Anouleth

Thor presumably has super strength and immortality since he's like, a GOD. also super human levels of sexy

Clerics tend to have extremely low magic anyway (Natasha has a base of 2) so it's unlikely they'd be able to do a huge amount of damage with it, unless you gave them a large buff to magic. Even if you wanted to do that, you could just give them a large promotion bonus instead of buffing their base stat directly.

They don't decrease drastically. I have had Janaff, Ulki and Tibarn kill almost everything in 4-2 before without ever untransforming, all in four turns. Most players don't play that fast, and they use more units, so they should have far less difficulty keeping their laguz transformed.

I would read a romance between Noah and Treck.

The high ranking of fliers is proportionate. Just because fliers are the best units in the game does not mean that foot units are useless. Foot units in general are not as useful as fliers. I'm sure that even the stupidest of players can figure out how Marcia's flying works. There's the door. Nobody is forcing you to talk to us. Nobody is forcing you to attack our positions. We're mocking you now. I doubt there is any unit in the entire game that Rolf does more damage to than Tanith + her two Falcoknight buddies. Having 3 range weapons is of no value when Tanith has 2 move movement anyway. A metric that evaluates abilities upon their contribution to the completion of the chapter. You didn't answer my question, so I'll repeat it: By what metric is killing enemies useful, but not chanting? Please do not respond with a bad analogy. I am asking a question and I expect an answer. And what the fuck does any of this have do to with chanting being supposedly useless? You didn't answer my question. When you said earlier on that "simply having flight knocks you up a tier or two", you were implying that there were no problems that were too great to be redeemed by flight, implying that a random civilian could get into Low just by having wings. Now you say that flight alone doesn't get you a tier higher. When you made this earlier statement, did you make it because you did not know it was wrong or did you know it was wrong and make it anyway? This question only has two answers. So what? The statistical difference between unpromoted characters in this game is pretty fucking low. Yeah, I was using hyperbole when I said Mia was a bottom tier combatant. I forgot how many downright awful characters there were in the game. Sue me.

No it doesn't. Tough. If I were to play through the game and have Mia exclusively use a Slim Sword, would that make her a bad character? No, of course not. Characters are rated on what they CAN do to contribute to an efficient playthrough. Maybe the player won't always do that, but that doesn't mean anything. If a player was to use Meta Knight and never use his specials, would that make him worse? No, his specials still make him a great unit even if they're not something that is used by everyone. If there are players that refuse to use Meta Knight's specials, does that make him not the best any more? No. But the command does exist, even if you don't like it. If you want to make a No Rescue tier list, go ahead, there is precedent (no Seth, no Warp), but this tier list, as far as I know, considers all the resources available in the game. We are not limiting ourselves. The majority of playthroughs will involve two or more 9 move units, because the game just gives you so many, and it would be absurd to refuse to use them to the best of their ability. Obviously, there will be a minority of playthroughs in which, by some fluke, there is one or zero 9 move units, and they should be given consideration, but we are not going to ignore rescue dropping because you want to give inferior units a fighting chance. Also, there are only two seize chapters in which flight is a serious factor. So you're saying we should completely ignore low turn count strategies that involve rescue-dropping, not because they have a distorting effect on the tier list, but because you don't like them. No. Killcount does not even come close to measuring which characters are good and bad, unless you are SERIOUSLY telling me that Rolf is better than Tanith in ANY way. Are you denying that these things are useful? By what metric is killing enemies useful, but not chanting? Flight makes a unit better, get over it. So you were lying when you said that flight makes you go up a tier? Or are you just stupid? Wow, that's like, a Nesshelper-level analogy. All you need is some gratuituous tropes and a good helping of butthurt. If we ignore skills and criticals, Mia is a bottom tier fighter.

That's not true.

Drop Sieglinde. You can let Eirika share Amiti with Elincia in exchange.

Bonjour, mes amis, mes francais n'est pas tres fort, mais j'espere je ne vais pas faire trop d'erreurs. C'est un bien occasion pour apprendre le francais, non? Je m'appelle Senaleth sur IRC.

oh and captain america for bottom tier he takes like five minutes to kill ONE random faceless soldier and he needs to scavenge a gun to do it

Chris Hemsworth and Jeremy Renner at the top pls in that order ok

I don't know: guns aren't always wielded with the intent to kill. Low caliber handguns are unlikely to kill someone in one shot. However, they can still be more deadly than a knife if wielded with the intent to kill. How could you distinguish between crimes in which the criminal had intent to kill and crimes in which they did not? Even if a ban on guns is functionally impossible in the United States because the place is already saturated, it can still be a desirable thing in theory. And as I have mentioned before there are constitutional reasons not to ban guns. In the case of Breivik, acquiring the weapons was more inconvenient than making the bomb because he had to travel to Czechslovakia and smuggle guns through Norwegian customs. Then I guess I'll be wrong. I don't know about a handgun. So a controlled experiment comparing firearms to alternatives? Impossible. And how could such data be acquired?

The comparison is not apt at all. That is only practical on Easy or Normal Mode. On Hard Mode, Sages have enough strength and defense that Haar would need to be extremely overlevelled to OHKO one. For example, the Thunder Sages in 3-3 have 33HP/12DEF, so Haar would need to be level 20 (after only three chapters, lol) in order to OHKO with a forge.

That's no fun.

Right, that's why we use efficiency and not LTC! But you must admit that being able to move Ike forward contributes towards clearing the chapter, and that being able to slaughter enemies before anyone else can even reach them is a contribution. Uh, why not? I mean, if you have Marcia, why not use her to her fullest potential? Anything else would just be sandbagging. The problem is that it's actually quite hard to "not conform" to the tier list. The number of excellent 9 move units the game gives you is really very high, between Muarim, Makalov, Kieran, Titania, Astrid, Oscar, Jill, Marcia, and Tanith (and you could stretch to accomodate Tormod). All you actually need is three of these units to render all those 7 move units obsolete (you can have a 7 move unit with Mordecai stuck to him, in theory, pretend to be a 9 move unit, but that's about it). Maybe even two. Maybe that won't happen in some playthroughs, but it's a minority: and even in those playthroughs, the 9 move canto units will still be a cut above. If you insist on playing the game super-optimally or whatever, obviously units in Upper Mid and below won't matter. But that's true of every tier list. Mid Tier on the FE6 tier list contains outrageous mediocrities like Lot, Lugh, and Roy. Kill count is a really bad way to tier the game. Rolf got more kills in my pt than Tanith or Titania. But that doesn't make him better, it just means he needs to be fed an ungodly number of enemies. And Tormod got more kills than all three. What about the tier list relies on one single strategy? Because I guarantee you that unless you use a completely boneheaded strategy Marcia is still far and away the best character in Chapter 15. Interesting theory: if Ulki didn't have flight, would we have to create a new Sub-Bottom Tier to accomodate him?

I don't have any problems with maps being symmetrical. Some of the best maps in Fire Emblem are symmetrical, such as FE5 Chapter 4 and FE8 Chapter 14. But I see your point, it is a bit... unexciting?

I believe dondon is making a more salient point: that hack creators should not get hung up on making a glorious epic tale and instead focus on making CONTENT.

Almost always these two are the same thing. But while I wouldn't quite say that Rolf saved any turns in a net utility sense, I would say that he contributed to my playthrough. Marcia and Tanith killed huge numbers of enemies between them, and yes, they rescue-dropped Ike forward. Those are both contributions to completing the map! Duh...

I found that in my efficient playthrough, the best characters were: Kieran Astrid Tanith Marcia Reyson And the worst characters by far were Rolf and Volke (in terms of combat). This bears out what I see in the tier list fairly well. Also, turncounts and efficiency are sometimes the same thing. That's not always true (think Edward in 1-P, for example, who saves a lot of turns but is still fairly low on the list). But usually, saving turns is a good rule of thumb to determine how good a character is.

No, that doesn't make sense at all! I don't see why that's relevant at all. In my country, there's more hospitalisations due to knife crime than gun crime, but that reflects the greater availability of knives to guns, rather than guns being a less deadly weapon. What's the difference? I don't think that Holmes and Breivik realistically could have access to the black market, and even if they did it would be a lot more expensive. As for the theory that they would have just used lots of bombs... there aren't really many bombings in the UK, so I doubt it. Nope, and I don't feel I need to. No, I said a rifle. A rudimentary shotgun could probably be built by the average person, although he'd need to buy the ammunition from somewhere. What evidence do you want specifically?

Apparently if you like dubs, you're racist.

models instead of sprites fuck the three dee ess screw technology

Don't forget that he's really awesome and powerful. And iirc, mysterious too.

I imagine James Holmes didn't buy an assault rifle instead of a knife so he could give his victims a fighting chance. That wouldn't tell us anything, though. More people are killed by guns than are killed by say, tanks. Does that mean that a tank is less deadly than a gun? Of course not. Even if there is more deaths due to knife crime than deaths due to gun crime, that doesn't mean that overall deaths would not be reduced by restricting guns. Except that's not what I'm saying! I don't think it matters at all how many people die overall because of guns or how many people die overall because of knives. I am saying that James Holmes, Anders Breivik and Martin Bryant would have killed fewer people with a knife than with a gun. And when the next crazy person shows up, the same will be true for him. Therefore, if gun laws had prevented them from acquiring guns, then fewer people would have died. And it's a statement that's impossible to prove barring travelling back in time and changing their weapons and seeing how many they kill. Probably not. We can't say for sure, because we have no evidence, but common sense would suggest that since firearms are more difficult to make than alcohol, especially ones as effective as modern assault rifles, it would probably not be possible. I do not have to prove every tiny little thing I say. If I say "the sky is blue" I do not have to find sources that back up my point. If I say "a gun is deadlier than a knife" I do not have to find sources that back up my point or perform a controlled experiment. I am not construing this as a simple fact. It IS a simple fact. You'll find that the only douche here is you. "Sorry that I have to ride your ass"? Shut the fuck up. You are not my fucking teacher, this is not debate class, don't pretend to be sorry for being intentionally clueless and "testing me" with constant bullshit. You are not teaching me some sort of valuable life lesson about backing up your points with data, because I don't give one shit about being rigorous when I already know I'm completely correct. No, I don't need to PROVE that Martin Bryant would have killed fewer people if he had been wielding a knife. No, I don't need to prove that James Holmes could not have designed and built a semi-automatic assault rifle in the basement that he didn't have.

when are you going to change the foreign-ese into USA-ish already