FE7 tier list, HHM Ranked

[Narga_Rocks]

There is no middle ground solution without great inconsistencies. You can't draw a line in the middle and say "well the units below here are negative if deployed but the units above here are positive if deployed even though their respective economic profits dictate that they should be negative anyway."

Wow. If I didn't have stuff in my sig already... I think you have successfully condensed my paragraphs into one sentence. (the second one)

Anyway, I can see the psychological merit to making a gross list and making an economic profit list and then just averaging the two out, or something like that, but it's more of a feel good thing, I think.

Guess I'll just have to wait on Moribalken if you think she'd be better at defending it.

And yes, I've lamented about one system possibly rewarding availability too much and the other system punishing availability (on weaker characters) too much. Psychologically, I'd like a middle ground, sure, but we can't just create one to make me feel better when it isn't there.

Edited October 15, 2009 by Narga_Rocks

[Candlejack]

A little suspect to changing this: Wil > Renault: to this: Renault > Wil

Renault is kind of your mini-Athos for however long you use him. He has Staff utility, so that increases EXP Rank a bit, and his MAG is high enough to be used for some Combat Rank.

Wil can't really do... anything. Except maybe slug his way out of his forced chapters, where you get Sain and Kent anyway.

EDIT: Oh, Florina too.

Edited October 15, 2009 by OliverXRenning

[dondon151]

Wil has better contributions for the EXP rank.

[Candlejack]

LITTLE contribution to the EXP rank. Renault provides little healing, little combat, and little EXP ranking contributions.

Why use Wil when you can use who you have right now? Because Wil isn't exactly the best bowman you'll get...

At least Renault has SOME utility.

[Rodykitty]

In a ranking list, providing EXP is utility.

[Dat Nick]

I don't see Wil contributing enough to the EXP rank to justify how badly he rapes combat with his awful offense.

"but bb snipers don't fuck up combat rank this has been proven!"

Maybe not people like Rebecca who can actually double and kill when leveled, but Wil's speed is, to be blunt, AWFUL. He HAS to killsteal in order to level [i'm using killsteal in the term Dart weakens soldier to like 1 HP, Wil finishes it] Even at promotion 14 AS is still iffy, and he has spent all of this time sucking kills out of a straw. The combat rank can't be THAT lenient.

Edited October 15, 2009 by Athena's Chest

[Candlejack]

Plus there are other, MUCH more better units to use for EXP Ranking.

Renault gives that last boost before Endgame.

[Geriba]

Anyway, one of the reasons why I advocate ignoring the opportunity cost of unit slots is because it's akin to why firms operate - even if a firm has a negative economic profit, it will operate as long as it makes a normal profit (which, as far as I'm concerned, every unit in this game makes). The other reason is because factoring in opportunity costs is either inconsistent to the point where it doesn't make sense or it doesn't promote healthy tier list discussion. The one basic premise for tiering the unit is the assumption that the unit is used, but if the unit can't be used, then what is there to tier the unit on? Just one chapter of performance? In that case, you have many units whose performances are relatively close because their utility spans only a couple of chapters and a small group of units who far outclass everyone else because they're used throughout the whole game.

...This is easily the best summary of the problem I've seen. A tip of my hat, sir.

[grandjackal]

Plus there are other, MUCH more better units to use for EXP Ranking.

Renault gives that last boost before Endgame.

A boost is still a boost. Or you saying that in Renault's favor?

Also yeah, definitely much more better. I don't know how you can get much more betterer.

[Candlejack]

It's in Renault's favor. Wil is so laughably terrible its not even laughable.

Yes, THAT is how bad he is. I'd rather use Karla as a Lvl. 1 Myrmidon on Ch. 17 then use him.

[Florete]

The combat rank can't be THAT lenient.

I think it is. I don't think I've ever seen or heard of anyone getting less than 5 stars, ranked or not. I know I never have.

[Dat Nick]

I know you bought up the combat rank being lenient even with boss abuse but I highly doubt it's THAT forgiving to a unit who did like...200 points of damage [1 point=unkilled enemy] to it?

[dondon151]

...This is easily the best summary of the problem I've seen. A tip of my hat, sir.

Except that means you agree with me, but you clearly don't...

[Florete]

I know you bought up the combat rank being lenient even with boss abuse but I highly doubt it's THAT forgiving to a unit who did like...200 points of damage [1 point=unkilled enemy] to it?

Uh, I'm pretty sure you can get even Wil to a point where he can ORKO some enemies, which turns the negative around.

[Dat Nick]

Uh, I'm pretty sure you can get even Wil to a point where he can ORKO some enemies, which turns the negative around.

...I just said that even at 20/1 14 AS is still shaky on some things and factor in how long it takes him to get there. This is...well, considering how slow EXP in FE7 uis per individual kill, I'd say...150 points of damage before he gets there? Plus he promotes late due to slow EXP gain from just one kill a turn.

[Florete]

Didn't you also once mention Marcus doubling late game? He doesn't even reach 14 Spd until level 13.

And since the site says ~40% of all battles being kills is enough to S rank, then having two units kill one enemy won't be enough to hurt it anyway. That would result in a total of 2 battles for 1 kill, or 50%. And since there other guys ORKOing reliably as well, even if Wil was hurting it more than helping it, it would be more than made up for by others.

[dondon151]

Yeah, 14 AS is not shaky.

[Dat Nick]

By the time Wil promotes? I beg to differ. Furthermore this is ranked so he promotes even later than he already did due to rotation.

[dondon151]

I can help you with that by providing some enemy AS samples. These will only be for the most common enemy types in a chapter.

Chapter 18

Pegasus knight (Iron Lance): 6 AS

Pegasus knight (Steel Lance): 1 AS

Shaman (Flux): 4-5 AS

Shaman (Nosferatu): 0 AS

Mercenary (Steel Sword): 10-12 AS

Archer (Steel Bow): 3 AS

10 AS doubles everything but the mercs, which you need at least 14, generally 15 AS to double.

Chapter 20

Cavalier (Iron Lance, Iron Sword): 7-9 AS

Nomad (Iron Bow): 10 AS

Mage (Thunder): 6-7 AS

Fighter (Hand Axe): 6 AS

12 AS doubles most cavaliers, and the nomads need 14 AS. There are a lot of knights this chapter, though.

Chapter 22

Fighter (Swordreaver): 5-6 AS

Mage (Thunder): 7-8 AS

Wyvern rider (Axereaver): 6-8 AS

Cavalier (Lancereaver): 7-9 AS

Nomad (Steel Bow): 7-8 AS

Yeah, so 13 AS doubles everything, and 12 AS doubles almost everything.

Chapter 24 (Linus)

Mercenary (Steel Sword): 10-12 AS

Wyvern rider (Steel Lance): 6-7 AS

Pirate (Steel Axe): 4-5 AS hehe Wallace would have been able to double most of these guys

Pirate (Hand Axe): 7-8 AS

12 AS doubles everything but the mercs, who need 14-16 AS.

Chapter 26

Nomad (Steel Bow): 9-10 AS

Wyvern rider (Iron Lance): 9-11 AS fyi most WKs on the map are this version

Wyvern rider (Steel Lance): 6-7 AS

Brigand (Steel Axe): 5 AS

You'll need 14 AS to comfortably double almost everything here, maybe 15.

Chapter 29

Shaman (Flux): 5-7 AS

Shaman (Luna): 0-2 AS

Shaman (Nosferatu): 0 AS

Druid (M) (Luna): 7 AS

Monk (Lightning): 7-9 AS

Monk (Shine): 5-7 AS

Monk (Divine): 1-3 AS

Bishop (Divine): 6 AS

Mage (Thunder): 9-10 AS

Sage (Elfire): 8 AS

Valkyrie (Thunder): 17-19 AS one of them as 22 AS

Valkyrie (Elfire): 13-15 AS

12 AS comfortably gets almost every generic on the map. 14 gets the mages and 16 avoids getting doubled by all valks. Shamans and Monks are most common on this map, though.

Chapter 31

Sniper (Silver Bow): 9-11 AS

Everything else is slower except for like 2 myrms and 1 SM. The next fastest enemy has like 8 AS max. 14-15 AS gets everything here.

Chapter 32

Warrior (Silver Axe): 12 AS

Paladin (Silver Lance, Longsword): 11-12 AS

Wyvern rider (Killer Lance): 10-12 AS there are Axereaver and Horseslayer ones that are -1 and -3 AS respectively

Wyvern lord (Silver Lance): 13 AS

Sniper (Silver Bow): 10-12 AS

Hero (Silver Axe, Hand Axe): 14 AS; 16 AS with Light Brand or Silver Sword, and one has 17 AS with Silver Axe and 19 with Light Brand

Nomad trooper (Steel Bow): 16 AS; 15 AS with Steel Sword

Mage (Elfire): 6-7 AS

Sage (Elfire): 8 AS

16-17 AS doubles most enemies here. Incidentally, --/13 Marcus with a Speedwings averages 16 AS.

Also, I have to say that the chapters that Marcus does worst on are actually around midgame. Chapter 20 is a little difficult for him because he probably has around 12 AS and thus can't double nomads and some cavs. Chapter 23x is difficult when enemies are unequipped because they're not weighed down. Chapter 26 suddenly has Iron Lance WKs that he might not double because he might not have 14 AS.

Lategame is pretty easy. He definitely needs a Speedwings for chapter 32, though.

[Tangerine]

I didn't read everything because I'm lazy. I've been against doing the tiers this way since Malcolm proposed the idea for this reason alone. It's impossible to reflect the changes on the tier list unless you adopt it completely, but that means completely re-working the entire thing and condensing the tiers into three groups that don't help anyone. When I suggested we only use opportunity cost with units that are we had equal at the time, I was essentially trying to get rid of it without getting into this same argument with Malcolm (terrible post limit on GF). I came here just to see what everyone else thought and spark the debate here, so I used those methods in my two debates. In other words, I chose to have you guys do it for me. I'm quite happy with the results; I didn't think it was going anywhere at first. I'm not a big fan of it myself, clearly.

However, I still think there needs to be an established value on a unit slot.

[dondon151]

Well, we've debated this already and didn't reach any conclusion (since no group will budge on their positions). There's a topic regarding it in the general FE forum.

[Narga_Rocks]

Well, we've debated this already and didn't reach any conclusion (since no group will budge on their positions). There's a topic regarding it in the general FE forum.

Ick, that topic. Good times. As Int pointed out, none of the major proponents of negative utility were willing to pick the option in the poll that was the logical conclusion of those beliefs because they knew that it didn't work for tiering:

It's more accurate to say that you're in agreement with me, since I've been saying in this thread from the beginning that strict adherence to negative utility isn't useful for Fire Emblem tiering. This is not something that I think you'd disagree with.

My only point here is that a discussion of negative utility in a void is pointless, because we only care about negative utility as it applies to tiering. This is a problem that's begging to be solved at the individual tier list level, with specific goals laid out up-front. The fact that nobody has voted for the strictly correct answer, #3, means that people recognize this. Now we're waiting on step #2, for more people who are arguing to discover that they aren't arguing about negative utility, but rather they are arguing about which way is better for tiering.

As for tier list goals, we may or may not disagree on them (probably disagree), but I don't see how that matters since we're not making a tier list here.

[Tangerine]

Oh, I wish I had seen that topic before I came here to do this, then. Wouldn't have started it again if I could just use that. Probably avoid quite a bit of argument to just make two tier lists.

Oh, and the reason I said you should be using levels too is because then we don't have to take your word on it. Not that I was even really debating rather than trying to start the argument.

Edited October 15, 2009 by Moribalken

[Geriba]

Except that means you agree with me, but you clearly don't...

I'm not stubborn or anything. You've put into words what I've been trying to say for a while now. Even if it's not the most "convenient" answer, it makes good logical sense; why wouldn't I agree with it?

Now, were to to unanimously adopt a Gross system where opportunity costs are ignored for unit slots, what would the implications be? Using a unit still isn't "free," since experience remains limited and needs to be distributed properly. In that way, we still may end up with units who contribute negatively to the team's utility if used, but it's far less extreme than what we have now. For specific comparisons, this gives further credibility to having Guy equal to Raven, since Guy's early-game is now 100% better than Raven's (as opposed to before, when taking up a unit slot hurt Guy's performance somewhat). Hm... anything important I'm missing?

[Don Draper]

You know the tier list is getting way too technical, when people start trying to apply microeconomics to it.