S Rank Tier List for FE7

[Florete]

There hadn't been as much discussion back then. I think with all that's happened in the past month and the obvious ambiguity of what can be credited to a tiered Merlinus we can start to see more understanding even if not everyone agrees completely.

[Narga_Rocks]

There hadn't been as much discussion back then. I think with all that's happened in the past month and the obvious ambiguity of what can be credited to a tiered Merlinus we can start to see more understanding even if not everyone agrees completely.

It just means that Colonel M was so smart he saw where it was going from the beginning and thus was able to recognize the best decision. The others shouldn't have doubted his brilliance and foresight. Maybe now, though, they may be more understanding, like you said. Too bad they couldn't all have just trusted Colonel M more in the first place.

[Florete]

It just means that Colonel M was so smart he saw where it was going from the beginning and thus was able to recognize the best decision. The others shouldn't have doubted his brilliance and foresight. Maybe now, though, they may be more understanding, like you said. Too bad they couldn't all have just trusted Colonel M more in the first place.

I concur. He fully deserves his spot on the FEG tier list imo. In fact, he may even be too low.

Edited April 10, 2010 by Red Fox of Fire

[dondon151]

I'm really just trying to kill the discussion right here by bringing up all kinds of potential damaging ambiguities. Tiering Merlinus gives the player no useful information whatsoever.

[Colonel M]

I tried making an argument. :/ If you want more Admiral (stats and whatnot), don't be afraid to ask!

EDIT: and as much as I appreciate the "thanks", I still was a typical asshole at that point so I have no excuse for that matter. I also remind you that I'm pretty average with debating anyway.

Not to shoot myself down but I can face the facts.

Edited April 11, 2010 by Colonel M

[Narga_Rocks]

I tried making an argument. :/ If you want more Admiral (stats and whatnot), don't be afraid to ask!

so, no Merlinus. Next topic: Vaida v. Dart. Have at it.

EDIT: and as much as I appreciate the "thanks", I still was a typical asshole at that point so I have no excuse for that matter. I also remind you that I'm pretty average with debating anyway.

Not to shoot myself down but I can face the facts.

Don't ruin this for me.

[Colonel M]

so, no Merlinus. Next topic: Vaida v. Dart. Have at it.

Well the best way to look at this is within Dart's time frame before Vaida arrives.

Dart - 34 HP | 12 Str | 8 Skl | 8 Spd | 3 Luck | 6 Def | 1 Res

Iron Axe - 20 Atk, 92 Hit

Well let's see. He can't double the 5 AS Pirates, for starters. Maybe if they proc lower in Spd, which looks possible, he can double some of those. The Cavaliers are out of his league. They wield Iron weapons still and rarely will you see the Steel Lance Cavalier. He can ORKO the Cavaliers that wield Steel Lance as well as the Pirates with Steel. I don't think I need to lecture you on how he ORKOese the Pegasus Knights. He gets 23 EXP per kill, and 9 per Hit. So the instances that he ORKOes, he's pretty good on gaining EXP. It will take him ~5 kills, but he also will likely be chipping things from time to time. Hit shouldn't be much of a problem.

Defensively, Dart is 3RKOed by the Steel Axe Pirates with 58% Hit rates. The Steel Lance Cavaliers also 3RKO while facing 48% Hit rates. So he's not doing terribly, but obvious to see that he's pretty mediocre.

The only good thing out of him in Chapter 19X is that he can pull out a Hammer against the Armor Knights. Still, he can't double most of them. It takes 6 AS to consistently double them. Since Hammer has 5 Wt, this drops Dart down to 3 AS. Even if he got lucky with 2 levels, he can only double possibly one more. It's not like he can OHKO them either since 22 Mt + 12 Str = 34. Armor Knights have a HP | Def combo of 36-37. So he's not doing well in here.

In Dragon's Gate, Dart is pretty scrubby here too. He has Hammer against AKs but, again, isn't doubling them. He's not that great against the Cavaliers either since most of them wield Iron or Iron Sword (oh noes the Sword). If he got +Spd, he can double some of the Shamans with his Hand Axe.

So he might get 4 Levels from the duration when he's on the Isles. Seems fair since I doubt he can argue deployment in 19X. Maybe 1 more in Chapter 20 and, to be honest, he's pretty mediocre to terrible in Chapter 21. So we have a couple of chapters where he's arguably useful (joining chapter, Dragon's Gate) and chapters where he's bad (19X and 22).

So already I can name two chapters where Dart is marginally useful, but Vaida is only great in one. I could argue that, at times, like Chapter 19X, he could be fielded if only to gain EXP. Chances are you could whiff on the Armor Knights since Mages are not optimal in this chapter. This leaves you with other units with Hammer... which can be Dorcas, Bartre, and Hector. Granted, they do much better than Dart, but given that we have to pad the EXP rank, Dart is the best candidate for that.

After Dragon's Gate, Dart can grab himself a Killer Axe and attempt to go for critkills if he misses doubling on units. Since he isn't doubling with it (possibly), this means that he's conserving the uses of the weapon.

Don't ruin this for me.

Nah, I appreciate your praise, as always.

Now can I get a "Tyrant of The Year" award?

[Narga_Rocks]

Nah, I appreciate your praise, as always.

Now can I get a "Tyrant of The Year" award?

If I could get away with it I'd give you a banner. (I can't even do it, though, forget getting away with it after.)

How's this?

Colonel M >

[Dat Nick]

I'm the new official forum tyrant anyway because I choose to call dondon's horseshit out for what it is instead of siding with every single word out of his mouth like some other individuals in #feto, no matter how atrociously stupid it is.

But that's another show.

[Life]

I'm the new official forum tyrant anyway because I choose to call dondon's horseshit out for what it is instead of siding with every single word out of his mouth like some other individuals in #feto, no matter how atrociously stupid it is.

But that's another show.

Cool beans?

EDIT: I want to post what GreatEclipse said on GameFAQs, only because I really can't answer it without swearing. GE, feel free to answer me here, I like being able to use proper language. I hate the filters there. I like swearing.

Marcus is no worse for EXP early than everyone else on your core team (Raven included) is late. If Dorcas weakening and Eliwood finishing is preferable to Marcus killing, Dorcas weakening and Nino finishing should be even more desirable than Raven killing (30 EXP vs. 60). The difference being that when killing is more desirable, Marcus is the only one who can do it early, while plenty can do it late. Raven is good for EXP when he joins, sure, but he also losses to Marcus is raw combat performance by a decent margin for whatever period of time he is helping.

Are you fucking kidding me? Why don't we just punish everyone not named Nino because Nino gets more Exp at the time that she appears?

Use your brain. I have 35 out of 36 characters in Cog of Destiny that have this so called "penalty". I have 1 out of 13 in Talons Alight with this "penalty". Am I going to penalize Raven when everyone suffers the same fate in CoD? No, I'd rather just give credit to Nino. Am I going to penalize Marcus when NOBODY suffers the same fate in Talons Alight? You bet your ass.

Honestly, this is fucking retarded. It's almost like Inui saying "well that 20k for Farina doesn't matter". IT DOES MATTER.

Edited April 15, 2010 by King Russell

[CATS]

Use your brain. I have 35 out of 36 characters in Cog of Destiny that have this so called "penalty". I have 1 out of 13 in Talons Alight with this "penalty". Am I going to penalize Raven when everyone suffers the same fate in CoD? No, I'd rather just give credit to Nino. Am I going to penalize Marcus when NOBODY suffers the same fate in Talons Alight? You bet your ass.

You have 35 characters on the same level as Raven in CoD? I find that hard to believe.

The gap in offense between lategame Raven and some Exp-filler unit should be pretty similar to the gap between earlygame Marcus and other earlygame units. Or maybe even less; remember that lategame enemies fail really hard in this game. For example, Bartre only needs to be 14/0 to be 2RKOing Ch 25's cavaliers with the iron axe, compared to Raven ORKOing, and obviously he's getting like 3-4 times more Exp per kill. That's very close to something like Marcus vs Lowen in Ch 13. Of course, as GE pointed out, the important difference is that you don't have anyone else who can even come close to Marcus's combat prowess during the early chapters, while you have multiple other top tiers available for the time that Raven is kicking ass. During their respective periods of dominance, Marcus is #1 in his niche by a much, much larger margin than Raven is #1 in the same niche.

Obviously me and GE are pretty like-minded, so maybe it's not worth much, but I don't think you should be so quick to dismiss his argument.

[Life]

You have 35 characters on the same level as Raven in CoD? I find that hard to believe.

The gap in offense between lategame Raven and some Exp-filler unit should be pretty similar to the gap between earlygame Marcus and other earlygame units. Or maybe even less; remember that lategame enemies fail really hard in this game. For example, Bartre only needs to be 14/0 to be 2RKOing Ch 25's cavaliers with the iron axe, compared to Raven ORKOing, and obviously he's getting like 3-4 times more Exp per kill. That's very close to something like Marcus vs Lowen in Ch 13. Of course, as GE pointed out, the important difference is that you don't have anyone else who can even come close to Marcus's combat prowess during the early chapters, while you have multiple other top tiers available for the time that Raven is kicking ass. During their respective periods of dominance, Marcus is #1 in his niche by a much, much larger margin than Raven is #1 in the same niche.

Obviously me and GE are pretty like-minded, so maybe it's not worth much, but I don't think you should be so quick to dismiss his argument.

I have 35 units that are either promoted or sitting at level 16+ at this point. They're not gaining much Exp.

Honestly, I don't understand or like this argument because I think it's trying to eliminate Marcus' penalty for the sake of eliminating his penalty.

I understand that using Raven late game gets you the same Exp as using Marcus early game. The problem comes when you use Marcus early game instead of another unit who will actually gain a lot more Exp at that point. Marcus is the only unit in (tossing out a random chapter) NLoC who suffers a severe Exp drop-off. Everyone else (even Oswin) will gain at least 2x the Exp from a kill than Marcus. When you say "Raven has the same problem in the late game", you basically say that it doesn't matter that most of your army has the same problem because the point is that Raven suffers from an Exp drop-off. It makes no sense.

If a problem like this affects at least 50% of your army the same way (drop-off Exp), it's high time that you stop penalizing them for it because it is now the standard. Why not just credit (at this point) those who don't suffer from it? It's why Nino is higher than she really could be and why Exp units (Rath, Bartre, Heath...) are also sitting at higher spots than they should be.

[Anouleth]

The gap in offense between lategame Raven and some Exp-filler unit should be pretty similar to the gap between earlygame Marcus and other earlygame units. Or maybe even less; remember that lategame enemies fail really hard in this game. For example, Bartre only needs to be 14/0 to be 2RKOing Ch 25's cavaliers with the iron axe, compared to Raven ORKOing, and obviously he's getting like 3-4 times more Exp per kill. That's very close to something like Marcus vs Lowen in Ch 13. Of course, as GE pointed out, the important difference is that you don't have anyone else who can even come close to Marcus's combat prowess during the early chapters, while you have multiple other top tiers available for the time that Raven is kicking ass. During their respective periods of dominance, Marcus is #1 in his niche by a much, much larger margin than Raven is #1 in the same niche.

I don't have enemy stats for Chapter 25's cavaliers, but Bartre has 15STR/8SPD. A 14/0 Raven has 15STR/17SPD. Bartre has ~3 HP on Raven, who wins everything else by a landslide. Bartre has WTA if they're using Lances, but Raven has higher attack than Bartre w/ Iron Axe with the Iron Blade, and he's more likely to double (15AS), even if he is less accurate. So I guess even as EXP filler, Raven beats Bartre, except that if we want we can also turn Raven into an unstoppable combat machine and we can't really do that with Bartre.

[CATS]

I have 35 units that are either promoted or sitting at level 16+ at this point. They're not gaining much Exp.

35 units? That's like 3-4 times as many as you can deploy in a typical chapter. It seems to me like Inui's claims that Oswin is L20 in Ch 19; possible, but not necessarily practical. Looking at Bal's HHM S Rank log, he has 6 units ending the chapter at L16 or below, meaning they almost certainly started the chapter below L16, and that's just who he has on the field. There's 20 something others on the bench and obviously not all of them are 16+ if alot of the units he's fielding are barely reaching that.

Honestly, I don't understand or like this argument because I think it's trying to eliminate Marcus' penalty for the sake of eliminating his penalty.

It looks to me like the argument is trying to establish Marcus >= Raven, not to hand-wave any traits of Marcus.

I understand that using Raven late game gets you the same Exp as using Marcus early game. The problem comes when you use Marcus early game instead of another unit who will actually gain a lot more Exp at that point. Marcus is the only unit in (tossing out a random chapter) NLoC who suffers a severe Exp drop-off. Everyone else (even Oswin) will gain at least 2x the Exp from a kill than Marcus. When you say "Raven has the same problem in the late game", you basically say that it doesn't matter that most of your army has the same problem because the point is that Raven suffers from an Exp drop-off. It makes no sense.

If a problem like this affects at least 50% of your army the same way (drop-off Exp), it's high time that you stop penalizing them for it because it is now the standard. Why not just credit (at this point) those who don't suffer from it? It's why Nino is higher than she really could be and why Exp units (Rath, Bartre, Heath...) are also sitting at higher spots than they should be.

If 50% of your army has a certain trait, it's not the standard. And that shouldn't be relevant anyways. The fact is that using Raven instead of weaker but lower-leveled combat units hurts Exp and helps Tactics; having other units who perform in a similar manner doesn't change that fact. The existence of a promoted Kent as an alternative to promoted Raven doesn't erase the existence of a 14/0 Bartre as an alternative to Raven.

I don't have enemy stats for Chapter 25's cavaliers, but Bartre has 15STR/8SPD. A 14/0 Raven has 15STR/17SPD. Bartre has ~3 HP on Raven, who wins everything else by a landslide. Bartre has WTA if they're using Lances, but Raven has higher attack than Bartre w/ Iron Axe with the Iron Blade, and he's more likely to double (15AS), even if he is less accurate. So I guess even as EXP filler, Raven beats Bartre, except that if we want we can also turn Raven into an unstoppable combat machine and we can't really do that with Bartre.

Very true. However, notice that the argument is Marcus vs Raven, not Raven vs Bartre.

[Life]

35 units? That's like 3-4 times as many as you can deploy in a typical chapter. It seems to me like Inui's claims that Oswin is L20 in Ch 19; possible, but not necessarily practical. Looking at Bal's HHM S Rank log, he has 6 units ending the chapter at L16 or below, meaning they almost certainly started the chapter below L16, and that's just who he has on the field. There's 20 something others on the bench and obviously not all of them are 16+ if alot of the units he's fielding are barely reaching that.

CATS, I want you to answer this question properly. Are you purposely being stupid or are you hoping that I'm going to get sick of arguing with you?

Here's a list of Bal's units from CoD. Look.

Hector 20.00 Over level 16

Ninian 19.82 Over level 16 but not the point

Priscilla 7.37 PROMOTED

Serra 10.01 PROMOTED

Florina 10.29 PROMOTED

Farina 7.20 PROMOTED

Fiora 7.19 PROMOTED

Louise 7.09 PROMOTED

Pent 9.25 PROMOTED

Gietz 6.97 PROMOTED

I'm sorry that I didn't write "over 16/0" because that's what I meant. Now do you see what I mean or are you once again going to say something stupid for the sake of it?

It looks to me like the argument is trying to establish Marcus >= Raven, not to hand-wave any traits of Marcus.

The point is to hand-wave the damage that Marcus does to the Exp rank in order to say Marcus >= Raven. If you can't see that, you're not reading it properly.

If 50% of your army has a certain trait, it's not the standard. And that shouldn't be relevant anyways. The fact is that using Raven instead of weaker but lower-leveled combat units hurts Exp and helps Tactics; having other units who perform in a similar manner doesn't change that fact. The existence of a promoted Kent as an alternative to promoted Raven doesn't erase the existence of a 14/0 Bartre as an alternative to Raven.

Bullshit. It's called a majority.

If the majority of a class fails an exam, does that mean that the class is stupid or was the exam too hard? What about it only one person fails it? Is the test too hard or is that person just stupid. Now substitute "army" for class and "Marcus" for "person" and you should see what I mean.

You're making a completely retarded case in order to say that Raven hurts the Exp rank... Wait, that's not it. You're penalizing anyone who promotes just so that you can say that Marcus is no worse even though "Raven" or whatever unit gets almost double the amount of Exp by the end of the game that Marcus does over the same time period (the entire game). Now do I have that right?

Edited April 15, 2010 by King Russell

[-Cynthia-]

I believe the list is attempting to measure how the unit helps the various ranks throughout the entire game. Raven helps the Exp rank considerably before promotion (and is also good for Tactics/Combat). Marcus doesn't help the Exp rank, in fact every time we use Marcus compared to just about any other unit for most of the game we're hurting the Exp rank.

Basically, even if Raven's Exp contributions are minimal during lategame, Marcus can't contribute significantly more than anyway and in the process of becoming a promoted unit Raven has gotten a lot of EXP towards the Exp rank. Any way you look at it, Raven helps EXp more than Marcus does.

[CATS]

CATS, I want you to answer this question properly. Are you purposely being stupid or are you hoping that I'm going to get sick of arguing with you?

Being stupid, though not purposely. I misread the passage and thought it was talking about Ch 25, not Ch 29; CoD is indeed more reasonable for those levels. This doesn't really change the original point, though, which was to question whether or not you have 35 units on the same level as Raven during that chapter, not 35 units at 16/0 or more. A 17/0 or 18/0 unit killing unpromoted mages or shamans on CoD is still earning alot more Exp than a promoted Raven for it.

The point is to hand-wave the damage that Marcus does to the Exp rank in order to say Marcus >= Raven. If you can't see that, you're not reading it properly.

Can you help me to read it properly, then?

Marcus is no worse for EXP early than everyone else on your core team (Raven included) is late. If Dorcas weakening and Eliwood finishing is preferable to Marcus killing, Dorcas weakening and Nino finishing should be even more desirable than Raven killing (30 EXP vs. 60). The difference being that when killing is more desirable, Marcus is the only one who can do it early, while plenty can do it late. Raven is good for EXP when he joins, sure, but he also losses to Marcus is raw combat performance by a decent margin for whatever period of time he is helping.

It looks to me like it's saying that Raven hurts the Exp rank late, in a similar fashion to how Marcus hurts it early on. I don't see where it states that Marcus doesn't hurt the Exp rank.

You're making a completely retarded case in order to say that Raven hurts the Exp rank... Wait, that's not it. You're penalizing anyone who promotes just so that you can say that Marcus is no worse even though "Raven" or whatever unit gets almost double the amount of Exp by the end of the game that Marcus does over the same time period (the entire game). Now do I have that right?

First of all, why so accusatory? I'm saying that I don't think you should be so quick to dismiss GE's argument as "fucking retarded." If you're going to respond by making it "my case" and trying to make me look like an idiot, I'll just quit talking about it entirely (and maybe this is what you want?), as I'm not interested in being cross-examined.

Now, I don't know what ideas you have about this particular argument, but here's what I'm seeing. You can tell me how this doesn't match up with what you're seeing and why.

A unit "hurts" the Exp rank when he gets less Exp for a kill than other units who could've taken the kill instead would've gotten.

If there's few or no other units who would earn more Exp for a kill than the unit in question, then he's not "hurting" the Exp rank.

However, so long as there's other units available who could've earned more Exp for that kill, then you're getting a net loss in Exp gains. Exp gains need to be compared to the next best alternative, not only to the next best alternative that's on a similar level.

The existence of alot of other promoted units during the lategame means that Raven isn't hurting the Exp rank relative to those units; however, compared to the next best alternatives in your whole army, Raven is getting significantly less Exp.

Basically, the same reasoning for why Marcus hurts the Exp rank (he gets less than the alternatives) also applies to lategame Raven. There are clearly other units who will get considerably more Exp for their kills than Raven will. It's not accurate to dock points off Marcus for this while not mentioning it for promoted Raven's performance.

With this in mind, it's important to note that the existence of alot of other units who are similar to lategame Raven (promoted with low Exp gains but high stats) de-values him. Why is Matthew the best unit? Because no one else can do what he does; he is completely irreplaceable and there are no alternatives for the role that he plays. If you had 5 thieves that joined before Ch 17 with similar stats to Matthew, would he still be the best unit? Obviously not.

Earlygame Marcus is a similar case. No other units can replace him during that time period; you don't have anyone else who can imitate what he does during those chapters, no one else who can have a similar combination of stats/weapons/move.

Now, no one else's stats will be as good as Raven's either, but the important thing is that, during lategame, the other combat units on your team will come alot closer to Raven than they will to Marcus during the earlygame. In the role that each plays during these time periods (namely, strong combat but low Exp gains; lets you trade Exp for Tactics), both are superior to all alternatives, but the key difference is that Marcus is superior by a much larger margin. The alternatives to him are alot farther away from his performance than the alternatives to Raven.

Thus, Marcus's overall contributions to Tactics are greater than Raven's.

It's true that Raven actually helps Exp rank for a while, but I don't think that was ever denied. I think the point was that the gap in Exp contributions is generally misrepresented or exaggerated, since no one ever acknowledges that Raven's also hurting Exp for a significant portion of his existence. Generally people discuss lategame as if the core team of promoted units are the only ones available, without mentioning that there's alot of other unpromoted units who are still there and can still boost Exp.

The end result is that Marcus contributes more to Tactics, while Raven contributes more to Exp, which would imply that they're pretty close overall (instead of being a tier apart).

[Narga_Rocks]

It looks to me like it's saying that Raven hurts the Exp rank late, in a similar fashion to how Marcus hurts it early on. I don't see where it states that Marcus doesn't hurt the Exp rank.

A unit "hurts" the Exp rank when he gets less Exp for a kill than other units who could've taken the kill instead would've gotten.

If there's few or no other units who would earn more Exp for a kill than the unit in question, then he's not "hurting" the Exp rank.

However, so long as there's other units available who could've earned more Exp for that kill, then you're getting a net loss in Exp gains. Exp gains need to be compared to the next best alternative, not only to the next best alternative that's on a similar level.

The existence of alot of other promoted units during the lategame means that Raven isn't hurting the Exp rank relative to those units; however, compared to the next best alternatives in your whole army, Raven is getting significantly less Exp.

It's true that Raven actually helps Exp rank for a while, but I don't think that was ever denied. I think the point was that the gap in Exp contributions is generally misrepresented or exaggerated, since no one ever acknowledges that Raven's also hurting Exp for a significant portion of his existence. Generally people discuss lategame as if the core team of promoted units are the only ones available, without mentioning that there's alot of other unpromoted units who are still there and can still boost Exp.

The end result is that Marcus contributes more to Tactics, while Raven contributes more to Exp, which would imply that they're pretty close overall (instead of being a tier apart).

I disagree with your implications.

Mainly, the bolded parts. Here's the difference between one exp guzzling unit and 8+ exp guzzling units:

Are you going to drop them all and deploy a team of units that are like tier 1 level 10 or something? No. If you have like 7 promoted units and 3 exp grabbers running around, then you can't claim that Raven is hurting exp rank anywhere near as much as Marcus was early-on. Why? Because it's not always better to use a lower leveled unit. If it was then your entire team would have lower leveled units. If on each turn you need, say, 5 promoted units to attack and the 3 lower leveled units can finish off 3 other units, then the cost of Raven getting lower exp is significantly reduced. He's not taking the entire cost himself, it is being split among all 7 of the promoted units. When Marcus does something early on, the cost is solely on himself. Raven not being the only promoted unit basically means that any cost of using a higher leveled unit is divided among all your higher leveled units. Unless you mean to tell me you can achieve the other ranks without any of your promoted units.

While it is true that you must compare exp gains to everyone, Raven isn't the only unit you have that could "give up" his kill or something and allow a lower leveled unit to take the kill. As such, the cost of whatever decisions you make for Raven are significantly reduced because he isn't the only one that can make that decision and it's not like you can afford for everyone to make that decision. Thus, any costs he faces are << the costs that Marcus faces.

[CATS]

While it is true that you must compare exp gains to everyone, Raven isn't the only unit you have that could "give up" his kill or something and allow a lower leveled unit to take the kill. As such, the cost of whatever decisions you make for Raven are significantly reduced because he isn't the only one that can make that decision and it's not like you can afford for everyone to make that decision. Thus, any costs he faces are << the costs that Marcus faces.

The other side of the coin is that there's alot more kills to give up on Raven's side. Lategame chapters have higher enemy counts, and with mostly promoted units on the field, they'll be taking a higher percentage of the chapter's kills than just Marcus is taking early on. If there's 35 kills taken by 5 promoted units in a lategame chapter, and 7 kills taken by Marcus in an earlygame chapter, each of the 5 promoted units hurt Exp rank to a similar extent as Marcus in the earlygame chapter. Now if it was something like 7 kills between 5 promoted units during the lategame chapter, I would agree with you, but I don't think that will be the case. And even if it is, you almost certainly sacrificed Tactics if you held your good units back like that.

Edited April 17, 2010 by CATS

[Life]

The other side of the coin is that there's alot more kills to give up on Raven's side. Lategame chapters have higher enemy counts, and with mostly promoted units on the field, they'll be taking a higher percentage of the chapter's kills than just Marcus is taking early on. If there's 35 kills taken by 5 promoted units in a lategame chapter, and 7 kills taken by Marcus in an earlygame chapter, each of the 5 promoted units hurt Exp rank to a similar extent as Marcus in the earlygame chapter. Now if it was something like 7 kills between 5 promoted units during the lategame chapter, I would agree with you, but I don't think that will be the case. And even if it is, you almost certainly sacrificed Tactics if you held your good units back like that.

Defending Marcus' hurting of the EXP rank by saying Raven hurts it late is ludicrous. 95% of the kills in CoD are going to units who get the EXACT SAME EXP as Raven. 0% of the kills early are going to units who get the same or less EXP than Marcus.

[CATS]

Defending Marcus' hurting of the EXP rank by saying Raven hurts it late is ludicrous. 95% of the kills in CoD are going to units who get the EXACT SAME EXP as Raven. 0% of the kills early are going to units who get the same or less EXP than Marcus.

You have to consider more than just what the player ends up doing. The alternatives and the opportunity costs they create are significant. If you give a Speedwing to someone, you can't just say "that's what happens" and assume +2 Spd from that unit; you have to account for the opportunity cost of the other units who could've received that resource. It's the same thing here. Even if "95% of the kills in CoD" are going to certain units, you have to account for the other units who could've taken them, and that includes more than just the other promoted units.

You can't say that low Exp gains are insignificant just because there's a number of other units who have the same disadvantage. A disadvantage is a disadvantage. If you had 10 other units identical to Marcus available for Ch 14, on top of the normal units that are available for that chapter, would it be acceptable to state that Marcus does not hurt the Exp rank in Ch 14?

[Narga_Rocks]

You can't say that low Exp gains are insignificant just because there's a number of other units who have the same disadvantage. A disadvantage is a disadvantage. If you had 10 other units identical to Marcus available for Ch 14, on top of the normal units that are available for that chapter, would it be acceptable to state that Marcus does not hurt the Exp rank in Ch 14?

Yes, if all 10 are being used together and blasting through things because it is necessary. Then they aren't hurting the exp rank at all, or at most are each hurting it only a little. Or if you are only needing say 8 or 9 then they are all hurting the exp rank but still only by a little bit, though by more than if you need all 10.

If, on the other hand, you had 10 Marcuses and it is a bad idea to use more than, say, 2 of them? Then no, it wouldn't be acceptable to state that he isn't hurting the exp rank. But then it would not be the same situation as Raven late. Raven late is in the situation of my first paragraph, and if Marcus was in a situation like that then he wouldn't be hurting it much either.

I'm just reiterating what Life Admiral already said, though, so I doubt this will help you understand our perspective since what I said is no different than what he said.

"0% of the kills early are going to units who get the same or less EXP than Marcus."

That's no different than what I'm saying. When you threw 10 other units into chapter 14, if chapter 14 is still the exact same as it is now then his 0% thing would still apply and thus Marcus still hurts it while Raven doesn't.

[CATS]

Yes, if all 10 are being used together and blasting through things because it is necessary. Then they aren't hurting the exp rank at all, or at most are each hurting it only a little. Or if you are only needing say 8 or 9 then they are all hurting the exp rank but still only by a little bit, though by more than if you need all 10.

If, on the other hand, you had 10 Marcuses and it is a bad idea to use more than, say, 2 of them? Then no, it wouldn't be acceptable to state that he isn't hurting the exp rank. But then it would not be the same situation as Raven late. Raven late is in the situation of my first paragraph, and if Marcus was in a situation like that then he wouldn't be hurting it much either.

I'm just reiterating what Life Admiral already said, though, so I doubt this will help you understand our perspective since what I said is no different than what he said.

You're right; it doesn't help me understand your perspective. Your perspective seems to be based the premise that the best course of action (presumably, using a ton of promoted units and giving them all the kills) is effectively the only one, and that other possible courses of action (such as handing kills out to lower-leveled units instead) don't need to be considered. If it's truly necessary to be blasting through things, what Raven does is helpful, since the gains in Tactics outweigh the losses in Exp; but those losses in Exp are still there, regardless of how significant the Tactics gains are. There's an important difference between the +Tactics outweighing the -Exp and the +Tactics entirely eliminating the -Exp. Your position seems to be the latter. If you could help me see where I'm getting this wrong, that would be cool; if not, then meh, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Narga_Rocks]

You're right; it doesn't help me understand your perspective. Your perspective seems to be based the premise that the best course of action (presumably, using a ton of promoted units and giving them all the kills) is effectively the only one, and that other possible courses of action (such as handing kills out to lower-leveled units instead) don't need to be considered. If it's truly necessary to be blasting through things, what Raven does is helpful, since the gains in Tactics outweigh the losses in Exp; but those losses in Exp are still there, regardless of how significant the Tactics gains are. There's an important difference between the +Tactics outweighing the -Exp and the +Tactics entirely eliminating the -Exp. Your position seems to be the latter. If you could help me see where I'm getting this wrong, that would be cool; if not, then meh, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I'm just thinking that the cost of the exp thing is shared among all the various promoted units you are using and Marcus in early game has nobody to share it with. As a result I'm of the opinion that the cost to Raven is significantly reduced in comparison to the cost to Marcus. It's not eliminated completely.

If it was merely the +Tactics obliterating the -Exp, I'd assume that necessary-only use of Marcus would also eliminate the -Exp on him.

[Life]

GE's idea for a wonderful tier list. Now I never use comments like "lol" but it seems just so appropriate in this case.

-Citizen Kane-

Hector

-Top-

Matthew

Serra

Priscilla

Ninian/Nils

-High-

Marcus

Oswin

Raven

Sain

Kent

Lowen

Guy

Erk

Eliwood

Florina

Nino

-Upper-Mid

Pent

Lucius

Harken

Geitz

Hawkeye

Dorcas

Legault

Fiora

Canas

-Lower-Mid

Heath

Athos

Lyn

Isadora

Jaffar

Bartre

-Low-

Karel

Vaida

Dart

Merlinus

Rebecca

Rath

Louise

Wil

Farina

-Bottom-

Karla

Wallace

Renault

lol