FE6 HM Tier List

[Dark Sage]

It should stay the way it is.

[Narga_Rocks]

Then you tell me what it should be based on. I'm sick of chasing my tail trying to figure it out.

I don't know. If we are trying to rate units based on their potential usefulness, then Wolt > never-optimal units like Oujay, Barth, etc is probably not something to have on the tier list. Hence, optimal deployment only is not gonna work. But ignoring free deployment is probably not very accurate. I just hold the opinion that we rate characters that can become decent as if they are used and then not punish them for kicking someone good out. Except there are units like Wendy and sofiya that should never be deployed after their joining chapter.

[Dark Sage]

I agree with Narga_Rocks. It would be inaccurate to put Lot and Sofiya in the same tier. So the standard way we've been doing it is probably the best approach.

[-Cynthia-]

The tier list should assume we're deploying and using the unit. In all chapters I suppose, just keep in mind people like Marcus/Zealot can be dropped if necessary.

Exception for some gaidens I guess due to low deployment, but in general assume units being argued are fielded.

Edited June 16, 2010 by -Cynthia-

[Narga_Rocks]

The tier list should assume we're deploying and using the unit. In all chapters I suppose, just keep in mind people like Marcus/Zealot can be dropped if necessary.

Exception for some gaidens I guess due to low deployment, but in general assume units being argued are fielded.

But do we apply a cost for being deployed and kicking out another unit? (punish or reward availability, really. net vs gross)

[Dat Nick]

"But do we apply a cost for being deployed and kicking out another unit?"

Any particular reason why we should? Wolt is shit regardless of whether or not he kicks out somebody who doesn't fail. This is another one of those "The list already acknowledges Rutger>Fir, implementing this system doesn't do anything but widen the gap, is it really necessary?" things.

The way I always saw a tier list is the player picks a random amount of random units and decides "We're going through the game with these units only. No alternatives to these units exist." to eliminate the whole issue about kicking out better units in the first place. Because if you bother with that then there's no reason to tier units below the top 10 that don't have utility for at least one chapter, and honestly, that's a stupid way to tier things. Tell me if there's a benefit in optimal deployment at all. Seriously, tell me. All it does is make the non top 10 worse than they're already considered. Never saw what made it a good system back then, don't see what makes it a good system now.

There's Warpskip tier lists, but those...are different.

But ignoring free deployment is probably not very accurate.

Free deployment happens how often in this game outside earlygame?

Edited June 16, 2010 by SaltyWongIsSalty

[Rewjeo]

Regarding the "utility units" thing, which I expect someone will complain about, I think we could tier both "Utility Marcus" and "Whole Game Marcus."

I'm indifferent on the availability issue. Both sides have things I agree with and disagree with.

[Dat Nick]

Just benefit Marcus for his time actually contributing and view the time where he sucks as a timeframe where he doesn't exist, not a timeframe where he sucks. Why do people always love to complicate the Marcus issue? It does not have to be this difficult.

[-Cynthia-]

I guess the thing is that people could view other units the same way. Such as Wolt making a few potshots then not having to be deployed> Treck forever. Then again, if you don't punish units for deployment this can be ignored.

[dondon151]

Intuitively it doesn't quite make sense, but it does in application. I don't really see what's wrong with that.

[Dat Nick]

I guess the thing is that people could view other units the same way. Such as Wolt making a few potshots then not having to be deployed> Treck forever.

Yeah but uh, the whole point is to eliminate the optimal deployment factor. Why enforce it when it's trying to be rid of? It makes no sense whatsoever.

Marcus doesn't get shelved latergame to cater to optimal deployment, he gets shelved lategame because he's downright unusable by then.

[dondon151]

Marcus doesn't get shelved latergame to cater to optimal deployment, he gets shelved lategame because he's downright unusable by then.

... They are the same thing.

[Rewjeo]

Not really. If you have 10 ORKO death machines who are 10RKOd by everything and you have 1 ORKO death machine who's 9RKOd, but you only have 10 slots, he's not optimal deployment, but he's definitely useable.

[Dat Nick]

... They are the same thing.

No, it's not the same thing. There is not one single person in his right mind who is going to think Marcus is usable at all lategame. I'd seriously rather use a trained Walt.

Not really. If you have 10 ORKO death machines who are 10RKOd by everything and you have 1 ORKO death machine who's 9RKOd, but you only have 10 slots, he's not optimal deployment, but he's definitely useable.

Marcus? An ORKO Death machine? 9RKOd? lololololololololololol. We're not in the earlygame anymore.

No, try those figures in reverse. As in, he 9RKOs everything and gets ORKOd back.

[-Cynthia-]

That was a hypothetical situation arguing against optimal deployment, not an indication of Marcus's actual performance.

[dondon151]

No, it's not the same thing. There is not one single person in his right mind who is going to think Marcus is usable at all lategame. I'd seriously rather use a trained Walt.

If a unit is unusable, does that not imply that he is not optimal? I suppose the converse is not necessarily true (as Slize pointed out), but you are going to have severe trouble disproving that logical statement.

[Narga_Rocks]

Marcus? An ORKO Death machine? 9RKOd? lololololololololololol. We're not in the earlygame anymore.

No, try those figures in reverse. As in, he 9RKOs everything and gets ORKOd back.

Do you even realize that he was responding to dondon's post? slize was supporting you.

Also, dondon, BBlade never said that "unusable => not optimal" was false. He doesn't need to prove it false because it isn't relevant to the point he is trying to make.

[dondon151]

Also, dondon, BBlade never said that "unusable => not optimal" was false. He doesn't need to prove it false because it isn't relevant to the point he is trying to make.

Whatever the point he was trying to make, I was pointing out the inconsistency in his statement, "Marcus doesn't get shelved latergame to cater to optimal deployment, he gets shelved lategame because he's downright unusable by then." Does he prove that Marcus stops being deployed because of the latter reason but not the former? My rebuttal aimed to show the difficulty in attributing deployment preference to "not optimal" or "unusable" in that situation. How do we know that it has to be either (at least, the way that bblade put it, it sounded like the two were mutually exclusive)? If one implied the other, then, wouldn't they not be mutually exclusive?

This really sounds like a traditional bblade assertion. He shoves it down your throat and then gets angry when we point out the logical inconsistency.

[Narga_Rocks]

Whatever the point he was trying to make, I was pointing out the inconsistency in his statement, "Marcus doesn't get shelved latergame to cater to optimal deployment, he gets shelved lategame because he's downright unusable by then." Does he prove that Marcus stops being deployed because of the latter reason but not the former? My rebuttal aimed to show the difficulty in attributing deployment preference to "not optimal" or "unusable" in that situation. How do we know that it has to be either (at least, the way that bblade put it, it sounded like the two were mutually exclusive)? If one implied the other, then, wouldn't they not be mutually exclusive?

This really sounds like a traditional bblade assertion. He shoves it down your throat and then gets angry when we point out the logical inconsistency.

I wouldn't say "logical inconsistency". Certainly unproven, though. Marcus isn't deployed lategame. We know that. But the "why" of it is dependent on what the list is going for. If optimal deployment is assumed, then he's not deployed because he's "not optimal". If we aren't going with optimal deployment and just "not sucking" or something like that, then Marcus is shelved because he's "downright unusable by then". I'll give you that BBlade isn't running this list so he can't actually state why we choose not to deploy Marcus.

Besides, it was in response to "Well, if we aren't caring about optimal deployment, then shouldn't Marcus be used the whole game?" (or words to that effect)

And so there isn't really anything wrong with his statement. He gave reasoning for why, even without "optimal deployment only", Marcus gets shelved.

[dondon151]

Besides, it was in response to "Well, if we aren't caring about optimal deployment, then shouldn't Marcus be used the whole game?" (or words to that effect)

And so there isn't really anything wrong with his statement. He gave reasoning for why, even without "optimal deployment only", Marcus gets shelved.

Take a look at the tone of the below post:

Tell me if there's a benefit in optimal deployment at all. Seriously, tell me. All it does is make the non top 10 worse than they're already considered. Never saw what made it a good system back then, don't see what makes it a good system now.

It is not a question of "well, if we are going with this system, then this explanation works to explain why Marcus isn't deployed lategame." Bblade is openly being hostile to the notion of optimal deployment, so it is not difficult to infer that he thinks that Marcus is unusable because of one reason rather than another. Also, if you read the rest of that post:

The way I always saw a tier list is the player picks a random amount of random units and decides "We're going through the game with these units only. No alternatives to these units exist." to eliminate the whole issue about kicking out better units in the first place. Because if you bother with that then there's no reason to tier units below the top 10 that don't have utility for at least one chapter, and honestly, that's a stupid way to tier things.

You'll also notice an inconsistency here. The player is supposed to pick random units, and uses only those units in the game. If the player can't use other units, then why would he drop Marcus? I doubt that he is completely unusable by lategame (I mean, he still has 8 move and a horse). The true reason is that there is someone better to take his place. Even when you fight against your intuition, you lose.

[Colonel M]

I blame the incompetence of dondon not being able to use Fir right and Narga not being able to use Lot right. </sarcasm>

(Sorry still getting a kick out of this post with Kiwi).

Renamed Graveyard Tier.

Edited June 22, 2010 by Colonel M

[Dat Nick]

If the player can't use other units, then why would he drop Marcus?

because he sucks

It's the exact same reason I'm not deploying Wendy when she joins. There's being outclassed (OJ), and there's downright unusable (Wendy). You're talking about apples and oranges here. You CAN suck to the level where it can be considered unlikely to deploy you. Fir doesn't fir that criteria. Wendy does.

If the player can't use other units, then why would he drop Marcus?

I don't know, because generally doing 11 damage with 60% hit and getting double-killed back or however badly he's sucking by then is really bordering on the depths of negative utility if I'm going to go out of my way to keep his ass alive?

(I mean, he still has 8 move and a horse)

And lategame chapters, with the exception of 22, tend to have either terrain, wyvern zerg rushes, or bolting sages, and Marcus hates all of these things. Terrain slows him down and makes him an easier target, wyverns can target him easy, which is bad because he absolutely cannot take a hit anymore, same goes for bolting guys...

If I'm going to use a rescue bot, I'm going to use one that can do their job a lot better (Yunno, even Zeiss) because Flight doesn't just mean it's much easier to stay out of enemy reach, it also means I can take shortcuts, AND it means I don't get slowed down by terrain. I have four fliers even if Ilia route wasn't accessed, plus two more semi-rescuers if I have Alan/Lance....there's really no excuse for needing another semi-rescue that badly.

The true reason is that there is someone better to take his place.

No, the true reason is because he has become garbage to the point where the team is better off not trying to keep his ORKOd ass alive.

[dondon151]

You CAN suck to the level where it can be considered unlikely to deploy you.

It's certainly possible, but it's very difficult. You will have to be beyond-Wendy bad to have negative normal profit. It is more likely that you, as the player, are just not creative enough to utilize Marcus in a positive way after his combat utility drops off.

[Life]

It's certainly possible, but it's very difficult. You will have to be beyond-Wendy bad to have negative normal profit. It is more likely that you, as the player, are just not creative enough to utilize Marcus in a positive way after his combat utility drops off.

Bblader, he speak the truth. Man knows how good Marcus is for x time thanks to that nutso 0% growths run.

Also, there are a bunch of units in this game that are terrible enough just to never get fielded if they need to knock someone's spot out. Wendy, Sophia and Yuuno come to mind.

EDIT: Can we rename the bottom tier to "Units only dondon can use correctly"?

Edited June 22, 2010 by Life

[dondon151]

Juno is definitely worth fielding, for pretty much the same reason as Marcus (except Juno flies). Additionally, if under the premise that no other unit can take Sophia or Wendy's deployment slot, then there is no reason to not field them. Wendy or Sophia might make random potshot kills, and Sophia only needs so many combats to get to 10/0 for staves.