FE6 HM Tier List

[-Cynthia-]

Okay, now that we specified. You get WTA on the Soldiers and the Javelin Cavaliers in Chapter 7 for example, so it's much like 98 Hit under those scenarios. Alternatively, the main point we're drawing at is not to strawman you, but it's merely implicating that 1-2 range is still a flexible advantage whether it can miss once every three throws or whatnot. Not having such an option still puts you at a disadvantage.

I think the argument is that it's not much of an advantage due to accuracy issues. 1-2 range is great in many other FEs where it can be strong and accurate, here not so much.

[dondon151]

You are exaggerating accuracy issues. Accuracy is annoyingly imperfect in every game, not just this one. I would gladly give up the ability to 100% hit 1 range enemies if I can counter near 100% of all enemies with imperfect accuracy.

[-Cynthia-]

In PoR and RD hand weapons can just be forged for more Hit, plus RD you have authority stars and PoR enemies are easy to hit.

FE7 enemies have lower Spd and no Lck, FE8 enemies are also very slow. The Hit for the ranged weapons is also higher in these games. Yes, character aren't necessariy seeing 100% Hit with 1-2 range all the time, but the issues are far worse in FE6 than in any of the other modern era games.

Edited May 14, 2010 by -Cynthia-

[Dark Sage]

As far as I'm concerned 1-2 range is an advantage because it allows you to be more flexible. It's not the be all and end all but it helps out.

Anyway what exactly were we discussing again?

[CATS]

If Lot has 20 base hit and he's attacked by an archer and a fighter, both of which have 20 avo, equipping the iron axe gives him 75.85% hit on the fighter and 0% hit on the archer. Equipping the hand axe gives him 50% against both. His hit on the fighter went down by ~25%, but his hit on the archer went up by twice as much.

[Narga_Rocks]

If Lot has 20 base hit and he's attacked by an archer and a fighter, both of which have 20 avo, equipping the iron axe gives him 75.85% hit on the fighter and 0% hit on the archer. Equipping the hand axe gives him 50% against both. His hit on the fighter went down by ~25%, but his hit on the archer went up by twice as much.

And characters like Dieck and Fir and Rutger can give you 100% hit on the fighter and 0% on the archer. And when promoted wielding killing edges (or in Dieck's case even an iron sword due to massive str) they are at 90% or something to KO that fighter. Then Fir KOs the archer on enemy phase and Alan/Lance/whomever picks her up and they run forward. Lot is not KOing either of those two enemies with his one attack on each that may not even hit. Then you need at least two characters left behind to KO those enemies rather than just one and it is harder to pick those two up to carry forward. How is Lot superior to Fir/Rutger in that circumstance? I'm not saying we are better off giving Lot an iron axe rather than a hand axe. I'm saying we are better off using Fir there with a killing edge than using Lot and his hand axe. Why would you think we are saying anything different?

Now, Miledy with javelin against a merc and an archer or mage (assuming delphi shield for archer) is a completely different story, of course. Decent hit and doubles and 2HKOs. Well, merc is only doubled assuming resources are applied to Miledy, but still. However, Miledy (and Dieck with hand axe) can't be everywhere. And even if they could, you don't always get situations that are favourable to using the 2 range. There are plenty of situations in which 1 range is preferable due to what I illustrated in the first paragraph. It's better to kill 1 of 2 and take out the other than it is to kill 0 of 2 and require 2 units to KO on player phase. Even in the case of 1 out of 3 wielding one range lock, you may still be better off. Kill one of three on enemy phase, Rutger + Fir can KO the two remaining on player phase, then you can pick them up and head towards the goal. If you weaken 3 out of 3 and kill none then you are still looking at needing 3 units on player phase to finish them off and it's much harder to press forward.

[Colonel M]

The problem is you're likely pulling out a 2 range option anyway. The only time where it was 50/50 was pretty much the Western Isles, and even then I exercised a bit of 2 range just because it could help with bypassing a counterattack on the occasion. Once I hit Chapter 12, I used 2 range a lot aside from maybe 12X. I can definitely say I used it often in Chapter 13. Hell Gonzales was equipped with a Hand Axe when he was PKing to hit the Mages. In Chapter 14, the Wyverns have both Javelins and Steel Lances. Better to hit both of them than just one of them. Don't even say that it's someone like Lot in this chapter. There's also the Bishop that will attack you with 1-2 range within the Mercenary group once he's run out of Sleep. This was another one of those rarities where Rutger's 1 range was used. Obviously I used his 1 range to KO bosses, but aside from that he did minor kills here and there. A lot of times I had units pull out two range just because it could counterattack on the Enemy Phase. Take Chapter 16. There's walls all over the place. Some Knights have Javelins. The Cavalier group has Mages and Javelin ponies. You can finish a Sniper if someone failed to proc a crit. You can chip the Mamkute to put it closer to Wyrmslayer range (they don't move ehehe). In Ilia, you want 1-2 range since you're KOing all of the stupid Pegasus Knights anyway, so the only thing you're missing on is possibly FalcoKnights. In Sacae you almost need 2 range to be decent. Aside from Miledy doing much of the work, Dieck and Lot combo held out often just because they could counterattack the Nomads and, sometimes, the Troopers. You better have 1-2 Range if you're doing Mountain / Peak strategy in Chapters 21 and 23.

Like I said before and I'll say it again: even with the accuracy disadvantage, I often pulled out Javelins and Hand Axes just because they could counterattack just about everything on the Enemy Phase and can give the reward of lessening the risk of taking extra damage from the enemies. The rewards are much greater, especially when speaking on the Enemy Phase, with regards to having the 2 range option.

[CATS]

And characters like Dieck and Fir and Rutger can give you 100% hit on the fighter and 0% on the archer. And when promoted wielding killing edges (or in Dieck's case even an iron sword due to massive str) they are at 90% or something to KO that fighter. Then Fir KOs the archer on enemy phase and Alan/Lance/whomever picks her up and they run forward. Lot is not KOing either of those two enemies with his one attack on each that may not even hit. Then you need at least two characters left behind to KO those enemies rather than just one and it is harder to pick those two up to carry forward. How is Lot superior to Fir/Rutger in that circumstance? I'm not saying we are better off giving Lot an iron axe rather than a hand axe. I'm saying we are better off using Fir there with a killing edge than using Lot and his hand axe. Why would you think we are saying anything different?

My bad then, for some reason I got the idea that someone was saying melee > 1-2 range on the same unit.

As for Fir vs Lot, if you're going to say "when promoted wielding killing edges," of course that's better than an unpromoted Lot with a hand axe. Giving Lot the same treatment, however, that's not the case. In Ch 16x, a promoted Lot with a hand axe can double pretty much anything unpromoted, which comes into play against 14/30 enemies in the chapter (6 mages, 4 javelin cavs, 2 archers, 2 bishops). Half of those (the mages) are 2HKO'd, and all of it is 2RKO'd, so Fir's not clearly better. She's better in situations where melee enemies outnumber ranged, but Lot is better when it's the reverse, and the reverse is more likely to happen, since it's much easier for ranged attackers to pile up on a single unit. Lot also doesn't have to worry about diverting ranged enemies away from superior 1-2 range attackers such as Lance/Alan/Lugh/etc, since he has high Hp/Def and access to 1-2 range himself.

[dondon151]

There are plenty of situations in which 1 range is preferable due to what I illustrated in the first paragraph.

I have not encountered any such situation in any of my play experiences, unless I was specifically countering only 1 range locked enemies. I understand how the theory makes sense, but it's just not the same in practice.

[Aquilae]

I'm not leaning towards either side of the argument, but I just want to point to Narga that he is overhyping Dieck's offence. Promoted Dieck doesn't ORKO most stuff with Hand Axes, Mages and Pegasus Knights are pretty much the only ones he ORKOs. Dieck pretty much needs an Iron / Steel Blade to ORKO most of the enemies when unpromoted, and promoted he doesn't come that close to ORKOing on durable enemies (leaves a lot of stuff with single digit HP when he hits).

[Colonel M]

Changes made:

- Mid Tier and Low Mid Tier is now re-arranged.

- Cath and Yodel are now Mid Tier. I know people were supporting Cath up and no one really "objected" to Yodel. They bottom Mid atm.

- Thany bottoms High Tier. Feel free to argue where you'd like her.

- Roy < Fir. I'm not going to lie; I agree with this.

- Healers > Lot. I think this makes perfect sense. Feel free to object it.

- Collapsed Low and Bottom Tiers for aesthetic purposes / not really that big of a tier difference between the characters within there (limited contributions or need a lot of resources to be good).

Still discussed:

- Uh I dunno 1-2 range? <_<

- Lot vs. Fir. <_< >_< >_> Though I'm not sure on which side I am tilting on either since I found Lot very useful in Sacae and wasn't terrible in Ilia either.

- Klein > both Lot and Fir, or at least start off with Fir.

- Boris and Barth. I kind of agree with GJ that they should probably swap places or a tier difference knocked off on them.

- Roy down more?

- Probably minor placements where to put Cath, Thany, and Yodel.

[-Cynthia-]

Ray> Igrene in Ilia prevously discussed.

Echidna not listed in Sacae? Or Shin in Ilia.

I think Barth should go right below Bors IMO. They're basically the same crappy unit, but Bors has some chapters where he can chip stuff.

Edited May 16, 2010 by -Cynthia-

[Salad Utensil]

Echidna not listed in Sacae? Or Shin in Ilia.

Also Sue isn't listed in Sacae either.

[Colonel M]

Nabbed them. Thanks for reminding me. Oh yeah, I did forget one last thing: Zeiss is Low Mid in the Ilia list. Not 100% sure on Sacae, but it's up to you guys and gals perhaps.

Bors up or Barth down?

[grandjackal]

I'd say they should switch places. Boris has earlygame contributions (getting Lou by himself, helping with the faster route through chapter 5 through the door, actually being decent in chapter 4), Barth doesn't. If used seriously,Boris could realistically be level 12, and if early-promoted (they hit level 20 by the time you have the last 2 seals, I still find it little issue unless we're just going to continue whining over nothing AGAIN), Boris does what I mentioned Barth could do (thus why Barth should just be in low rather than bottom, with a bit of resource use like Hue, he can at least be usable), except Boris can actually double things and thus ORKO things, all with better acc. Things such as steel axers, steel bowmen, even hand axe pirates if they're the slower end kind.

That sounds like a tier difference to me. Early contributions, and quite a bit better performance witht he same resources.

[dondon151]

Please, do not give Barth, Bors, or Noah the first Knight Crest ever again.

[grandjackal]

Please, do not give Barth, Bors, or Noah the first Knight Crest ever again.

I'll stop when you stop overrating it's value.

[dondon151]

I am not "overrating" Alan or Lance and I am not "underrating" Bors, Barth, or Noah. A 12/1 Bors or 10/1 Barth still has abysmal offense. Bors will have ~53 hit with Hand Axe on 9 AS, 2 luk fighters in chapter 10E and his 19 atk 3HKOs 35 HP, 5 def. Even if this were above average, you delayed a cavalier promotion until chapter 16x for this kind of performance. What would you have him do? He doesn't have WTA and subsequently has a relatively terrible player phase (having 68 hit with your best weapon, an Iron Axe, sucks). He has bad move and is suboptimal for your enemy phases. A promotion turns Bors into basically one of your other non-promoted units, with the side effect that he doesn't die, but that's generally not a problem for everyone else anyway. This comes at the cost of delaying one of you cavaliers promotion from around chapter 13 to chapter 16x. That's however many chapters of missed ORKOs, missed utility with an 8 move mounted unit, missed chapters of extra growth that Bors, Barth, or Noah cost to have a rather average unit for a short term period of time.

[-Cynthia-]

Does anyone think that Lance/Alan could go down because of the Knight's Crest issue? One of them can promote in Ch7, but the other one can't until Ch15, which is a relatively long time. By Ch15, we can already have promoted Rutger/Dieck/ Miledy as well. One of Rutger/Dieck can have been promoted since C7, the other since C12, and promoted Miledy> promoted Lance or Alan anyway. Percival is also going to be better than the newly promoted cav, probably not by as much though.

I guess it depends on how we're considering resources. Either we assume the Crest on the person it's best on (hard to do in this case, since it's fairly equal IMO), or we penalize both for hurting the performance of the other.

Basically, if we're using Alan/Lance we are probably using them together, and on any one playthrough, I really don't think we can have Lance as the #1 and Alan as the #2 (or vice versa), because the one not given the Crest is worse than Rutger/Dieck/Miledy. Essentially it would be applying opportunity costs to the first Knight's Crest. Unless you think that whatver cav is promoted in C15 is still better than Rutger/Dieck/Miledy (their earlygame isn't that good IMO, but it's debatable).

Edited May 16, 2010 by -Cynthia-

[Narga_Rocks]

Does anyone think that Lance/Alan could go down because of the Knight's Crest issue? One of them can promote in Ch7, but the other one can't until Ch15, which is a relatively long time. By Ch15, we can already have promoted Rutger/Dieck/ Miledy as well. One of Rutger/Dieck can have been promoted since C7, the other since C12, and promoted Miledy> promoted Lance or Alan anyway. Percival is also going to be better than the newly promoted cav, probably not by as much though.

I guess it depends on how we're considering resources. Either we assume the Crest on the person it's best on (hard to do in this case, since it's fairly equal IMO), or we penalize both for hurting the performance of the other.

Basically, if we're using Alan/Lance we are probably using them together, and on any one playthrough, I really don't think we can have Lance as the #1 and Alan as the #2 (or vice versa), because the one not given the Crest is worse than Rutger/Dieck/Miledy. Essentially it would be applying opportunity costs to the first Knight's Crest. Unless you think that whatver cav is promoted in C15 is still better than Rutger/Dieck/Miledy (their earlygame isn't that good IMO, but it's debatable).

I'd agree with you on Dieck/Rutger/Miledy > Alan/Lance except I'm clearly not good at raising them. Aquilae clearly had no problems doing it while keeping turncounts even lower than mine. He had them at levels 17 and 18 by the end of chapter 13. Mine were level 13 and 12.

Now, the levels I had for Dieck actually let mine ORKO more things with a hand axe than the levels his Dieck had. Depending on what you go by for Dieck's potential levels I could easily agree with Dieck > Rutger > A/L. As for Miledy, it depends on what you are willing to give her. If you are willing to give her a wing + icon + body ring you'll have a nearly unstoppable machine capable of killing nearly everything from the moment you get a nice supply of killing lances (chapter 13). It's kind of resource intensive, but the returns are like getting a flying Titania in fe10 only she'll also be your most durable unit (though not nearly as good against mages/druids, but 44 mt Fenrir Druids wreck nearly everyone's day in fe6).

[dondon151]

Being the person that put Allen and Lance above Rutger and Dieck in the first place, I have to say that the cavs are always responsible for scooting your other units around and have that kind of utility in addition to combat. Which, to me, beats anything that Dieck and Rutger have on them.

[-Cynthia-]

If horse utility is so valuable why are Sue/Noah/Treck etc. so low? On this tier list, better combat> horse, and Rutger/Dieck beat an Alan/Lance who promote in Ch15 for quite some time.

[dondon151]

Horse utility is not generally useful enough that you'd deploy characters exclusively for that purpose. I do not mean to say that horse utility is superior to Rutger and Dieck, which is what you seem to be thinking. What I do mean to say is that horse utility + good combat is superior to better combat, given that the difference in combat prowess between Allen/Lance and Dieck is not that large (and it really isn't).

Consider also that the typical team, for the first half of the game, has Marcus, Zealot, Allen, Lance, Clarine, Thany, and maybe Shin for mounted units. The value of adding Sue, Noah, or Treck is small.

Edited May 17, 2010 by dondon151

[Dark Sage]

Wow it's been awhile since anyone posted.

But I think we should discuss something else like Lot vs Fir. The top tier units are so good that it's pointless to argue about their placement unless you're adding someone new to it, like say Marcus (not that I think Marcus should be top tier but still).

[Colonel M]

Wow it's been awhile since anyone posted.

But I think we should discuss something else like Lot vs Fir. The top tier units are so good that it's pointless to argue about their placement unless you're adding someone new to it, like say Marcus (not that I think Marcus should be top tier but still).

What more do you honestly want to discuss with it? I guess people really do want Fir > Lot...

...Fine. I don't want to be biased and let Rody have another gloat spree at me. You have 36 hours. Give me decent reasons, and I guess Ill have no choice but to back down on the argument. I don't care for Lot enough to continue to defend him (note: I'm not agreeing with Fir > Lot either but whatever goes).

I'm not caring either way anymore. Just state good reasons for either side and Ill flow with it.