and enthralling. Your telling everyone to go hack, and it'll become more fun. Because hacking gets the same result as RNG abuse. . . blah blah I said that before. A Berserker deals 76 damage to a maxed general. It's not survivable in any situation. 19x4-terrain = 72. (Ignoring the weapon triangle advantage which would normally cancel this bonus anyway)

You didn't say it I did. My point is, in the highest level of competitive play (Which you were arguing) anyone who chooses swordmasters is strictly worse off than someone who chooses horsemen. Ok, you prefer swordmasters. Doesn't mean you'll win. Horsemen have the advantage, thus will win more, thus in competitive play, are favoured. Thus, making swordmasters unusable. If there is a unit that is STRICLY better, then that's that. Using a weaker unit may be preference, but it's not smart competitive play. Imagine this, You use your team of generals, I use my team of berserkers. Ok, so I can only have two berserkers. But bam. Two of your units die, none of mine die. I fortify/restore and recover health. Then I kill another unit with my two horsemen. Instantly, the game is decided. That's unsuable. You can just as easily replace the gneral with a berserker, and not die. So that is favoured. So generals become useless. See above what I said in response. They have the same flaw, they can still be quad hit. Even by berserkers. Both swordmasters are heros fall in preferance to horsemen, so therefore, any team with heroes or swordmasters can be made better with horsemen

Case: Horseman vs horseman: But both players have a card. If 1 has Apotrope, then crits are random and apply equally to both parties. So, both parties will use Apotrope, to bring them up to par. They can't waste their card negating crits. Case: Horseman vs other: Horseman uses Apotrope. Can critical at a range and hit more times, effectively doubling crit rates. This either forces the other player to use dazzle, or gives the horsemen the advantage. Other point: All lance users will get quad hit. Snipers, Berserkers, horsemen and *maybe* mages. Those are the only useful teams. Everyone else has speed that is too low, so they get quad hit. Making them unwanted. Swordmasters can't use bows, and won't do damage with a levin sword (not compared to a brave bow). Their 10% accuracy bonus means nothing as forged 50% accuracy makes it obsolete. So they loose out to horsemen. Because you can learn new things in brawl. You can't in FE. Maxed stats are it. There are no ATs to be discovered. Characters can't have their metagame developed, because it doesn't exist. Brave bows mean horsemen rape at range. Swordmasters can't. Levin swords are negated by everyone's max res. Snipers are usable. Nup. Generals can be quad hit. From a range or at close. Their move sucks, so they need a scout. Plus, Paladins have higher speed (not enough to stop them being quad hit, so they are unusable to) higher move and same def generals are worse versions of paladins, and paladins are unusable. nup. They get quad hit. Yes, berserks are usable. only for staves. Everyone else has max res, and sages won't hit twice Normally Swordmasters can't cap res, so mages take them down. RNG abuse they can. Like? having 26 or less speed means you will get quad hit from a brave weapon. You need double the def and double the str to even compare. The highest def cap is 30, which is only 30% more than a hosreman, meaning it's not worth the extra hits they take. Manaketes can't attack at a range. With all max stats, only a select few units become usable.

Forged brave with crit will give you a 15% crit rate. Then the battle just relies on pure blind luck as to who is the winner. There is no skill in that. The enemy would simply choose Apotrope, because to win with a 15% crit (even on x2 hits, 30% crit) is just random chance. Random chance that equally applies to them, as they can just as easily make their weapons have identical crit rates. Then, the player without Apotrope will be at the disadvantage, since Apotrope only works one-way. So then, naturally, they choose dazzle and voila, the whole situation is negated.

Then should I point you to the SBR discussion about banning MK even after his cape is banned. Why? Their caps are crap, they have no stand out traits, and any character can be maxed. If this was true, hackers would win all the time. The reason they don't win is because they choose to mas crap classes. If you fought a hacked team of all horsemen with forged brave bows+swords then your raped. I never said stalling. I said broken. I never said it did. I never said anything to do with that. Ahh, problem here is brave>killer. Even forged. 30 luck will rape crit rates to nothing. Both teams have max supports, so that negates, (since any character can be maxes, it doesn't matter who you use in what class.) 30 luck -15 (30skl/2) means best, 35% crit (1 hit because they maxed speed). That's 35% to take down an entire party. A berserker can get 45%, but you can only get 2 berserkers, nowhere near enough to take down an entire party. Plus, someone with crit, needs brave in reserve in case of dazzle. This takes up weapon slots. You can't have every super-effective item in your hold, because you still should have keys and healing. Even then, the player can just change cards. Sinpers would still be useable, as they are the only ones that can use a longbow. but still, over 50% of classes become unusable.

MK's glitch was banned, because it broke the game. RNG abuse breaks the game. MK's glitch was a game mechanic, RNG abuse is a game mechanic. Both players can MK glitch, both players can RNG abuse. The analogy holds. Sure, RNG abuse doesn't make your characters invincible, but it does make them strictly better than the rest of the cast. Just like how MK becomes strictly better than a non-MK. RNG abused people still need strategy, just like MK-glitch still needs the first hit to win. It's just as broken. If I wanted to play a game with all homogeneous units, I'll play advanced wars tyvm. There is NO point playing FE if it means only a few classes become usable. Generals will suck, because everyone will strike twice and have just a much def (warriors). Swordmasters will suck, because horsemen are strictly better (have higher move and can use bows). Ballisticians/swarm become useless, because everyone has way too much def/res. Heros become unusable, because they don't have 30 in any important stat (def, speed, str) and hence will get dulled, won't do damage and take a lot of damage. Tactics become homogeneous. Since everyone has the same troops, there is no variation in tactics. People exploit. Then the over-the-top exploits get banned from competitive play. Arena abuse is an exploit. But it doesn't break the game. RNG abuse does. No, it's not loki's wager. because you can go to FE planet and look at character's averages. Averages are defined. Unlike in Loki's wager, where it was not defined. Having two wrongs does not make a right. Just because teams are fighting with identical stats does not mean it's the highest level of competitive play. In fact, it's much lower as your removing the biggest aspect, classes. As above, certain classes are only usable by the fact that certain characters belong in those classes. e.g. the pegasus sisters, they are used because they make awesome units, but the cannot be all types of units. Hence, a pegasus sister as a swordmaster can have better growths than most horsemen, thus making the swordmaster class still usable. With RNG abuse, I can pick up any character, max their stats (even with a 0% growth, stats still grow) and go for gold. It just becomes advance wars with only 5 units. Sure, you can claim tactics. But it's not fire emblem. This is fair game, I trained my horsemen as fighters to increase their HP and str. There's nothing wrong with this, because even with class changing they are still limited to averages.

That's why I put the word legit in inverted commas. Can't be done. There is no way for the game to tell what is or isn't a hacked unit. The american version might need different codes, but eventually they will get hacks for it.

It's not claiming there is "no" natural selection. Just that, if there are two characters that make equal mercs, you can't say they are not as good as sedgar, so they can't be used. It has to be taken into consideration that they can be mercs, and that it is possible to play without sedgar. And in that circumstance, one low tier character would be above the other low tier character. Of course both low tier characters are penalised in relation to the entire list for blocking sedgar, but not in relation to each other. If two characters are vying for a merc position, then bringing in a third character that outranks both only means that the third is higher than the others, not that the others are lower than each other. Lets say, Astram and Samson. If I want a hero, Astram makes the better one due to his better stats. So, astram should be higher than Samson. However, Since using Astram blocks Sedgar, Astram should be above Samson. See the problem there? That logic makes no sense. It's not logic even. But that's what has been said. And that's why people are objecting. If Astram is better than Samson, then he should be above Samson. Sedgar has nothing to do with it. "Blocking" Sedgar applies equally to both units, so therefore, both are penalised equally, so it makes no impact on either in relation to the other.

But it's massively unfair to the legit players to fight hacked teams, they are just as strong with none of the work. Technically, yes. But even with those "legit" teams, it can't be done without constant resetting and abusing non-in-game features such as a random number generator. There's a big difference between a lvl 20/20 gotten in the arena and a lvl 20/20 from RNG abuse. The arena team comes out exactly the same strength as a normal team, the RNG one does not. That's what I mean about loki's wager. Some teams are clearly hacked. Others are not. A hacked team that controls your moves? obviously cheating. But if you see a team with all max stats (bar move) who's to say they are or aren't hacking? At least with lvl 20/20 teams and stat boosting items, averages and strategy still matter. RNG abuse, they do not. At high levels of competitive play it should matter how your units were trained (as in class swaping/choosing averages) not just the end caps. RNG abuse is a cheap way of maxing stats, and is basically second only to hacking. Averages do not matter, as any growth rate (effectively) gets changed to 100% (even negative growths or growths with 0%) A "normal" team is one that lies within the averages. No matter how that was obtained. (yes, even via hacking).

There are averages. Using the area will result in average characters. It's when you get people with capped str and capped mag that it becomes difficult to tell legit teams from hackers. Getting any mage to cap mag is sus, considering the best mages average out to 20, so with the added 10 boost from items, that's capped mag. Merric for example, will almost never cap magic even with the pumps. Linde will, with all the pupms. Having ogma (for arguments sake) with max mag and max everything else is impossible to tell if the character is hacked or not. It's easy to get lucky and have a unit like sedgar max all stats bar mag and res. But as soon as they max mag and res, You may as well have a hacked team, no one can possibly tell the difference unless you explicitly tell them. IMO, and just imo, if you have to turn off the game to get your team, (for any other reason than a unit dying) then you may as well save time by getting some hacks. You'll end up with the same result. Still in my opinion, (so don't have to take it seriously) but if your resetting the game to get good levels, then all that is doing in reality is "hacking" the RNG system to make it do what you want. There has to be a line between legit and non-legit, because otherwise people will end up with Loki's wager. Can't tell a legit team from a non-legit team. (Loki's wager was, he bet his head but subsequently lost the bet. He agreed that they could take his head, but were not entitled to any part of his neck. Some areas were clearly the head, others were clearly the neck. But nobody could decide where exactly his head ended and the neck started. So he kept his head indefinitely.) Similar thing here, how am I (playing with anyone) supposed to tell if a team is legit or not? I see all maxed stats I'll call hack. http://www.feplanet.net/games-11-characters-averages Those are the averages a character can get. If I see something that breaks that by more than 10 consistently, then I rekon it's safe to call hack. (of course different combinations have to be accounted for, but the idea is there.)

so many hackers. . . . username: HollyWoodGF team: FireEmblem*

About 5 people have all tried to tell him the same thing.