Personal Tier List

[Snowy_One]

As the topic title suggests, this is my own, personal, tier standards. However, this does not mean that this tier list is based solely on personal standards, but rather that I'm not stupid enough to try and make cutting jabs or try to pass of a personal tier list under the guise of a 'minimum turn tier' or 'minimum resource consumption' tier or something similar. This tier list does indeed have standards, and I try to define them as best as possible. Sometimes I forget to make a character follow by the rules and put them higher/lower, so a seemingly obvious contradiction may simply be due to an oversight or lack of deep thought, yet, in general, I try to follow these following standards.

On in-game limitations.

1) This list measures the potential for every character and is not focused on earning a minimum time or resource spent or something else.

2) In general, it is assumed that, so long as you are finishing the map in less time than the turn maximum for Bexp or you are going over with good reason (namely, it earns more EXP than would be lost in Bexp).

3) It is assumed all characters will either reach 20/20 or end up close enough to it/not be statistically dependent so it won't matter.

4) All parts of the game are given semi-equal weight instead of blowing off a late-game character because 'the endgame is easy' or something else.

On resources.

1) All characters may have an amount of Bexp/forges that is equal to any other member of the team. This is not to say that unit Y, who doesn't care about stats, is forced to take a set amount of Bexp, but rather unit X, who does need Bexp, can not take more than a equal amount to the other units on the team without it being favoritism.

2) It is not favoritism if a unit uses a resource the best no matter how many of said resources that character can use the best.

3) All characters may have two forges forged however they so desire (or whatever amount can be equally divided between all team mates).

Top

Oscar

Kieran

Jill

Titania

Ike

High

Boyd

Marcia

Tanith

Astrid

Makalov

Nephenee

Upper-Mid

Reyson

Lethe

Soren

Mordecai

Mia

Muarim

Ilyana

Rhys

Mist

Volke

Zihark

Mid

Stefan

Brom

Sothe

Gatrie

Calill

Tormod

Lower-Mid

Geoffrey

Elincia

Devdan

Haar

Largo

Shinon

Ranulf

Tauroneo

Low

Janaff

Rolf

Ulki

Nasir

Lucia

Ena

Bastian

You know... It' funny. After writing all this up and looking back over my rules, I feel like smash's 'Communist FE' viewpoint has become so predominate, I struggle to know any better even though smash and I are like water and some sort of water-triggered explosive substance.

[messy mike]

I really like the theory behind this list. Can I ask what puts the hawks under Tauroneo based on these conditions?

[Anacybele]

Shinon better than Rolf? That's weird, because I always found Rolf to be WAY better. Shinon would be alright if you could just use him more, but you can't until late in the game after he leaves.

[Interceptor]

2) It is not favoritism if a unit uses a resource the best no matter how many of said resources that character can use the best.

In other words, the Mia + Wrath rule, I take it.

[Integrity]

In other words, the Mia + Wrath rule, I take it.

He must mean the Nephenee + Vantage rule.

[Narga_Rocks]

He must mean the Nephenee + Vantage rule.

Or both?

[Reikken]

1) This list measures the potential for every character

What does this even mean? It's vague enough to have no meaning at all as it's currently worded.

[Life]

Or both?

It's Snowy. I won't be surprised if it also refers to Mist + Energy Drop too.

[Narga_Rocks]

It's Snowy. I won't be surprised if it also refers to Mist + Energy Drop too.

I thought he liked Rhys more? Just look at their placements.

[Integrity]

I come to realize that Makalov is on the High tier. Makalov is a useless poof who steals from his sister and gambles the money away. I declare him a worthless drain on society, therefore he gets shunted to the bottom.

Nephenee is the hawtest and therefore goes to the top.

Actually, I will write myself up a tier list based on the usefulness of each character's character.

[Inui]

Why do people think Nephenee is so hot when you can't see a lot of her face?

Anyways, anything without Titania as top of top makes me frown.

[Integrity]

Why do people think Nephenee is so hot when you can't see a lot of her face?

Anyways, anything without Titania as top of top makes me frown.

Tifa syndrome. We have to make up what's left of it due to low resolution low-cut helmets. That makes her more appealing than anybody else.

Actually, that's just my theory. I like the lower 2/3 we get to see, and her personality is ohsoendearing to me.

Edited March 2, 2010 by Integrity

[Snowy_One]

Can I ask what puts the hawks under Tauroneo based on these conditions?

Really, a lot of it has to do with my dislike of laguz due to their formshifting. I won't deny that the placement is more of this than checking hard stats and will be more than willing to discuss a change.

Shinon better than Rolf? That's weird, because I always found Rolf to be WAY better. Shinon would be alright if you could just use him more, but you can't until late in the game after he leaves.

In terms of sheer statistical prowess, you would be right. However, Shinon's ability to taunt in the early chapters, coupled with the fact that, even at best, snipers are meh in FE9, makes it so that those few chapters in the early game are worth a lot more. Keep in mind, though, that a lot of this is old Gamefaqs stigma where anyone trying to argue the snipers up was immediately sandbagged by Reikken and smash. The main weakness of the snipers (lack of one range) was far less minor too me, so I think it may be possible for Rolf to move up here. Don't think Shinon will change, but Rolf can move up to the same tier at least with some half-decent arguing.

In other words, the Mia + Wrath rule, I take it.

In other words, if any unit can show they use a resource the best, I'm not gonna be a moron and refuse to give it to them out of some desire to follow some method of 'fairness' that is abstract and semi-retarded. Don't care how it falls. If you can show me that Boyd uses a energy drop better than Nephenee (which I doubt) and is, in fact, the best possible choice, go right ahead and give it to him. I won't care.

What does this even mean? It's vague enough to have no meaning at all as it's currently worded.

If I say a room is dark, do you need to know exactly how much light is in it or how much light can be in a room before it can be considered 'dark' or 'light'? No. You don't. A half-wit can figure out damned well what I mean by 'maximum potential' (measuring how well a character can do overall). Heck 'minimum turn count' is actually MORE vague. What does that mean? Minimum turn count possible to reach a seize square? Minimum turn count possible with the set team? Minimum turn count to clear the map of all enemies? Sure, you may think it's obvious what you mean, and it is... mainly because I'm not a idiot and I would assume most of this board is not either. I... Would say much more, but I'm not intent on flaming. If you don't have anything to add that is at least somewhat constructive (and no. 'your tier list sucks and is stupid' does not count as constructive) than please leave the topic.

[Anouleth]

1) All characters may have an amount of Bexp/forges that is equal to any other member of the team. This is not to say that unit Y, who doesn't care about stats, is forced to take a set amount of Bexp, but rather unit X, who does need Bexp, can not take more than a equal amount to the other units on the team without it being favoritism.

2) It is not favoritism if a unit uses a resource the best no matter how many of said resources that character can use the best.

This seems like a contradiction. If a unit does really really well with BEXP, then rule 2) justifies giving lots to them, but according to rule 1), it's favouritism.

(I won't get into how much I despise the word favouritism.)

You know... It' funny. After writing all this up and looking back over my rules, I feel like smash's 'Communist FE' viewpoint has become so predominate, I struggle to know any better even though smash and I are like water and some sort of water-triggered explosive substance.

How about caesium? Its reaction with water is pretty explosive.

[nflchamp]

In other words, if any unit can show they use a resource the best, I'm not gonna be a moron and refuse to give it to them out of some desire to follow some method of 'fairness' that is abstract and semi-retarded. Don't care how it falls. If you can show me that Boyd uses a energy drop better than Nephenee (which I doubt) and is, in fact, the best possible choice, go right ahead and give it to him. I won't care.

Which basically lets the floodgates open on your first rule. It's like it isn't even there.

If I say a room is dark, do you need to know exactly how much light is in it or how much light can be in a room before it can be considered 'dark' or 'light'? No. You don't. A half-wit can figure out damned well what I mean by 'maximum potential' (measuring how well a character can do overall). Heck 'minimum turn count' is actually MORE vague. What does that mean? Minimum turn count possible to reach a seize square? Minimum turn count possible with the set team? Minimum turn count to clear the map of all enemies? Sure, you may think it's obvious what you mean, and it is... mainly because I'm not a idiot and I would assume most of this board is not either. I... Would say much more, but I'm not intent on flaming. If you don't have anything to add that is at least somewhat constructive (and no. 'your tier list sucks and is stupid' does not count as constructive) than please leave the topic.

You say you're measuring how well a character can do overall but give no way to measure how well a character is doing is the problem. Hence, your list has such a vague premise it could be anything.

Edit:

In terms of sheer statistical prowess, you would be right. However, Shinon's ability to taunt in the early chapters, coupled with the fact that, even at best, snipers are meh in FE9, makes it so that those few chapters in the early game are worth a lot more. Keep in mind, though, that a lot of this is old Gamefaqs stigma where anyone trying to argue the snipers up was immediately sandbagged by Reikken and smash. The main weakness of the snipers (lack of one range) was far less minor too me, so I think it may be possible for Rolf to move up here. Don't think Shinon will change, but Rolf can move up to the same tier at least with some half-decent arguing.

4) All parts of the game are given semi-equal weight instead of blowing off a late-game character because 'the endgame is easy' or something else.

How do those statements not contradict one another?

Edited March 3, 2010 by nflchamp

[Snowy_One]

Which basically lets the floodgates open on your first rule. It's like it isn't even there.

Eh? How so? All you need to do is show that a character can use a item the best (or conversely, is the best use of a item) and that character can have it.

You say you're measuring how well a character can do overall but give no way to measure how well a character is doing is the problem. Hence, your list has such a vague premise it could be anything.

Well let me give you a HUUUGE hint. If a character is doing well, it's usually because they can perform their role exceedingly well and can help the team out a lot. True, it may not be as clear and defined as 'minimum possible turn count', but don't be a idiot and try to say 'well since it COULD mean anything I can't work with it at all' when what I'm referring to should be obvious. Don't try to be a 'draw the line' type person.

How do those statements not contradict one another?

Well the most obvious answer would be 'even when counting all parts of the game equally or whatever, Rolf's endgame where he does dominate Shinon is simply still not worth the amount of help Shinon can offer in the early game'. Secondly, as I mentioned, a lot of it is likely due to an old gamefaqs stigma largely enforced by smash and Reikken and can easily be changed.

[nflchamp]

Eh? How so? All you need to do is show that a character can use a item the best (or conversely, is the best use of a item) and that character can have it.

Which is why the first rule (the one about how resources are distributed evenly) is basically not there.

Well let me give you a HUUUGE hint. If a character is doing well, it's usually because they can perform their role exceedingly well and can help the team out a lot. True, it may not be as clear and defined as 'minimum possible turn count', but don't be a idiot and try to say 'well since it COULD mean anything I can't work with it at all' when what I'm referring to should be obvious. Don't try to be a 'draw the line' type person.

Which doesn't tell us anything. A unit's role in a team (and how much they help said team) is defined but what the team is trying to accomplish, which, at this point, isn't clear. I still can't tell how a unit is being measured.

Well the most obvious answer would be 'even when counting all parts of the game equally or whatever, Rolf's endgame where he does dominate Shinon is simply still not worth the amount of help Shinon can offer in the early game'. Secondly, as I mentioned, a lot of it is likely due to an old gamefaqs stigma largely enforced by smash and Reikken and can easily be changed.

Which is the problem. Rolf clearly beats Shinon for an extended period of time and Shinon only wins a couple of maps. Unless you're saying Shinon has monumental wins early (which will surely be strongly opposed), you're saying Shinon's early maps are more important than Rolf's latter maps. Which is in direct contradiction to your rules.

[Narga_Rocks]

Which is the problem. Rolf clearly beats Shinon for an extended period of time and Shinon only wins a couple of maps. Unless you're saying Shinon has monumental wins early (which will surely be strongly opposed), you're saying Shinon's early maps are more important than Rolf's latter maps. Which is in direct contradiction to your rules.

Do any of the rules imply any sort of opportunity cost for deployment slots? Or simply "negative utility"? If so, then Shinon > Rolf does not necessarily break any listed rules because all those chapters of building Rolf up into a ORKOing player phase unit are hurting his case, and hence Shinon > Rolf can be considered reasonable.

[OverratedSage]

Did you have any particular amount of BEXP in mind for how much characters can use?

[-Cynthia-]

This list actually resembles the one here pretty closely.

The one thing I have to mention is that there seems to be some issues with the relative placements of Titania and Shinon. Shinon seems rather high consdiering a lot of characters have more "maximum potential" than he does and are below him, meaning you gave him significant credit for earlygame maps. In contrast, Titania apparently didn't get that much credit since shes not the #1 unit, which I question.

Edited March 3, 2010 by -Cynthia-

[Fayt Zelpher]

This list actually resembles the one ehre pretty closely.

The one thing I have to mention is that there seems to be some issues with the relative placements of Titania and Shinon. Shinon seems rather high consdiering a lot of characters have more "maximum potential" than he does and are below him, meaning you gave him significant credit for earlygame maps. In contrast, Titania apparently didn't get that much credit since shes not the #1 unit, which I question.

I'd add to that that Zihark is too low, since Z > Mia is more or less a given statwise and affinity, and Mia's 4 chapters aren't a huge difference. (Though I could certainly see the logic of Mia ahead of him on that very ground since they'll be more or less equal after then, maybe small advantages to Z based on higher Str cap and Earth affinity).

[OverratedSage]

I'd add to that that Zihark is too low, since Z > Mia is more or less a given statwise and affinity, and Mia's 4 chapters aren't a huge difference. (Though I could certainly see the logic of Mia ahead of him on that very ground since they'll be more or less equal after then, maybe small advantages to Z based on higher Str cap and Earth affinity).

IIRC the arguments in favor if Mia > Zihark are

1) Easier access to the Wrath/Vantage combo (since she's already got half of it and Zihark would have to ditch Adept).

2) Vantage > Adept, mostly because of activation rates.

3) Mia can more easily utilize the SS (IIRC the idea is that she's ORKOing with just the mage band while Zihark also needs the Dust, not totally sure though) which helps counter range issues.

4) Fire affinity (and access to double fire via Rhys) offsets Zihark's small str lead and Mia + Vantage has more durability overall than Zihark + Earth affinity boost.

...um...there might have been other things too, but I forgot them.

[Snowy_One]

Which is why the first rule (the one about how resources are distributed evenly) is basically not there.

That rule is referring to forges and Bexp. It's less of a 'they need to be distributed absolutely evenly' rule though and more of 'a character can tax X amount of Bexp and Y amount of forges fairly no matter what before we should even start to question if it is favoritism' type rule (a protecter-type instead of an inhibitor type).

Which is the problem. Rolf clearly beats Shinon for an extended period of time and Shinon only wins a couple of maps. Unless you're saying Shinon has monumental wins early (which will surely be strongly opposed), you're saying Shinon's early maps are more important than Rolf's latter maps. Which is in direct contradiction to your rules.

Please re-read the last part of my post. I won't deny that Rolf certainly wins over Shinon during the latter chapters. What is stopping me, however, is mainly that back on Gamefaqs, the snipers were considered absolute trash. Since negative utility abounds there and Rolf is often considered the worst character, that Shinon is seen as superior due to his early-game performance is simply expected. I do see your point though and I do agree with the concept. If we are measuring the entire game, then yes, Rolf is indeed better than Shinon from a statistical point of view. However, do keep in mind that Shinon has several chapters where he is the second-best basically in the game as well as Rolf needing training while Shinon does not...

My god... I feel so dirty saying that...

Anyways, here is a good question I would like to see answered before I make a change. How much better than Shinon is Rolf and how useful is Shinon in the early game anyways? I have a general opinion that he is fairly useful at the least, but am unsure of just how much.

Do any of the rules imply any sort of opportunity cost for deployment slots?

I view negative utility as a impossibility. However, I also believe that a unit can be bad enough to make their contributions near-negligible. Guess what the general opinion on Rolf is on gamefaqs? Now, I will grant this is more of me being a beast of habit than something hard and concrete. I do wanna be sure that Rolf > Shinon though before I make a change instead of people just telling me that he is better.

Did you have any particular amount of BEXP in mind for how much characters can use?

Well, back on Gamefaqs, there were two primary ideas. One is that the total EXP for the entire game would be divided up between all the team characters equally (ignoring contribution/performance/time) and another was that the Bexp for a chapter was divided up entirely between all units equally with none being saved for the latter ones. I have a feeling neither is looked upon favorably here though, but I don't know what else to do.

This list actually resembles the one here pretty closely.

The one thing I have to mention is that there seems to be some issues with the relative placements of Titania and Shinon. Shinon seems rather high consdiering a lot of characters have more "maximum potential" than he does and are below him, meaning you gave him significant credit for earlygame maps. In contrast, Titania apparently didn't get that much credit since shes not the #1 unit, which I question.

Mmmm... I do see the point. The reasoning behind my placement was that Shinon's early game taunting/power domination is indeed fairly useful. In fact, if the game ended after chapter 7, I would probably have him as the second best character in the game. However, he falls flat on his face later on when pretty much every unit ends up surpassing him. He still manages to beat the hawks due to lack of transforming and Rolf due to Rolf not being the best unit himself, but is otherwise fairly weak overall. The same applies to Titania. Though her early game is stunning (even though I feel that she shouldn't fight, I won't deny that, if she does, she's certainly powerful), I feel her mid game is... a bit... less jawdropping and her endgame is... well... She's clearly no longer a god at that point to be sure. The better question to ask would not be 'why isn't Titania top?' and instead 'why is Oscar and Kieran top?'

I'd add to that that Zihark is too low, since Z > Mia is more or less a given statwise and affinity, and Mia's 4 chapters aren't a huge difference. (Though I could certainly see the logic of Mia ahead of him on that very ground since they'll be more or less equal after then, maybe small advantages to Z based on higher Str cap and Earth affinity).

Overrated sage hit the nail more or less firmly. However, the main reason for his drop is that I also dropped Muarim down here. I'll grant that he still is played, but he's... simply not as good as most lists seem to make him out to be IMO. He is only god-powerful for one to two chapters than is only a high character who fades down to being average to below average by the endgame. I'm not sure myself if this list assumes a character will always be played once they are on the team or not myself, and that certainly has a huge impact here. Either way, I feel Muarim is less likely to be played than in other tiers and, as a result, since Muarim is the main reason why Zihark > Mia (try arguing him superior without that support. It's not easy to say the least) and Muarim is now lower on the list, I think he's less likely to be played.

This isn't to say that this list measures likelihood of being played mind you. Instead I am stating that units who are lower tend to be played less often. Even if we ignore tier placements, it's simply more likely that Rhys (Mia's key support) will be played (I would say he's one of the few characters we can feel assured will be on the team no matter what) than Muarim will be played even with his few chapters of power.

[uzy5o]

Can you explain why you put Ike > Boyd, and why Reyson is an entire tier down relative to the other tier list?

[Snowy_One]

Can you explain why you put Ike > Boyd, and why Reyson is an entire tier down relative to the other tier list?

The Reyson is fairly simple, at least to me. When Reyson chants, all he does is refresh the four units nearby him. That's it. He doesn't do much else at all. Sure, those for units may be able to attack again or move into better positions, but they are the ones who are doing it. Even though Reyson is the enabler, it is still those units who are doing it. Not to mention that Reyson will not always refresh four units and those four units will not always be Jill, Oscar, Kieran, and Titania either. As a result, he drops.

Ike > Boyd is more tricky, but I will try to explain. In the early game... Ike is more likely to double than Boyd. Even though Boyd has an advantage with axes, Ike's doubling (and regal sword) gives him a stronger edge. Not to mention that, later on, after promotion neither will have too much trouble killing IIRC, except Ike can do it in 'one' attack (Aether), heal (Aether), and still has a load of dodge to back it up if he screws up. Boyd... does not have that. Not to menion that Boyd's speed isn't the best either. Not saying he's slow, but when people have tried to argue speed bands for Ilyana, Boyd's name often pops up as a contender for the band.