H5 Tier list topic

[Colonel M]

I'd say their earlygame is hindered in some ways, but it's not like they're being much of a detriment.

Whenever you're face-to-face with units such as Archers and Horseman, which the latter being pain in everyone's assholes, these guys are doing pretty good. Horseman may have low Atk, but notice that they double a lot of units and durability isn't as great in comparison to Kashim and Darros. Once Javelins are obtained, their offense becomes better due to being able to avoid riskier situations.

Problem with Horus is you're facing really good units for your lategame team. We have Generals who are practically or are immune to Brave shots, DracoKnights that can at least brag 3RKOes with good Avoid, or offense-heavy units that can double Paladins and such. Horus here can't quite brag that any of the situations, except maybe getting 3RKOed sometimes or better, though it will be in rare scenarios and pendant on levels.

I think Horus isn't a terrible unit lategame, but he just needs to squeeze a lot of levels to keep up with the team. I won't deny that Horus is an excellent utility unit, but outside of that... it's difficult to determine. You know, I always thought he was better than Wendell in some scenarios, but others would've thought completely different on the subject.

As for Darros in particular, Sirius might be the better person to ask. From my perspective, Kashim and Darros's earlygame seems to be a bit cleaner than Horus's lategame, though others could argue it's about equal.

[Rodykitty]

Horace is tiered mostly from a utility perspective. I don't really put a lot of importance on his long term abilities other than the fact that it stabilizes him so he can't be considered a failure.

I personally think that lacking an early game fail is a huge advantage despite weaker endgame, since it means you didn't have to train him to be useful, and he can easily be benched or killed when he's no longer being a huge benefit. It also isn't going to affect Darros' or Kashim's training at all.

Edited June 28, 2009 by Chainey

[Dr. Tarrasque]

As for Darros in particular, Sirius might be the better person to ask. From my perspective, Kashim and Darros's earlygame seems to be a bit cleaner than Horus's lategame, though others could argue it's about equal.

Darros and Kashim earlygame: 2 rounded, weak damage until ridersbane or some STR growth + rank ups.

Horus lategame: 2 rounded. Ridersbane where Paladins are plenty and had good room to build a bow rank.

I'd vote Horus' lategame >>> their earlygame. Chainey covered the rest.

Edited June 28, 2009 by Sirius

[Colonel M]

Yet another roadblock. Well then, guess we can argue Horus up toward Wendell or...?

(Man this is slightly irritating, but what can one do?)

Scratch that, I've been bored. It's entertaining me a little bit, but I bet it's slightly frustrating on Chainey's end.

Edited June 28, 2009 by Colonel M

[Rodykitty]

You're probably approaching this the wrong way. You're attempting to change well established positions instead of trying new possibilities.

It is possible some units could go below Navarre instead of Navarre going above Horace or whatever.

[Colonel M]

Catria is the first unit that pops into my head to be honest. She's nearly guaranteed there.

From there I'd have to look at things closely, but I could probably find one or two more people. I don't think Roger / Dolph / Kaiser would go that low though. This is just a rough estimation, so I could be completely wrong on the latter 3.

EDIT: Actually, no. Now we've reached another dilemna: almost everyone would be going under Horus in the first place since, again, Darros's earlygame is also in question to Horus's lategame. Inevitably, Horus would just rise, or we've just created a cluster of problems.

Edited June 28, 2009 by Colonel M

[Rodykitty]

Does anyone think Caesar should drop below Navarre? He is underleveled just like Radd, and while he's definitely better and cool class swap options, I'm guessing he doesn't have insta-usability like Athena nor the availability of Navarre.

Or he could be compared to Kashim, who has the same class set but suckier stats.

[Mekkah]

Navarre doesn't even seem that bad of a growth unit to me. He is like Abel but with ~2-3 less AS and C swords instead of D lances as a Cavalier. If B2BD doesn't respond to my Horace vs Navarre opener already I can make a case for him.

[Rodykitty]

True that. I probably underrated Navarre badly thus the need to bring him closer to Athena. I just don't know who needs to go under him since everyone worked so hard to rise the characters between them.

[Blacknight9]

to make it more objective couldn't people post their endgame stats with characters? it won't solve mid-game and early game discussions entirely, but we could then clearly see who is better at the end

[Dat Nick]

Navarre doesn't even seem that bad of a growth unit to me. He is like Abel but with ~2-3 less AS and C swords instead of D lances as a Cavalier. If B2BD doesn't respond to my Horace vs Navarre opener already I can make a case for him.

im working on it, i'm working on it

You didn't exactly respond to the original one right away, and tbh I'm half convinced this is a losing battle due to the cav route actually being viable >_>

I will say right now that E Lances and the fact that his AS starts sucking more and more as the game goes on is an issue, though

[Mekkah]

I'm not blaming you, I'm just saying I'm not going to have a realism-striving debate about Nabarl when I'm gonna have a biased debate about him.

[Rodykitty]

to make it more objective couldn't people post their endgame stats with characters? it won't solve mid-game and early game discussions entirely, but we could then clearly see who is better at the end

No, because not every character with endgame stats has had an easy time getting there.

[Colonel M]

The dilemna with Horus and others is since Darros's earlygame rut is considered worse than Horus's lategame rut, then Darros would have to be moved down or Horus would have to go up. Again, with Nabarl and Kashim, the only goal is to close the gap. This doesn't mean I'm advocating them right next to their respective partners in the first place, just to help close it in.

Caesar situation seems a bit in question, but I guess his start isn't beyond the word "terrible" with Fighter -> Hero. Other figures I'm unsure about.

[Rodykitty]

Navarre and Athena are not going to be next to each other. They may not even budge after all and we end up proving that all of these characters are between them.

Caesar situation seems a bit in question, but I guess his start isn't beyond the word "terrible" with Fighter -> Hero. Other figures I'm unsure about.

I'm not going to say Caesar is terrible or anything, otherwise he would be near Radd on the tier list. The question is whether he's better off than Navarre/Kashim.

[Capracanis]

To be brutally honest, that list on page 1 is total bull. Do you realize how ahrd it is to level Wolf and Sedgar in Normal, let alone Merciless? After about 3-4 lvevls in normal they're the best but don't count in in it H5. I found Gordin, Marth and Ogma were the best. Gordin has significant defence and the other two have decent avoiding. Barst is also amazing considering that Cord has no speed what-so ever and Bord is not fast from the start; I don't feel like leveling him.

All knights are utterly useless as a double hit will leave them with anywhere from 2-4 hp if not kill them.

Caesar and Radd are great provided you can level them quickly. Radd has amazingly high Defence and str and Caesar is just a regular Merc, and we all know from past games that Mercs are amazing.

I guess the reason I disagree is because my playing style is more for speed than defence.

[Rodykitty]

You had a point until I read the word "Gordon."

(Also, I didn't find Zagaro hard to level on NM at all.)

Edited June 29, 2009 by Chainey

[Don Draper]

Barst is also amazing considering that Cord has no speed what-so ever

Are we playing the same game?

Edited June 29, 2009 by IOS

[Dr. Tarrasque]

To be brutally honest, that list on page 1 is total bull. Do you realize how ahrd it is to level Wolf and Sedgar in Normal, let alone Merciless? After about 3-4 lvevls in normal they're the best but don't count in in it H5. I found Gordin, Marth and Ogma were the best. Gordin has significant defence and the other two have decent avoiding. Barst is also amazing considering that Cord has no speed what-so ever and Bord is not fast from the start; I don't feel like leveling him.

... This looks like personal experience and the typical noobish approach that just looks at growths and only growths. Great...

All knights are utterly useless as a double hit will leave them with anywhere from 2-4 hp if not kill them.

Killed in 2 rounds... like most people. Immortal later, assuming it's one with good DEF growth like Darros and Kashim.

Caesar and Radd are great provided you can level them quickly. Radd has amazingly high Defence and str and Caesar is just a regular Merc, and we all know from past games that Mercs are amazing.

Interesting... you bug AKs for their earlygame and consider Radd's DEF "amazingly high"? What the hell is this shit?

Edited June 29, 2009 by Sirius

[Rodykitty]

Here's a fun fact.

Hero Zagaro has better base stats than Radd in every. Single. Way. Here's the even funnier part. Luck is one of these stats.

His join time is better too, meaning that he's going to start getting a level lead on the poor boy. Heck, he only needs two levels and Radd loses hope of catching up.

[Colonel M]

The point is still being missed Chainey: if Darros > everyone below him, but Horus > Darros, then wouldn't Horus rise up anyway?

This is not me arguing Athena = Nabarl or Kashim = Darros, this is me arguing Horus > Darros and everyone below Darros.

If we really value something such as utility and someone like Horus can do a bit more than that, then I don't see what is the major issue of him rising in the first place.

Edited June 29, 2009 by Colonel M

[Rodykitty]

Go PM someone that actually put Horace where he is (Sirius) and Darros where he is (Sirius & Grandjackal) to see if they agree, but until then let's concern ourselves with seeing if anyone can lower below Navarre, which would in turn rise Horace slightly higher anyhow.

Edited June 29, 2009 by Chainey

[Dr. Tarrasque]

I put Horus where he is? Anyway, I'd vote Darros. He pretty much tramples Horace for mid and lategame. Horus being easily useful just means he should be close to Darros (and he already is) since he's only a "decent" tank during the midgame and then 2 rounded in the lategame.

[Rodykitty]

Alright then. Darros staying where he is.

I apologize for dragging you here, but I don't really have the knowledge required to make decisions based on these guys on my own.

Edited June 29, 2009 by Chainey

[Colonel M]

I got this from Wolf:

The fact that Darros is an equivelent to your group early on, thus providing an extra fighter, who grows to basically do Horace's job just as well? I can safely say yes, Darros is better if trained, however Horace comes pre-packaged. There is no chance of screwing over his midgame utility. Darros on the other hand is a risk. Horace is a milestone character, and it's hard to pass him. Due to Darros needing to be trained to do what Horace is already capable of doing? Horace>Darros.

Once this is resolved I'll go to work on Nabarl > Catria.