OMG it's a tier list

[GreatEclipse]

I don't think that anyone actually thinks that Eddie should be going into High tier for this stuff, so [No, thanks] at any argument that suggests Sothe is DB Jesus for something that's altogether similar.

Why should he not be high tier if you think units should be judged on contributions to a low turn count?

[-Cynthia-]

It's an impossible standard to demand parity between cross-army performances. When people say things like what I just quoted from you, my gut reaction is to ignore everything that they said thereafter, and then demand that they explain Eddie's position in Lower Mid. Full stop. Do not pass Go, do not collect two hundred dollars.

Perhaps the problem then is with Eddie's position rather than Sothe's. Not to pull a CATS here, but the definition of efficiency is still unclear. If it means lower turn counts with minimal restarts, Edward should definitely move up.

Part of the problem is that the line between Sothe and any GMs is going to be rather arbitrary. How is Mia so good that her contributions are better than Sothe's, but Titania/Gatrie/Shinon etc. are not? I can see justifying Haar and Ike above Sothe because they contribute significantly more than their team members, but I wouldn't lump Mia into this category (partially because Titania vs. Mia is so arguable, Titania vs. Haar is not).

I don't think that anyone actually thinks that Eddie should be going into High tier for this stuff, so [No, thanks] at any argument that suggests Sothe is DB Jesus for something that's altogether similar. Sothe fails in the clutch, also known as Part 3, which is a strictly player's-choice-deployment set of chapters that separates the men from the boys.

How is Part 3 "clutch"? Is it somehow more relevant than Part 1 for some reason? Anyway, Sothe falls in the middle of the pack for Part 3. Worse than Volug, Nolan, Aran, Jill, Bk when he's around. About equal to Zihark, better than the rest of the mooks, which is still contributing.

Sothe's chapters in Part 1 are arguably more clutch than any other unit in the game, except for a few cases like the BK in 1-9. Being great for 4 part 1 chapters (where the other character is entirely absent) is more important than being slightly above average as opposed to average for 3 Part 3 chapters.

I think that Titania > Mia is at least arguable. It's just a sticky wicket since when you drill down their individual performances, you notice that they have very little overlap in duties, which is unexpected for a direct combat comparison. This has nothing at all to do with Sothe. Mia and Titania are both pillars of the army, you excise them at your own peril. Replace Titania with Oscar, or Mia with Nephenee, for example, and see what kind of damage that you will do to your performance and resource distribution as a result.

My point is that the efficiency loss between replacing Titania with Oscar or Mia with Nephenee is much less severe than not having Sothe for the chapters which he exists.

[Interceptor]

Why should he not be high tier if you think units should be judged on contributions to a low turn count?

I had a feeling you'd post this, when I saw Trollface McTroublemaker show up on the user's list, so I've prepared the standard reply, which you are already familiar with: the reason he probably shouldn't be High tier, is because auto-promoting units for something entirely outside the player's control makes for pretty boring discussion.

Perhaps the problem then is with Eddie's position rather than Sothe's. Not to pull a CATS here, but the definition of efficiency is still unclear. If it means lower turn counts with minimal restarts, Edward should definitely move up.

As much as I like CATS, the Rand Paul of tier list debating, there's a certain point in every list where idealogical purity crosses the street from "interesting to jaw about" to "counter-productive to discussion". There is a reason why there is a gentleman's agreement to ignore the Seize argument in tier debates. It is not because there is something inherently illogical about auto-topping a Lord for literally allowing the game to be won. It's because building in structural advantages for certain characters because of storyline accidents that player choice and resource distribution have no impact on, tends to marginalize our ability to compare two units based on things like the difference in combat prowess.

Part of the problem is that the line between Sothe and any GMs is going to be rather arbitrary. How is Mia so good that her contributions are better than Sothe's, but Titania/Gatrie/Shinon etc. are not? I can see justifying Haar and Ike above Sothe because they contribute significantly more than their team members, but I wouldn't lump Mia into this category (partially because Titania vs. Mia is so arguable, Titania vs. Haar is not).

This is just a problem for comparing armies in general. Even your own argument is arbitrary, asserting that Ike/Haar are significantly better than their team members (because it's easy to pick out the top two units), but that Mia/Titania/whoever are not (ignoring that your second-string fighters are still essential for the core of the team, Ike/Haar cannot carry the army alone).

How is Part 3 "clutch"? Is it somehow more relevant than Part 1 for some reason? Anyway, Sothe falls in the middle of the pack for Part 3. Worse than Volug, Nolan, Aran, Jill, Bk when he's around. About equal to Zihark, better than the rest of the mooks, which is still contributing.

Sothe isn't just a lukewarm nobody in the middle of the pack, he's also a mediocre pissant that has no future. Using his overwhelming under-achievement actually makes you worse off than you would be otherwise, since he's taking calories from the mouths of units like Jill, Nolan, and Volug; whilst giving you nothing in return.

Sothe's chapters in Part 1 are arguably more clutch than any other unit in the game, except for a few cases like the BK in 1-9. Being great for 4 part 1 chapters (where the other character is entirely absent) is more important than being slightly above average as opposed to average for 3 Part 3 chapters.

Being one of the best offensive units in an army that's lacking them, is better than being a Jeigan with Steal and Item-Find that falls flat on his face as soon as he gets out-Jeiganed. My assertion is cooler than yours.

My point is that the efficiency loss between replacing Titania with Oscar or Mia with Nephenee is much less severe than not having Sothe for the chapters which he exists.

I understand your point. But I think it's silly to essentially ignore everything about Sothe that makes him a playable unit, just because he's the essential part of a sandwich for 8% or the game or somesuch.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Speedwagon

[-Cynthia-]

The thing is with ignoring Seize arguments is that they're easily defined "Seizing doesn't count". There isn't such a rule that "forced chapters don't count" or "forced chapters with less than X numbers of units doesn't count". It gets even worse when it's just "count less", because how much is less? It's a tricky situation.

Edited May 24, 2010 by -Cynthia-

[Interceptor]

The thing is with ignoring Seize arguments is that they're easily defined "Seizing doesn't count". There isn't such a rule that "forced chapters don't count" or "forced chapters with less than X numbers of units doesn't count". It gets even worse when it's just "count less", because how much is less? It's a tricky situation.

I don't disagree. There is a clear difference between this and the Seize deal, and the specific point is not easily definable. But a tricky situation is not an impossible situation. I would say that amongst most of people who argue here, there's a general consensus that the point of this list is to argue the relative merits of different characters in efficient play. So, amongst those people, some sort of cease-fire agreement can probably be reached on the subject of the weight that ought to be given to forced earlygame chapters.

[GreatEclipse]

I had a feeling you'd post this, when I saw Trollface McTroublemaker show up on the user's list, so I've prepared the standard reply, which you are already familiar with: the reason he probably shouldn't be High tier, is because auto-promoting units for something entirely outside the player's control makes for pretty boring discussion.

I am like Socrates. I only go where the argument takes me.

As I said in the FE7 topic, under efficiency premises, a unit that saves 100 turns in a single chapter and then hits the bench is better than someone who saves 3 turns every chapter in a 33 chapter game. If Edward saves you 13 turns in an early chapter due to only 1 other unit on the field, and Haar saves you 12 from being an awesome mobile tank from start to finish, Edward > Haar, no questions asked.

[RNG Princess]

I used Fiona in 1-7 and took 15 turns

I used Nailah in 1-8 +1-E and took 16/18 turns

I don't get the point

well Fiona only killed weakened enemies and mages so I don't that counts

Edited May 24, 2010 by Queen_Elincia

[dondon151]

Why should he not be high tier if you think units should be judged on contributions to a low turn count?

You asked a question like this in my FE8 tier list thread, to which I responded that my tier list is more of a usage guideline than a strict ranking of characters based on contributions to low turn counts. I think that should apply to this tier list as well.

[Interceptor]

I am like Socrates. I only go where the argument takes me.

Well, you're half-right.

As I said in the FE7 topic, under efficiency premises, a unit that saves 100 turns in a single chapter and then hits the bench is better than someone who saves 3 turns every chapter in a 33 chapter game. If Edward saves you 13 turns in an early chapter due to only 1 other unit on the field, and Haar saves you 12 from being an awesome mobile tank from start to finish, Edward > Haar, no questions asked.

There's no need to explain this point to me; it should be obvious from my Eddie rant that I already understand the concept. That you explained it to me regardless, means that you either think that I'm a dumbass who accidentally made a correct argument without actually understanding it, or that you missed the broader point that I was making in the first place. I'm going with Door #2 here, but feel free to correct me if you think I'm an idiot savant, blessed by providence.

The point, again, is that most of us we are reasonable people, not bound by strict efficiency as if it were a straitjacket. It's fine to take things to their ultimate absurdity in order to make a point, like I did with Eddie, but the aim there is to inject some reasonableness to the debate, it was not a call to kneecap the tier list with auto-top idiocy.

[GreatEclipse]

You certainly want to use Edward for at least the first few chapters, and his contributions during said chapters are supposedly enormous, so how would it be inaccurate to put him above units that contribute for longer but have a smaller impact on turn counts? It looks similar to something like Marcus vs. Lot.

There's no need to explain this point to me; it should be obvious from my Eddie rant that I already understand the concept. That you explained it to me regardless, means that you either think that I'm a dumbass who accidentally made a correct argument without actually understanding it, or that you missed the broader point that I was making in the first place. I'm going with Door #2 here, but feel free to correct me if you think I'm an idiot savant, blessed by providence.

A false dilemma. I was making the point that I am willing to follow that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, however "absurd" it looks to you on the surface. I do not consider "It kills discussion" a convincing response, for reasons CATS explained in the FE7 topic. Comparing Haar to Edward without factoring in his moment of glory certainly kills discussion. Haar is better, and it's stupidly obvious, nothing to discuss.

Edited May 24, 2010 by GreatEclipse

[Interceptor]

You certainly want to use Edward for at least the first few chapters, and his contributions during said chapters are supposedly enormous, so how would it be inaccurate to put him above units that contribute for longer but have a smaller impact on turn counts? It looks similar to something like Marcus vs. Lot.

For someone who (wrongly) accuses me of presenting a false dilemma, it's pretty rich of you to put words in my mouth. I never said that it would be "inaccurate" to put Eddie over the likes of someone like Ulki. To make a massive understatement here, I implied that it would be undesirable.

A false dilemma. I was making the point that I am willing to follow that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, however "absurd" it looks to you on the surface. I do not consider "It kills discussion" a convincing response, for reasons CATS explained in the FE7 topic. Comparing Haar to Edward without factoring in his moment of glory certainly kills discussion. Haar is better, and it's stupidly obvious, nothing to discuss.

I already followed the line to its logical conclusion: Eddie for High tier. Your need to explain a concept to someone who obviously already understands it, suggests (at least) those two possibilities that I laid out. Either you think I'm a moron who formulates an argument without truly understanding it, or you missed the larger point that I was making. I am getting no indication from you that you actually follow where I was going, even if you disagree with it, so the conclusion that I draw is that misunderstanding or undiagnosed Asperger's Syndrome or trollface is the major malfunction here.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Interceptor

[GreatEclipse]

For someone who (wrongly) accuses me of presenting a false dilemma, it's pretty rich of you to put words in my mouth. I never said that it would be "inaccurate" to put Eddie over the likes of someone like Ulki. To make a massive understatement here, I implied that it would be undesirable.

If you think the list should convey accurate information (As DD151 thinks it should), how would it be undesirable to rank him above units with smaller contributions to efficiency? If you define "use" as "used the entire game" then I could see ignoring this, but this creates problems with units like FE6 Marcus. Edward seems to be in a similar situation: necessary for an efficient completion on a few early maps, then useless for the remainder.

I already followed the line to its logical conclusion: Eddie for High tier. Your need to explain a concept to someone who obviously already understands it, suggests (at least) those two possibilities that I laid out. Either you think I'm a moron who formulates an argument without truly understanding it, or you missed the larger point that I was making. I am getting no indication from you that you actually follow where I was going, even if you disagree with it, so the conclusion that I draw is that misunderstanding or undiagnosed Asperger's Syndrome or trollface is the major malfunction here.

I apologize if you found something offensive. If you think I am missing some deeper point, feel free to spell it out for me. All I currently see is an unwillingness to live up to the implications of the standards in use.

Edited May 24, 2010 by GreatEclipse

[Florete]

On that note, what about the Volug moving a tier down idea from earlier?

That did happen, but dondon argued against it and it was reversed.

[Narga_Rocks]

To be honest, I'd like Ed somewhere in mid. He really is too important early. But it's impossible to judge how many turns unit A saves compared to unit B. You can't prove that Ed in 1-P saves you more turns than Haar through the course of the game. It wouldn't be possible to judge. Also, there are far too many units that are nearly essential for one or two chapters and then fall on their faces. It's better to merely note that they are important for a while and hold it as tie-breakers against units that never are when their performance over time is similar. As long as it remains undesirable to the majority of posters, I see no reason to turn this list into auto-tops for everyone that is essential for single chapters while anyone that never is that essential has some ceiling they can never ascend beyond. This tier list isn't meant merely for absolute turn counts, in part because determining those numbers isn't particularly easy. Consistent performance over a long period of time should be valued even more than essential performance in a single chapter, and so it is.

[Interceptor]

If you think the list should convey accurate information (As DD151 thinks it should), how would it be undesirable to rank him above units with smaller contributions to efficiency? If you define "use" as "used the entire game" then I could see ignoring this, but this creates problems with units like FE6 Marcus. Edward seems to be in a similar situation: necessary for an efficient completion on a few early maps, then useless for the remainder.

At the risk of stating the obvious, and with no disrespect meant to His Eminence the Pope, my handle is not "DD151", it's "Interceptor". You are busily attributing things to me that other people have said; but as this Impostorceptor that you've created doesn't even resemble me, I feel that by even replying to you, that I'm intruding on a carefully-choreographed tea party -- complete with sugar cookies, and stuffed animals in funny hats -- to which I was not invited.

There is merit in the Pope's vision of a tier list, but this particular tier list doesn't actually follow his Sethstomp guidelines. It is merely an efficiency list for Hard Mode that follows some elements of Vykan's tiering FAQ. The specifics have been under debate since RFoF started the thread sometime shortly after the creation of the known universe. If you follow the arc of the list's growth over the months and years, you can see distinct eras of dominance by various philosophies and flavors of conventional wisdom, even though the controlling guidelines for the list have not actually changed.

What I mean to say here, is that the guidelines are not a suicide pact. We ignore Seize arguments because they are generally accepted to be asinine. The same should, I think, be true of things like auto-topping people like Eddie. Not because the argument for putting him there is illogical under some specific guideline, but because it trivializes the importance of his terrible combat parameters in the rest of the game, and makes any and all discussion about Eddie eminently retarded.

You would burn the village to save it; I'll pass on that one.

I apologize if you found something offensive. If you think I am missing some deeper point, feel free to spell it out for me. All I currently see is an unwillingness to live up to the implications of the standards in use.

Ironically, I am only offended by fake apologies, and also by having to repeatedly repeat myself repeatedly.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Interceptor

[nflchamp]

To get out of the way that turn counts are not the only important thing in this list, I'd like to remind everyone that Volug is Top Tier more from saving us from the pain and agony of tearing our hair out than from actually lowering turn counts.

[dondon151]

I was implicitly suggesting that it would be unintuitive to raise Edward solely because of the magnitude of his turncount contributions, because his usage pattern throughout the game is very limited.

[GreatEclipse]

I was implicitly suggesting that it would be unintuitive to raise Edward solely because of the magnitude of his turncount contributions, because his usage pattern throughout the game is very limited.

I guess we just look at the issue differently then. I do not particularly care that someone like Lot has more potential for long term use than Marcus. I can drop Lot at any given point in the game, and it will have an insignificant impact on my performance compared to Marcus at his prime. I think I get your point though, and I would be fine with dropping the issue.

If I did not feel sincere, Interceptor, it was because I think you are taking this way too personally. The first thing you did was accuse me of trolling, following up by suggesting I was insulting your intelligence. I ask you to keep things in perspective. We are arguing on the internet about fictional characters from an obscure JSRPG.

[Colonel M]

I'm actually surprised that he didn't hit up Black Knight and, instead, went with Edward. Ah well, such is the life.

I have to go "babysit", but I'll hopefully be able to write up my argument tonight. With Haar. Not fucking Edward.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Colonel M

[Interceptor]

I'm actually surprised that he didn't hit up Black Knight and, instead, went with Edward. Ah well, such is the life.

BK is almost a Seize argument himself, is the problem. Eddie's earlygame performance is closer to what we're getting out of Sothe.

If I did not feel sincere, Interceptor, it was because I think you are taking this way too personally. The first thing you did was accuse me of trolling, following up by suggesting I was insulting your intelligence.

I am not being criticized, so I think that perhaps you don't know what it means to "take something personally"; you might want to look that idiom up somewhere. What is happening here is more akin to a game at a child's birthday party. You are the child, your adherence to doctrine is the blindfold, your posts are swings with the baseball bat, and my essential point here represents the piñata. Now, analogies are not my area of expertise (I prefer metaphors), but let's just say, if I may put it delicately, that there isn't any candy on the floor right now.

I can't be sure if you're trolling, such is the nature of it, but since I knew exactly what you were going to say as soon as I saw you in the thread, and was able to prepare a response, perhaps I am just gifted with supernatural precognition. As for insulting my intelligence, this may come as a shock, but that was not actually serious. I choice an absurd option in order to draw attention to the real one, which can be summed up thusly:

point->  .

you ->   O  
       /|\ 
        |
       / \

My point, again, in different words, is that rigid adherence to maximum efficiency via turn counts -- such as in the example of super-utility Eddie -- kills discussion potential. This may be unavoidable in the case of terrible units like Lyre/Fiona/Astrid, but c'est la vie, we lack an alternative for the time being. The important factor here is that reasonable people can agree to not put hilarious worth on the dozens of turns that earlygame Eddie technically saves you via simply existing, in order to leave room to look at things that are more interesting, like his combat prowess in non-forced chapters, relative to other units.

This is not a new topic, even if it seems like one; I've been making this point for a while now. I may make this my last attempt, since soon I'm going to have to break out my thesaurus.

I ask you to keep things in perspective. We are arguing on the internet about fictional characters from an obscure JSRPG.

Would it help you pick up on certain social cues if I were to embed things like /sarcasm tags in my posts?

Edited May 24, 2010 by Interceptor

[Rewjeo]

As much as I like the usage guideline tier list idea (I really do) it needs to be made clear whether this is that or a direct list of who saves you the most turns in an efficient playthrough.

[Soren37]

Probably going to get shot down for this, but I think Muarim should be dropped a couple of ranks.

Yes his bases are good, and his stats are godly, but his availability issues make him very difficult to train. You get him in 1-7, 1-8, 1-E, and 4-4 before endgame. You have 4 chapters to get him to the point where he's able to be considered for use. Granted he's level 19 when you get him, he has to go up 11 levels to get Roar, and his experience doesn't add up quickly unless you stick Paragon on him and buy a laguz stone or have him take Grass like candy.

Just my opinion, but meh.

EDIT: I mean, he's in the Middle rank, but due to availability, he should almost be below Skrimir or Kieran.

Edited May 26, 2010 by Soren37

[Narga_Rocks]

Probably going to get shot down for this, but I think Muarim should be dropped a couple of ranks.

Yes his bases are good, and his stats are godly, but his availability issues make him very difficult to train. You get him in 1-7, 1-8, 1-E, and 4-4 before endgame. You have 4 chapters to get him to the point where he's able to be considered for use. Granted he's level 19 when you get him, he has to go up 11 levels to get Roar, and his experience doesn't add up quickly unless you stick Paragon on him and buy a laguz stone or have him take Grass like candy.

Just my opinion, but meh.

EDIT: I mean, he's in the Middle rank, but due to availability, he should almost be below Skrimir or Kieran.

I treat Muarim as if he doesn't exist after part 1. To me he's a liability to train in 4-4 because he faces crit from nearly everything and gets doubled as well. I've seen him get killed by just two enemies when he started at full hp. My attempts at 10 turning 4-4 went a lot better once I started treating Muarim as a vulnerable little kitten rather than a roaring tiger.

No, he's where he is because of his 1-7 to 1-E. He's also more useful in part 1 than Skrimir is in part 4. As for vs. Kieran, Kieran is where he is mainly for 2-3 and 3-9. Is Muarim more or less useful in part 1 than Kieran in his only two good chapters?

At times I wonder if Tormod should be closer to Muarim, or even above him, though, given Tormod's abiltiy to ORKO everything he can double in 1-8 and 1-E if you give him a forge (yeah, so can Muarim, but Tormod has no gauge to worry about and has 2 range). But there is a pretty large durability difference.

Edited May 27, 2010 by Narga_Rocks

[Soren37]

Okay then. Fair enough.

Next thing I have to question is Meg's placement. She's in the Bottom tier along with Astrid, Fiona, and Lyre. Meg should at least be low for a couple of reasons, mainly when she's compared to who else is in Bottom Tier.

First, Red Fox of Fire's post on Lyre (taken from FEPlanet). Link.

Oh dear. Oh dear, sweet Jesus. Intelligent Systems, what have you done?

Lyre is what every unit doesn't want to be. Lyre has absolutely nothing going for her. I daresay Lyre cannot even be fixed as a unit.

So what is it that makes Lyre so awful? Well, do you remember how bad Mist was as a combat unit with her base 22 atk? Lyre's base atk is also 22. Only Lyre doesn't have 1-2 range and hasn't gotten a chance to level or build support like Mist, so she loses to Mist in raw damage output by 3-4 points per hit. To put into perspective, in her joining map she:

7 hit kills Warriors.

13-19 hit kills Halberdiers.

6 hit kills the weaker Swordmasters.

Is 3-4 atk short of even hurting Generals.

8 hit kills Snipers.

3-4 hit kills Sages. (Luckily for her, she doubles the slow ones)

Deals 1 damage to the Dragonmasters' 40-42 HP.

And Lyre is a combat unit!

See, even an Energy Drop and a level of BEXP for Speed won't do much for her. She'll now be 5 hit killing the Warriors with a double (luckily enough), 6 hit killing the Halberdiers with a double, 4 hit killing the Swordmasters with no double, 1-2 damage to Generals....I think you get the picture. Lyre with resources is still a pile of failure.

And then there's durability. 47 HP, 14 Defense, and 16 Resistance always taking counters. Warriors, Halberdiers, and Snipers get her in 3, Swordmasters in 4, Generals in 3 again but the stronger ones leave her with 1 HP (or 2 if you gave her BEXP and she got HP) after 2 hits, Elfire Sages in 2. Yeah, she sucks on this end as well.

It does not end there. That level of BEXP I just fed her stops doubling as soon as 3-8, so she may need another for there, only now we're seeing that these BEXP levels are preventing her from getting the Strength she needs since Strength is her 5th highest growth 15% behind the 4th and only 5% above the 6th. Lyre also has her terrible Cat gauge limiting the kills she can be fed every map, she never has free deployment, none of the units joining around her want Defense or Avoid...What the hell happened here?

I can't do an accurate part 4 review because I can't imagine what level and stats would be reasonable. Are all her levels BEXP'd and getting only her higher growths? Is she being fed 15 kills per map so she can get to Rend asap? Is borderline doubling enough to get to S Strike in 6 maps? I don't know. However, given her bad growths, gauge, and lack of 2 range attacking, I cannot imagine she will be anything resembling a good unit ever without tons of attention. Worst unit in the game for me.

0/10

Next is Fiona. This was my own comparison once again from FEP. Link.

When Fiona joins, she has the following.

Fiona

Lance Knight

Level-9

HP-25

STR-8

MAG-6

SKL-8

SPD-10

LCK-7

DEF-8

RES-6

She's going to have a tough time killing anything with 103 base hit. With WTA, she'll have 113, 108, 103, 98, and 93 hit at her different biorhythms. She'll have 18 base damage, 19 with WTA, and that'll mean that she's doing ~8 damage to the enemies on the Freeing Daein Soldiers chapter, with an AS of 8. The only characters she won't get doubled by are an Elfire toting mage and an Armoured Lance with a Javelin. All of the characters in that chapter have have ~30+ Avoid, meaning she'll be averaging a hit of 73, which is closer to 85.15% in Two RN. All the characters can double her, and with her lulzy DEF and RES and the enemies having ~20-30 ATK, she'll go down faster than a balloon filled with lead. She also gets the -2 MOV penalty, meaning you can only move 6 squares and Canto will only allow you to move oh-so-slightly away from whatever you just tried to kill. Think you can cap ram with that start?

Also, this comic outlines all of Fiona's shortcomings in the chapters you get her in.

Finally, we have Astrid. Once again, my own analysis from FEP. Link.

Astrid 20/20/5

HP-46.2/50

STR-24.8/33

MAG-16.4/20

SKL-27.9/36

SPD-25.8/35

LCK-32.4/35

DEF-19.6/27

RES-26/30

The only thing Astrid excels in is LCK, SKL and RES. Can you say mage killer that never misses? Sadly no. While her SKL and LCK will guarantee hits, her 24 STR is painful. With a Steel Bow, she'll have 247.8 Base hit. At the different biorhythms, she'll have 257.8, 252.8, 247.8, 242.8, 237.8. While she'll never miss, her damage output is terrible. With said Steel Bow, she'll have 34.8 Base Damage against normal units, and 104.4 against fliers. By endgame, she'll be doing 14.8 damage against Lekain. Her AS is 25. Lekain has 25 AS. If she can barely damage Lekain, think of what she'll be able to do to Wishblade guy, Dheg, Sephiran and Ashera. She'll just become worse and worse. While she does have Paragon and comes in enemy-rich chapters, it's still not enough to pull her out of the hole and make her decent.

Finally, we now come to Meg.

Meg Level 20/20/10

HP-53.4/60

STR-30.4/36

MAG-13.6/20

SKL-27.6/33

SPD-29.2/32

LCK-30/30

DEF-30.4/35

RES-29.5/32

Most likely cap: HP, SPD, LCK, RES

Meg joins at Level 3 in 1-4, and has a lot of time to level up. I know that people say she's bad because of her start, and she's doubled by cats, level 6 Tigers and one Boss (assuming Hard mode), as well as the reinforcements. If you really want to put the time into her, than just simply let other characters weaken, such as Ilyana with a Fire tome, Nolan, Sothe, Miccy and let her steal the kill. Sure it's cheap, but she can at least gain the experience. After that chapter, it's just a wash and repeat. Yes, it requires babying, but Miccy, Soren, Eddie, and Nephenee need to be babied too so that they can reach their full potential. When you compare Meg to the other units, it's mainly her start that bugs her, but if you compare her to the other piles of fail that are in the bottom tier, and use a bit of babying, then she may not be bottom tier, but still not a great unit nonethless.

Edited May 27, 2010 by Soren37

[BEST TRYNDAMERE PLAYER]

Meg joins at Level 3 in 1-4, and has a lot of time to level up. I know that people say she's bad because of her start, and she's doubled by cats, level 6 Tigers and one Boss (assuming Hard mode), as well as the reinforcements. If you really want to put the time into her, than just simply let other characters weaken, such as Ilyana with a Fire tome, Nolan, Sothe, Miccy and let her steal the kill. Sure it's cheap, but she can at least gain the experience. After that chapter, it's just a wash and repeat. Yes, it requires babying, but Miccy, Soren, Eddie, and Nephenee need to be babied too so that they can reach their full potential. When you compare Meg to the other units, it's mainly her start that bugs her, but if you compare her to the other piles of fail that are in the bottom tier, and use a bit of babying, then she may not be bottom tier, but still not a great unit nonethless.

Her growths don't fit her class, that's a main problem. Also the fact that even tigers double her in her joining chapter makes it impossible for her to level and her main weapon is swords, which is a pretty crappy weapon type in HM. So even if you do baby her, in the long run she's not worth it at all. Oh yeah, don't forget her 5 move as well and having not only crappy offensive stats, but defensive stats as well.

Although I will give her credit for two things: Possible support with Ilyana to help out her somewhat poor accuracy and the fact that she can shove a couple of people here and there if necessary in chapters where deploying her doesn't cost anything.

Edited May 27, 2010 by Joey