Frustrations concerning tier list topics

[TheEnd]

Wolt is even more of a mook than Leonardo. His stats are worse than the Archer's in the chapter he starts in too!

Roy still has himself (and he doubles instead of being doubled), Allen, Lance and Marcus, though. Micaiah, on theother side...

Renault's level is high and he fails

Low bases at a low level != low bases at a high level.

Part 3 with Mercs. :D

Oh God, I wish it was Mercs-only.

It depends on how well they do either job.

First off, the flier has more move. Therefore she can move more, keep up with the group and help get chapters done faster. You have to stay behind for the armor. She's winning there.

But how non-durable is she? How durable is the slow tank? How well are they doing on offense? Compare these, weight them and see where it takes you. If the flier happens to have really good evade, it could be argued that they are winning durability - they're evading more, and the one attack they take in a blue moon makes up for the fact that they have very little defense. However, if this hit is near fatal, if not fatal, and the Armor takes literally zero damage from every attack, I'd put the lead towards the Armor.

See? This is why individual unit capability is more important than class. Until you hit stat caps anyawy, and even then very few times are those stat caps even relevant; 10 is one of the places where they are.

The weighing is a serious problem, however, since it's very subjective - even if discussed by five people. It makes the tier list unreliable as reference and, as such, a waste of time and effort.

They're apart of their class. It contradicts your generalization.

They fail to fulfill their classes' potential. I see no contradiction.

Her bad offense and defense aren't caused by her caps.

They would be her saving graces (as she could go high), and she yet she lacks them.

Her caps later. As in, when she reaches her cap. Granted, this happens pretty fast in second and third tier, and like Nathan said, it's one of very few instances where class actually means something, since caps come with class and not the character. Point being, her stats suck upon joining compared to the rest of her team and she is never better than anyone (except when Fiona joins). This is why she sucks. It's not because she's an armor with low defense, it's because she's meant to fight but has bad durability offense, and mobility. Class has nothing to do with it. Her purpose on the field of battle is the same as Edward's, Aran's, Nolan's, etc.; to kill things and stay alive. She sucks because she fails to do either.

I wouldn't mind having more tank characters in the Mook Brigade, especially some that won't kill attacking enemies for 1 exp (lol Muarim).

I'm still not following you there, though. You say it has nothing to do with being an armor, and yet you repeat she sucks because she has low offense and durability - which are armor qualities, and fields her caps would allow her to excel in. She has all the class' disavantages (low speed/res caps, worst movement) while enjoying none of its advantages (high str/def).

Edited January 29, 2009 by TheEnd

[Lord Raven]

Roy still has himself (and he doubles instead of being doubled), Allen, Lance and Marcus, though. Micaiah, on theother side...

That's true, and FE6 HM (even ranked) is easier than FE10 HM.

Low bases at a low level != low bases at a high level.

I'm just saying, you seemed to imply she had low bases because she was at a low level.

Oh God, I wish it was Mercs-only.

Crimean knights were nice.

The weighing is a serious problem, however, since it's very subjective - even if discussed by five people. It makes the tier list unreliable as reference and, as such, a waste of time and effort.

The subjectivity contributes to argument then. You should try it..

They fail to fulfill their classes' potential. I see no contradiction.

No, they still retain their move. They just have atypically high stats for a stat an Armor is not supposed to have any of or a stat a Pegasus is supposed to have a lot of.

They would be her saving graces (as she could go high), and she yet she lacks them.

Then again Jagen's saving graces would be better growths everywhere but he lacks them too. :/

I'm still not following you there, though. You say it has nothing to do with being an armor, and yet you repeat she sucks because she has low offense and durability - which are armor qualities, and fields her caps would allow her to excel in. She has all the class' disavantages (low speed/res caps, worst movement) while enjoying none of its advantages (high str/def).

Starting out. Compare her to the laguz in the chapter she comes right into. Her stats are getting owned worse than the rest of your characters'. <_< Edited January 29, 2009 by Nathan Graves

[TheEnd]

I'm just saying, you seemed to imply she had low bases because she was at a low level.

It'd be odd if she had HIGH bases at a low level.

Crimean knights were nice.

I played Part 2 without abuse (battle saving excluded). I was almost proud of myself. But I was talking about Part 3.

The subjectivity contributes to argument then. You should try it..

I have little faith in finding truth through argumentation. :|

No, they still retain their move. They just have atypically high stats for a stat an Armor is not supposed to have any of or a stat a Pegasus is supposed to have a lot of.

What.

Then again Jagen's saving graces would be better growths everywhere but he lacks them too. :/

Jagen's saving graces are being a mid-powered unit available right off the bat for use in babying, tanking, harder difficulty modes, etc.

Starting out. Compare her to the laguz in the chapter she comes right into. Her stats are getting owned worse than the rest of your characters'. <_<

She's level 3 when the rest of your group is what, 7?

[Florete]

It'd be odd if she had HIGH bases at a low level.

Level means little to nothing. Performance is what matters. It would be odd if she had high bases at that level, but it would ultimately make her a better character because her performance would auto-improve. And not because of level, because of stats.

[Lord Raven]

It'd be odd if she had HIGH bases at a low level.

I know. :3

I played Part 2 without abuse (battle saving excluded). I was almost proud of myself. But I was talking about Part 3.

There's a Crimean Knight chapter in Part 3.

I have little faith in finding truth through argumentation. :|

I have little faith in that too, but hey I'm a bored person.

What.

Pegasus Knights. High Move.

Armors. Low move.

They both have these, which is one thing that is respective to their class.

Their stats are different from their class, so they're meant to do a different role than they're "supposed to." They fail anyway, but for other reasons, not because they can't do their class's role.

Jagen's saving graces are being a mid-powered unit available right off the bat for use in babying, tanking, harder difficulty modes, etc.

FE3 has only one difficulty.

His strength is only like one more than Cain's, too.

She's level 3 when the rest of your group is what, 7?

Level does not directly correlate to stats. More levels = more potential stats, but base level != base stats. Nolan's like level 12ish by the way, everyone else is right about to hit 9. And Sothe is like level 1 still. Edited January 29, 2009 by Nathan Graves

[Vykan12]

Bah this has veered so heavily off-topic, and yet I guess there is a good discussion going on and stuff. Anyway, before quoting random stuff I wanted to address, I’ll get my whole opinion into this matter.

The issue seems to be people having trouble distinguishing what they consider class roles (eg/ generals tanking vs fliers visiting places + ferrying) with the ultimate objective of the game. The goal of a map is usually to seize, to kill all the enemies, to defend, among other things, but ultimately they pretty much all come down to how well any unit can contribute to combat efficiency. The way I see it, you have to examine the use of units who don’t attack directly (eg/ healers, dancers, thieves) based on their consequence on the fighters they’re helping. So instead of seeing a healer’s “role” as healing units, see it as allowing units to stay on the frontlines. Or in a thief’s case, instead of looking at them as getting items and money, look at it in terms of them increasing combat efficiency by allowing one of your units to switch to a special weapon that was either bought with stolen cash or taken directly from a chest or enemy. So long as everything relates to this common goal, then we can examine each unit as a function of how they accomplish that goal instead of just looking directly at what it is they’re doing.

Caps and stats aren't everything. No matter how much you cry, Rutger isn't going to fly and reach that hidden shop among the mountains.

That just makes him worse than pegasi at performing the task of visiting a village. It doesn’t suddenly become a pegasi’s role because they can do it better than others, merely an advantage.

It gives the pegasus knights a different ability that can't be properly compared to others' on a numerical scale - a tactical edge. As such, they have different possibilities open to them, even if their stats make them less efficient killers.

The only thing that cannot really be measured on a numerical scale is how much more enemy exposure and non-combat tasks a flier can pull off relative to other unit types. And the only reason this is true is because it would take an eternity to look at the consequences of every possible situational benefit and give them a certain weight (realistic strategies more likely than lesser ones). So, instead of spending a lifetime analyzing a game, subjective differences are used instead such as to save time while reaching a conclusion that has a good chance of being rather similar to the one that all that insane work would tell us.

And besides, if there weren’t any subjective factors to consider (eg/ 1-2 range vs healing), then it would be hard to argue anything in a tier list, since there’s no shift in what’s valued over another thing.

So, in a tier list, they would generally rank low because of their lower killing efficiency.

The general case for a class is irrelevant, you have to examine each unit individually and take account for every circumstance the game offers (eg/ lance heavy earlygame in FE9). Are you going to tell me FE9 Tanith’s joining time performance is bad because she’s a Pegasus?

Does that mean they should be ignored in favor of the higher tier units?

Not if they’re high tier to begin with *points at FE5 Karin, FE8 Vanessa, FE9 Marcia and FE9 Tanith*. And you’ll notice that Karin is useful for very different reasons than Tanith is if you know anything about their respective games. Once again, generalizing the flier class accomplishes nothing.

Is Gatrie a better choice than Sigrun for a desert chapter? If the answer is no, congrats, you have made a (tier) list without any usefulness at all, as it measures in a numeric level things not easily mensurable/comparable.

What the hell? The desert is 1 chapter where Sigrun will ever have such a sizeable advantage over Gatrie, and Gatrie doesn’t even have to go on Micaiah’s route. But even supposing he does, and that he loses, it’s maybe 10% of Sigrun’s availability. Gatrie wins the match-up overall because of what he does in part 3 when she’s not around, in addition to how much more durable and offensively capable he is. Sigrun may be able to reach enemies sooner, but if she’s 3 rounding them and he’s 1 rounding, then it makes no difference to Gatrie since he’s winning anyway. Of course, Sigrun being able to retreat from sticky situations, being able to fly over sand bags in the bridge, etc also has to be considered, and we do our best to account for all these things in measuring a unit’s usefulness to the team.

It should. As Fox said in another thread: Wendy sucks because she's a Pegasus Knight with Armor Knight caps.

Sweeping generalizations are completely useless. Should I say Dieck is good because he has the base speed of a swordsmaster, the base strength of a wyvern, but suffers from the res growth of a knight? Think of how horrendous tiering would be if we did such things.

As I said, it's situational. If you have the upper hand (lolsety), evade may be a much better option. But, sometimes, it isn't an option at all. I hear it isn't even reliable in FE1/3/11, for instance.

And thus units (not classes) who are avoid dependant but with poor defensive stats would suffer from poor durability in FE1/3/11, which the tier list would account for.

Her bases fail at that point of time because her level is low for that point of time.

See you’re not only making generalizations about classes an how they perform, but also about many other aspects of FE. A unit who starts low levelled doesn’t have to have low bases as “compensation”. Just look at Raven for an easy contradiction of that, especially on HHM.

The weighing is a serious problem, however, since it's very subjective - even if discussed by five people. It makes the tier list unreliable as reference and, as such, a waste of time and effort.

It may not give a tier list the same authenticity as a mathematical proof of a theorem, but you’re certainly cutting people’s ability to weigh subjective factors against each other a bit short. Have you even read a character debate yet? I’m pretty sure a lot of your criticisms would dissipate if you saw how they were carried out, at least the good ones.

I wouldn't mind having more tank characters in the Mook Brigade, especially some that won't kill attacking enemies for 1 exp (lol Muarim).

You’re not killing enemies to grow, you’re killing the to beat the game. How much you grow is just a benefit that pays dividends later on.

[dondon151]

Aside from characters reaching certain high levels where their stats are limited by class caps...

Just imagine that, when tiering characters, their class doesn't exist. Instead, each character has his/her own base level, base combat stats, stat growths, weapon weaknesses, movement, terrain advantages and disadvantages, shoving/move again ability, weapon level and type, affinity, potential support partners and bonuses, other utilities, etc.

All of these elements make up a character and determine his usefulness. Sure, a lot of these are granted by class, but each is part of the character himself and cannot be analyzed separately by assigning arbitrary class roles.

Furthermore, no one gets compensation or preferential treatment. It's a tough world out there.

So sorry if this post was incredibly redundant.

Edited January 29, 2009 by dondon151