Anouleth

Kieran's durability is so much better than Titania's. I mean, he only needs to gain twice as many levels as her in half a third as many chapters, and suddenly he has an earth-shattering SEVEN more HP than her!

Marisa joins late and has horrible strength.

Well, you might well ask, what is the alternative? Either Palestine is recognised as a country (two-state solution), or Gaza and the West Bank are absorbed into Israel and the Palestinians denationalised and deported (one-state solution), or what? This state of affairs continues forever? Would the Palestinians seriously cease targeting Israeli civilians because Israel invaded them? Has the use of force by Israel had good results in the past?

I just picked a bad Paladin pretty much at random from FE3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12.

Why does that matter? Soren in RD can use Celerity for 12 chapters, but in Path of Radiance, he can use the Boots for 13 chapters. Also, the Boots in Radiant Dawn don't show up until very late. So no, someone else can't have them, at least, not until Part 4. You can BEXP abuse better in Path of Radiance more easily, anyway. It's really not hard to get him to cap all his stats in either game, and since his caps are relatively better in Path of Radiance, he must be better in that game.

I think he would, and I don't think that being mistrustful is a good mark of a hero. And that doesn't mean you have to invade them. Ike does not try to avoid bloodshed whenever possible. He's a MERCENARY. And a pretty damn violent one, at that. He went to war just because Ranulf asked him. Because Lekain didn't sign the pact. The pact was signed by Naesala's father: who presumably lived many dozens of years ago. The senator that signed Naesala's pact is probably dead, just of old age. So how comes Marth can do something evil and unjustifiable in the service of an evil king, and he can still be a hero, but when Micaiah does something that's perfectly justifiable in the service of a good king, she is not a hero? But it was actually a huge mistake for Ike to jump Sanaki. In fact, it's only because he's such an amazing gary stu that he got away with it. And often, Ike does not engage in a fair, straight fight either. For example, in 3-P, he attacks under cover of darkness, through a side door, against an enemy that had no warning. In 3-1, he even uses disguises to get behind the enemy walls. In 3-3, he attacks the enemy's supply lines instead of fighting on the front line. It's mentioned several times that if Ike and the Laguz Alliance had tried to engage Begnion in a straight fight, they would have lost.

I think Jarod was mistaken in his evaluation of Micaiah's importance. If she had died, she would have simply become a martyr. And the key events in the rebellion had already taken place by 1-9. Jarod had had all his authority in Daein rescinded by Begnion. Real life historical events suggest that while special individuals can sometimes be the catalyst for great social changes, their death usually does nothing to prevent them. Joan of Arc's death did not prevent the other French from continuing to fight, and to win, the Hundred Year's War. Martin Luther King's death did not end the civil rights movement. So I think Jarod was rather clutching at straws when he hoped that killing Micaiah would solve all his problems. And I suppose, he just wanted his vengeance upon the woman who had ruined him, even if he did not save himself in the process. Is that not natural? Did Ike not perform several actions for Sanaki in FE9 without knowing why? Does that make him less heroic, because he trusts Elincia not to ask of him any service that might do him dishonour? And why does it make Micaiah less heroic, because she trusts Pelleas the same way that Ike trusts Elincia? Heroism is also having the luck to never be in such a dilemma in the first place. Regardless if whether the Apostle's Army went out of it's way to avoid attacking you (and they didn't, they could have gone straight for Begnion but they instead went through Daein), they are in sovereign Daein territory without permission, and therefore Pelleas has every right to do with them as he pleases. Just as Elincia was perfectly justified in destroying the Begnion troops that were on her territory against her will, so it was that Micaiah was justified in her defense of her nation's soil. I don't know if I would call it cowardly, either. Surely, attacking a far stronger opponent who is not attacking you is bravery, not cowardice? Micaiah could have avoided conflict, and just gone home and done nothing, but instead she chose to stand and defend her nation, and whether you think that's heroic, it's definitely brave. It's implied that Micaiah's blood pact is written differently to Naesala's: Micaiah is forced to be loyal to the Begnion Senate specifically, while Naesala is forced to be loyal to Begnion (which makes a loophole, because Sanaki is the ruler of Begnion). The key word is "eventually", and in most of those cases, the actions they were being commanded to do were pretty much completely evil. The actions of Micaiah and co. are justifiable.

That's the joke. The TC said that Rhys is the best Bishop. But he's also the worst Bishop! Ah, but he can use the Boots in Path of Radiance. Didn't think of that, did ya? Maybe you need to try only using Soren and giving him lots of BEXP in Path of Radiance, instead of being so close minded!

I think that Noish, Kein, Treck, Amelia, Makalov, Roshea, Matthis, and Sol aren't characters in need of "nerfing".

Legault is probably just joking.

Rhys is the worst Saint/Bishop in PoR. Get your facts straight. I'd also like to submit Janaff and Ulki. While in RD, they actually are capable of killing enemies, they've got reduced EXP gain.

But he isn't. Like, compared to the royals, Bastian is goddamn useless. He's an outright hindrance compared to the Royals. Don't get me wrong: Bastian does have some use, but trying to compare him to the Laguz Royals is not the right way to show it! He just gets stomped by them in terms of mobility, offense, and durability, and the only thing he really has over them is being able to use staves.

Lyre and Oliver are of no use whatsoever in both games, so they should be on any such list.

I really don't understand this. Guy is not "fucked" in FE7. He's a fairly decent unit that is held back mainly by low strength.

Alien Aliens Terminator Terminator 2 The Lord of the Rings The Hobbit Trainspotting The Usual Suspects The Shining 2001: A Space Odyssey Braindead (also known as Dead Alive) 1984 One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest The Hurt Locker

Every RPG in the world has weapon upgrades that actually improve weapons. Why is that a bad thing?

What borderline incest supports?

Well, it's more that axe users aren't very important for efficiency anyway. Just look at the FE6 tier list: the highest ranked primary axe users are Echidna and Gonzales. And because Echidna doesn't exist in B Route and Gonzales is weakened there, I don't believe that buyable killer Axes are really part of the reason why B Route is less attractive in an efficient playthrough.

I don't have to imagine it.

Ephraim and Eirika are likely to spend most of their time on Chapter 16 being rescued by other units. I think that alone would disqualify them as Boots canditates, quite besides the fact that there is a significant amount of terrain in Chapters 20 and Final.

it's a fine mug for a girl

Killer Axes really aren't that great, and I can't say that having them buyable in Chapter 11 is a significant consideration for efficient playthroughs. You know what would be more amazing than Killer Axe Bartre? Killer Bow Bartre. With 3 move in desert.

I really don't think that any level of economic stimulation would be worth the death of tens of thousands of people, unless those people are part of the 47% who are useless to society because they don't pay income tax. Wars are technically only stimulating to the economy when they take place a long long way away, like if the United States were to go to war with Germany, Japan, or even Iraq, because a war on United States soil would cause so much destruction as to completely outweigh any economic benefits from increased government spending. Certainly, I doubt that the economy of Iraq was improved in the short term by US invasion. Even Krugman in his "alien invasion" analogy wouldn't say that an actual alien invasion would improve the economy: it's the belief that such an invasion is imminent that alters spending habits and stimulates the economy.

I am of the opinion that Tate getting an extra chapter is more useful for her than another level of Pegasus Knight.

I suppose what's more troubling than anything is the idea that many working class people who voted for Romney with their wallet had their money wasted. I mean, Sheldon Adelson can afford to spend millions setting up super PACs or what have you, but by being duped by consultants, Romney was being irresponsible with other people's money. Which, supposedly, was what Republicans hate more than anything else.