S Rank Tier List for FE7

[CATS]

Life:

You answered your own question. In this case, Rebecca is optimal deployment because the alternative is not using her and losing out on her chip shots. Any unit > empty slot.

Works for me.

Forced deployment has no downside to it as we can consider that Nino (or whoever) joins automatically on Turn 1 rather than keep a better unit from entering the battle.

But earlier, didn't you think forced deployment shouldn't count as optimal deployment? Or maybe I'm just remembering it wrong? Anyways, to define the issue:

Is Nino optimal deployment on Ch 28?

Is Nino optimal deployment on Ch 28x?

---

nflchamp:

What I'm saying is if, by tier standards, we have to recruit Nino and Jaffar, they can't get credit for being recruited and/or recruiting. Since 28x happens if we have Jaffar and Nino, by tier standards, we're going to 28x no matter what. No one can get credit for "allowing us to go there" because we have to go there by our own standards.

For one, I don't see a rule that you have to recruit everyone. Surely the tier list player will recruit these two characters, but because it is beneficial to do so (if you don't, no 28x), not because of some rule that he is forced to. Though of course, you could make such a rule, as long as we're searching for ways to invalidate the Nino argument.

For another, I don't see why it matters. Again: so what if it's assumed that the player is going to do it? The fact remains that he isn't doing it without using a Nino-specific command.

This argument would also apply to a huge number of things, not just recruitment. It is assumed that the tier list player is trying to S Rank and to do so as easily as possible (without the latter provision, almost everyone is equal, since it is still possible to S Rank with a team of crappy units). As a result of this, he will use the best units and avoid using weaker ones. Thus by our own standards, for example, we're going to use Athos in the final no matter what. Thus Athos cannot get credit for his performance in the final, because we have to use him by our own standards. Surely you wouldn't think this to be acceptable, but this is where your logic seems to lead.

---

Narga:

I was driving towards something with that statement. I was really really hoping to find out some kind of motivation for why GE was even bothering at this point. Or to find out if GE actually thought this change had the slightest chance of happening. I wasn't attempting to use that line as a means of proving why Nino shouldn't be given credit as a result of an action for which she deserves no credit.

Indeed, but your quote still accurately describes the situation, does it not? I realize that you were driving at something in the paragraph where you said that, but I assume that you said it because you think it's true.

I still find ranking Nino with the conversation to be in a similar vein to ranking units in rpgs partially based on their actions during cutscenes. It has nothing to do with combat parameters or class abilities or anything related to the standard ideas of unit performance. It is simply a conversation. The effect of the conversation between Nino and Jaffar isn't even seen until the end of the chapter during the following cutscenes when you are allowed to go to the gaiden. Nino would be using cutscene power to rise in the tier list, basically. I just think a tier list has far more meaning if we don't do things like that.

There is no cutscene involved. The tier list player selects "Talk," he presses B to skip the ensuing conversation because it is irrelevant, and he continues playing. It is a gameplay event, and the tier list player addresses it as such. The difference between this and your viewpoint is that you do consider that conversation relevant in some way, whereas the tier list player is concerned only with the action-commands that he needs to execute. To him it might as well not exist, but to you, the existence of the conversation is obviously considered and thought to have a relevant bearing on the gameplay implications of the action-command which triggers it.

And once more, if you apply this standard here, there are other cases where it is applicable. Do Support convos not classify as using Cutscene Power to boost your units' stats, considering that they are nothing more than conversations? Do boss fights count as partial cutscenes, since the boss has a quote before attacking and upon death, and sometimes a short convo with the unit that is fighting him/her?

"I just think a tier list has far more meaning if we don't do things like that" gives another excellent demonstration of my point about bias. You seem to find the argument posed to be extremely distasteful, and this seems like a near-admission of your feelings on the subject. Are you going to say something like this and also insist that bias does not exist or is not affecting the discussion?

You can't really use it as an example of producing weak arguments rather than accept the other side's point.

I was using it as a demonstration of bias, not of poor-quality arguments (which are another, separate indicator of bias, depending on the circumstances).

Edited March 28, 2010 by CATS

[Narga_Rocks]

For one, I don't see a rule that you have to recruit everyone. Surely the tier list player will recruit these two characters, but because it is beneficial to do so (if you don't, no 28x), not because of some rule that he is forced to. Though of course, you could make such a rule, as long as we're searching for ways to invalidate the Nino argument.

You make it sound like this is us desiring to keep Nino down, rather than prevent silly conversations from affecting unit positions. Don't forget:

Hector Seize

Unit Recruitment

Nino's convo

These are all, in the end, the same thing. Every single one of these is an action performed that results in something happening in the game that is different than if you don't do these things. From that standpoint, every single one of these is something that affects your ability to S-Rank HHM. Therefore, every single one of these must either be included in the tier list or they must all be excluded. Maybe the Farina 20000 could be considered part of that, maybe not. I don't think you've proven the connection, but that's not relevant right now. Hector auto-tops. Priscilla >>> Raven, since if Raven is, say, a 9, and Pris on her own is a 6, Pris becomes a 15 at least (does she recruit anyone else?). You can't have Raven without Pris chatting. You can't reach 28x without Nino chatting.

Is it preferable to have a tier list which incorporates all that? yes or no. Is it desirable to have a tier list that people actually like? yes or no. What's the point of creating a tier list that very few even want to argue about? Why must we accomodate 2 or 3 people at the cost of what we actually want? We are the ones that started this list, after all. Shouldn't our desires take precedence? Not just because we are the majority, but also because we are the creators of the list. The rule-setters, so to speak. Isn't this result, this conclusion, the logical conclusion that can be reached given these circumstances? Why should we be illogical? If we gave in to what you are arguing, wouldn't we then be acting irrationally?

Indeed, but your quote still accurately describes the situation, does it not? I realize that you were driving at something in the paragraph where you said that, but I assume that you said it because you think it's true.

I think we disagree on the causes, though. The effect is the same: Nino is almost certainly not ever going to shoot up 2 or 3 tiers based off her ability to give you access to 28x where you now have the potential to shave off more turns for tactics and do the rest of what is available. We disagree on how this conclusion comes to be, so I disagree that the quote accurately describes the situation when you spin it your way. Maybe I can agree that in your eyes it accurately describes the situation. What I wanted to know, though, was whether GE knows where this is going and if so why he continues to bother.

There is no cutscene involved. The tier list player selects "Talk," he presses B to skip the ensuing conversation because it is irrelevant, and he continues playing. It is a gameplay event, and the tier list player addresses it as such. The difference between this and your viewpoint is that you do consider that conversation relevant in some way, whereas the tier list player is concerned only with the action-commands that he needs to execute. To him it might as well not exist, but to you, the existence of the conversation is obviously considered and thought to have a relevant bearing on the gameplay implications of the action-command which triggers it.

There is a cutscene after the map, though, is there not? That's what gets you there. If you have the talk with Jaffar but can program it not to initiate the cutscene after, would you still go to 28x? I'm not sure, of course, but somehow I doubt it. Therefore, there is a cutscene involved, whether the tier player skips it or not. The cutscene gets you to 28x. Granted, Nino gets you the cutscene by conversing, but nevertheless a cutscene still exists.

And once more, if you apply this standard here, there are other cases where it is applicable. Do Support convos not classify as using Cutscene Power to boost your units' stats, considering that they are nothing more than conversations? Do boss fights count as partial cutscenes, since the boss has a quote before attacking and upon death, and sometimes a short convo with the unit that is fighting him/her?

What do I care about support convos? What matters is what they do when they have those boosted stats, not how they got them. The conversations are irrelevant. I don't tie the convos to the stat-boost. I don't tie the convos to the available chapters. See? Consistent. And once the words of the boss are gone, what does it matter? They are still using their stats against the boss'.

"I just think a tier list has far more meaning if we don't do things like that" gives another excellent demonstration of my point about bias. You seem to find the argument posed to be extremely distasteful, and this seems like a near-admission of your feelings on the subject. Are you going to say something like this and also insist that bias does not exist or is not affecting the discussion?

Bias affects what ruleset is used, sure. I never claimed that determining what we allow units to receive credit from was a completely unbiased process. Note how I said (maybe not in this topic) that there is a democratic process involved in determining what is and is not a creditable contribution to S-ranking. I do, however, claim that what we do from that point on is unbiased. Comparing units based on their valid contributions towards S-ranking HHM. Or at least that we try. I mean, you can't always guarantee unbiasedness when humans are involved. If nobody likes unit A, but unit A was randomly placed a bit too low because people don't really know how to use unit A, then unit A's tier list position is unbiased. That's a result of circumstances. If somebody comes along and actually analyzes unit A's capabilities properly and then argues for it, unit A should then rise to an unbiased position.

I certainly can.

Well, you can do whatever you want. I should have said that I dispute the validity of such an action.

In order to "use it as a" valid "example of producing weak arguments rather than accept the other side's point" however, I would have to have actually been using it as an argument for denying Nino that credit, which I wasn't. Hence, it is clearly not a weak argument instead of accepting the other side's point. So while I suppose you could use it as an example, your point is likely better served by using something else as your example.

A biased debater will search for anything he can grasp at to make his point viable, and persist in arguing his side based on such flimsy arguments. Whereas without this bias, a debater would be more willing to simply concede the point if it becomes clear that his arguments no longer have much viability. Unless the debater is simply stupid and honestly does not realize that the arguments he's making are obviously bad (giving people the benefit of the doubt here), there is no other reason that someone would put forth said arguments. This is common sense.

Which has what to do with me wanting to know the motivations (or ability to recognize reality) of GE?

oh, an edit, and a change removing I think my last two quotes.

I was using it as a demonstration of bias, not of poor-quality arguments (which are another, separate indicator of bias, depending on the circumstances).

It's really just me asking a question and pointing out what is obviously going to happen while asking the question. It says nothing of how that reality will come to be. You can't even (properly) use it as an example of someone at SF being aware that we use biased arguments, since I didn't claim that we will be rejecting the Nino thing simply because we don't like it. I don't remember typing anything about why the Nino argument will be rejected, just that I can't foresee it being accepted and I can't imagine GE thinks it will be either. If I did say anything in that paragraph about why it will be rejected, I hope I didn't accidentally say anything I don't actually believe through bad typing.

Edited March 28, 2010 by Narga_Rocks

[nflchamp]

nflchamp:

For one, I don't see a rule that you have to recruit everyone. Surely the tier list player will recruit these two characters, but because it is beneficial to do so (if you don't, no 28x), not because of some rule that he is forced to. Though of course, you could make such a rule, as long as we're searching for ways to invalidate the Nino argument.

I'm assuming its just an implicit part of the list. If it's not, it's not. Oh well.

For another, I don't see why it matters. Again: so what if it's assumed that the player is going to do it? The fact remains that he isn't doing it without using a Nino-specific command.

What matters is that we don't care about what we're forced to do, only about the choices that we have to make. Sure, Hector has to seize. I don't care about that though, since I already know it has to happen. I'd much rather know about only how the choices I make affect things.

This argument would also apply to a huge number of things, not just recruitment. It is assumed that the tier list player is trying to S Rank and to do so as easily as possible (without the latter provision, almost everyone is equal, since it is still possible to S Rank with a team of crappy units). As a result of this, he will use the best units and avoid using weaker ones. Thus by our own standards, for example, we're going to use Athos in the final no matter what. Thus Athos cannot get credit for his performance in the final, because we have to use him by our own standards. Surely you wouldn't think this to be acceptable, but this is where your logic seems to lead.

The goal is to S rank. As a result, the player will use the best units and avoid using the weaker ones. However, it is not assumed the he has to do this. This is important. Only actions that the player is forced to take we don't care about. Because he has the option not to use Athos, Athos will get credit. Athos being used 100% of the time because he is obviously beneficial makes no difference.

[Life]

But earlier, didn't you think forced deployment shouldn't count as optimal deployment? Or maybe I'm just remembering it wrong? Anyways, to define the issue:

Is Nino optimal deployment on Ch 28?

Is Nino optimal deployment on Ch 28x?

You're remembering it right. Forced doesn't mean optimal.

Nino in BBD - No. She's recruited on something like Turn 5 or 6 and is across the map from Jaffar. We have to use another unit just to transport her to the other side of the map. As a result, she doesn't gain Exp and she keeps that unit from also getting Exp.

Nino in NoF - Depends. If you can keep her out of Sonia's reach, then yes. IIRC, most of the units are physical so Nino should be able to snipe them easily. But once she moves within Sonia's Bolting area, I'm pretty sure she's OHKO'd. Again, I could be wrong but I seem to remember that a 20/0 Legault is basically OHKO'd.

[Ether]

Nino can survive a Bolting at Base with a Pure water,or at 11/0 unassisted.

[CATS]

nfl:

What matters is that we don't care about what we're forced to do, only about the choices that we have to make. Sure, Hector has to seize. I don't care about that though, since I already know it has to happen. I'd much rather know about only how the choices I make affect things.

It's true that Hector seizing isn't really a choice (well, I guess it is, you could choose to just never progress with the game, but w/e). Nino--28x, however, is very obviously a choice. It is an optional chapter caused by an optional action.

The goal is to S rank. As a result, the player will use the best units and avoid using the weaker ones. However, it is not assumed the he has to do this. This is important. Only actions that the player is forced to take we don't care about. Because he has the option not to use Athos, Athos will get credit. Athos being used 100% of the time because he is obviously beneficial makes no difference.

That's true. I still don't really see why it matters, though, and it still seems to lead to some unsavory conclusions. If we can discard an action simply by stipulating that the player is forced to do it, then could we not discard anything with such rules? A rule could be made that the player is assumed to steal the silver card; as a result of your logic here, Matthew would no longer receive credit for stealing it, correct? The obvious response is that such rules won't be made for other actions, but that would bring to light the question of why a rule of this nature is made for Nino, but not for anyone else.

---

Life:

You're remembering it right. Forced doesn't mean optimal.

Nino in BBD - No. She's recruited on something like Turn 5 or 6 and is across the map from Jaffar. We have to use another unit just to transport her to the other side of the map. As a result, she doesn't gain Exp and she keeps that unit from also getting Exp.

Nino in NoF - Depends. If you can keep her out of Sonia's reach, then yes. IIRC, most of the units are physical so Nino should be able to snipe them easily. But once she moves within Sonia's Bolting area, I'm pretty sure she's OHKO'd. Again, I could be wrong but I seem to remember that a 20/0 Legault is basically OHKO'd.

You can easily keep her out of Sonia's Bolting range, she'll just have to stay back once the group charges Sonia's position (or chug a pure water as Ether pointed out, I guess). Anyways, you say forced doesn't mean optimal, but you seem to think Nino could be optimal during her forced chapter. What determines if a character is optimal or not during a forced chapter?

---

These are all, in the end, the same thing. Every single one of these is an action performed that results in something happening in the game that is different than if you don't do these things. From that standpoint, every single one of these is something that affects your ability to S-Rank HHM. Therefore, every single one of these must either be included in the tier list or they must all be excluded.

If your only criteria is that performing the action results in something happening that is different than if you don't do it, then Matthew stealing the silver card is included. If you do it, you get the silver card. If you don't do it, you don't. I assume that you are trying not to include actions like that one, though.

Is it preferable to have a tier list which incorporates all that? yes or no. Is it desirable to have a tier list that people actually like? yes or no. What's the point of creating a tier list that very few even want to argue about? Why must we accomodate 2 or 3 people at the cost of what we actually want? We are the ones that started this list, after all. Shouldn't our desires take precedence? Not just because we are the majority, but also because we are the creators of the list. The rule-setters, so to speak. Isn't this result, this conclusion, the logical conclusion that can be reached given these circumstances? Why should we be illogical? If we gave in to what you are arguing, wouldn't we then be acting irrationally?

Nope. You're acting irrationally if you follow said irrational personal desires, of course. If you were truly objective and rational, you would not have those desires, or you would ignore them completely when considering these issues. Whether a tier list that has "all that" is preferable or not is irrelevant. That's simply a matter of opinion. To you, obviously not. To me, I don't really care that much what the end result is, I'm just concerned with the reasons you're using to get there.

The point here is simply a question of objectivity. Of course you might think it's better to have a tier list that people like, and end up catering to irrational biases in order to make it happen. If you do this, then you sacrifice the list's objectivity. I'm not even trying to tell you that an objective list is better, I'm just trying to make it clear that the list you're describing isn't objective and shouldn't pretend to be. If people would simply be willing to accept and acknowledge this fact, and then continue making their non-objective list while fully aware of the fact that they are not objective (or at least, they are not really trying to be objective), then no one would be able to complain about their actions anymore.

Also, "because we are the creators of the list?" So, the opinions of those who have been here longer are more significant? That's what it seems like you're trying to say.

I think we disagree on the causes, though. The effect is the same: Nino is almost certainly not ever going to shoot up 2 or 3 tiers based off her ability to give you access to 28x where you now have the potential to shave off more turns for tactics and do the rest of what is available. We disagree on how this conclusion comes to be, so I disagree that the quote accurately describes the situation when you spin it your way. Maybe I can agree that in your eyes it accurately describes the situation. What I wanted to know, though, was whether GE knows where this is going and if so why he continues to bother.

So what do you think the cause is? Just because I don't really see any other alternatives, I'm guessing that you think it's a result of GreatEclipse's argument being of poor quality and clearly worthy of rejection?

There is a cutscene after the map, though, is there not? That's what gets you there. If you have the talk with Jaffar but can program it not to initiate the cutscene after, would you still go to 28x? I'm not sure, of course, but somehow I doubt it. Therefore, there is a cutscene involved, whether the tier player skips it or not. The cutscene gets you to 28x. Granted, Nino gets you the cutscene by conversing, but nevertheless a cutscene still exists.

First off, we can't really know that without hacking the game somehow. Second, it doesn't really matter. There's actually a cutscene involved when you hit Talk; I simply say that there is no cutscene involved because the player skips it immediately, and will do the same to whatever scene comes after the chapter as well. The point is that these storyline scenes are irrelevant to the gameplay events that trigger them (or at least, they should be), and that if they are truly considered irrelevant, they shouldn't be influencing discussion in any way at all. Yet obviously the existence of these cutscenes is indeed influencing discussion. Why do you think that they are relevant?

What do I care about support convos? What matters is what they do when they have those boosted stats, not how they got them. The conversations are irrelevant. I don't tie the convos to the stat-boost. I don't tie the convos to the available chapters. See? Consistent. And once the words of the boss are gone, what does it matter? They are still using their stats against the boss'.

You're placing value on what the player is able to do as a result of support convos (he has stronger units), but insisting that what he is able to do as a result of Nino's convo is irrelevant. You are arguing that Nino's action is irrelevant specifically because there is a convo (or cutscene, whatever word you want to use) triggered by it in addition to the concrete, gameplay benefits that the player receives. The exact same holds true for supports, yet in that case, "I don't tie the convos to the stat-boost." Then why do you tie the convo to the benefits when it comes to Nino in BBD? I don't see how it's consistent.

Bias affects what ruleset is used, sure. I never claimed that determining what we allow units to receive credit from was a completely unbiased process. Note how I said (maybe not in this topic) that there is a democratic process involved in determining what is and is not a creditable contribution to S-ranking. I do, however, claim that what we do from that point on is unbiased. Comparing units based on their valid contributions towards S-ranking HHM. Or at least that we try. I mean, you can't always guarantee unbiasedness when humans are involved. If nobody likes unit A, but unit A was randomly placed a bit too low because people don't really know how to use unit A, then unit A's tier list position is unbiased. That's a result of circumstances. If somebody comes along and actually analyzes unit A's capabilities properly and then argues for it, unit A should then rise to an unbiased position.

That's a fair distinction between positions and rules; I don't necessarily agree that everyone here really tries to be unbiased even when arguing under their own standards, but that's not relevant so w/e. But the thing here is that, there's a point at which determining the rules and determining the positions that result from those rules are no longer two separate actions. If you take the ability to create rules far enough, it is entirely possible for people to justify almost any position on a list using rulesets designed for that purpose.

I think it's pretty clear that that's at least partially what is going on here. People would rather change the rules or add a new one than accept an argument which is valid under the pre-existing rules. You can channel the bias into a movement to amend the rules in order to invalidate the disliked argument, and then claim that the argument is now objectively invalid, but that simply changes the form which the bias takes. It still exists and clearly influences the positions of the list.

As indicated earlier, a tier list has to define what the player's goals are and what he is working to achieve, since discussion needs a baseline for comparison. The question of what's a "unit" and what isn't is a secondary "rule" of this type, since the matter really can not be settled objectively. However, further rules beyond these are no longer necessary. What is the purpose of a rule which stipulates that all action-commands are relevant, except Talk? If it is not created simply to justify a particular unit's placement or rule out certain arguments, then why does it exist?

Which has what to do with me wanting to know the motivations (or ability to recognize reality) of GE?

It has nothing to do it. I misread your statement there and thought you were saying something else; after realizing this, I tried to edit the post, but I guess I was not fast enough.

Edited March 28, 2010 by CATS

[Life]

You can easily keep her out of Sonia's Bolting range, she'll just have to stay back once the group charges Sonia's position (or chug a pure water as Ether pointed out, I guess). Anyways, you say forced doesn't mean optimal, but you seem to think Nino could be optimal during her forced chapter. What determines if a character is optimal or not during a forced chapter?

To me, optimal is "do I want to play this character in this chapter". If I recall correctly, there are a lot of level ~16 unpromoted enemies (most of which are melee) and then a bunch of like level ~6 promos but I can't remember for a fact. If someone could correct me, most appreciated.

Now forget the fact that Nino is forced for a second. Nino would be much better in 28x than 28 because she can snipe with Thunder/Elfire at enemies with low Res. Most of the enemies around Ursula in 28 are magic based and Nino also has to get over to Jaffar. But she has no such obligations or restrictions in 28x. You know those Wyvern Lords that sit on the perimeter of the map? Lure one of them, take out about 2/3 of its HP and let Nino mop up the kill. We need her for her low level in order to add more to the Exp rank.

[CATS]

To me, optimal is "do I want to play this character in this chapter". If I recall correctly, there are a lot of level ~16 unpromoted enemies (most of which are melee) and then a bunch of like level ~6 promos but I can't remember for a fact. If someone could correct me, most appreciated.

Now forget the fact that Nino is forced for a second. Nino would be much better in 28x than 28 because she can snipe with Thunder/Elfire at enemies with low Res. Most of the enemies around Ursula in 28 are magic based and Nino also has to get over to Jaffar. But she has no such obligations or restrictions in 28x. You know those Wyvern Lords that sit on the perimeter of the map? Lure one of them, take out about 2/3 of its HP and let Nino mop up the kill. We need her for her low level in order to add more to the Exp rank.

Indeed, you could say Nino performs better in 28x than in 28. I don't really see how that affects the question of whether or not the player would want to use her in those chapters, though. Even though she is worse in 28 than in 28x, the player would still want to use her there assuming that there is no opportunity cost for her deployment.

As I see it, there are two approaches you could take here. You could say that forced = optimal, which seems to have been rejected. Or you could pretend that the unit consumes a deployment slot for purposes of comparison. I don't really see a third option, though if there is one, point it out.

[Life]

Indeed, you could say Nino performs better in 28x than in 28. I don't really see how that affects the question of whether or not the player would want to use her in those chapters, though. Even though she is worse in 28 than in 28x, the player would still want to use her there assuming that there is no opportunity cost for her deployment.

As I see it, there are two approaches you could take here. You could say that forced = optimal, which seems to have been rejected. Or you could pretend that the unit consumes a deployment slot for purposes of comparison. I don't really see a third option, though if there is one, point it out.

I chose option 3.

3. Forced doesn't mean optimal and we penalize a forced unit if they aren't optimal in that forced chapter or reward them for being optimal.

I know that this rule negates Nino in 28 (her terrible performance can be argued to negate her opening the way to 28x if you wanted to argue that) but the person who would really suffer is Karel/Harken in Kenneth's map. By the time one of them appears, we're already at the throne room. We're wasting turns just to recruit this unit who can't do anything in this chapter by this point.

[nflchamp]

nfl:

It's true that Hector seizing isn't really a choice (well, I guess it is, you could choose to just never progress with the game, but w/e). Nino--28x, however, is very obviously a choice. It is an optional chapter caused by an optional action.

However, if I'm forced to recruit all characters by our own rules, 28x stops being optional and is a guarantee. Hence the assumption of recruiting all characters.

That's true. I still don't really see why it matters, though, and it still seems to lead to some unsavory conclusions. If we can discard an action simply by stipulating that the player is forced to do it, then could we not discard anything with such rules? A rule could be made that the player is assumed to steal the silver card; as a result of your logic here, Matthew would no longer receive credit for stealing it, correct? The obvious response is that such rules won't be made for other actions, but that would bring to light the question of why a rule of this nature is made for Nino, but not for anyone else.

If we were to make some ridiculous rule that forced us to steal the silver card, then no, Mathew wouldn't get credit for stealing it. And you are obviously correct about such a rule never being made. However, your idea that a rule is being made simply to keep Nino down is silly. Forcing all characters to be recruited stops recruitment arguments altogether as no one can get credit for something we have to do. Just because Nino can't get credit for 28x because of it does not mean that such a rule is put in place to keep her from moving up.

[CATS]

I chose option 3.

3. Forced doesn't mean optimal and we penalize a forced unit if they aren't optimal in that forced chapter or reward them for being optimal.

I know that this rule negates Nino in 28 (her terrible performance can be argued to negate her opening the way to 28x if you wanted to argue that) but the person who would really suffer is Karel/Harken in Kenneth's map. By the time one of them appears, we're already at the throne room. We're wasting turns just to recruit this unit who can't do anything in this chapter by this point.

Yes, you could have it so that forced chapters can swing either way. The question is, how do you determine whether a character is optimal or not on a forced chapter? I'm not really seeing what the standard is there.

However, if I'm forced to recruit all characters by our own rules, 28x stops being optional and is a guarantee. Hence the assumption of recruiting all characters.

That's one way of putting it, I suppose. That simply feels like ignoring or changing the reality of the game, though. Similar to how the gross system of utility assumes that if the unit being compared is not deployed, no one else will go in that unit's spot, and you'll have an empty slot instead. It's not how the game actually works, and I see no reason for trying to do it.

If we were to make some ridiculous rule that forced us to steal the silver card, then no, Mathew wouldn't get credit for stealing it. And you are obviously correct about such a rule never being made. However, your idea that a rule is being made simply to keep Nino down is silly. Forcing all characters to be recruited stops recruitment arguments altogether as no one can get credit for something we have to do. Just because Nino can't get credit for 28x because of it does not mean that such a rule is put in place to keep her from moving up.

That's the thing; you think a such a rule about the silver card would be "ridiculous," but essentially it is the same as your proposed rule which keeps Nino in low tier. It simply applies to a different action and a different unit.

As you said, forcing all characters to be recruited stops recruitment arguments altogether, and indeed this seems to be the entire point of your proposal. It is the same as simply making a rule that says "Recruitment arguments are invalid and will be ignored," isn't it? As for "it does not mean that such a rule is put in place to keep her from moving up," then such a rule is put in place to rule out the argument which could move her up. However you want to word it, it's pretty much the same thing.

[nflchamp]

That's one way of putting it, I suppose. That simply feels like ignoring or changing the reality of the game, though. Similar to how the gross system of utility assumes that if the unit being compared is not deployed, no one else will go in that unit's spot, and you'll have an empty slot instead. It's not how the game actually works, and I see no reason for trying to do it.

Yes, it is true that the game does not force us to recruit all characters. However, we must recruit characters in order to tier them, so it isn't unreasonable to say that all characters have to be recruited.

That's the thing; you think a such a rule about the silver card would be "ridiculous," but essentially it is the same as your proposed rule which keeps Nino in low tier. It simply applies to a different action and a different unit.

As you said, forcing all characters to be recruited stops recruitment arguments altogether, and indeed this seems to be the entire point of your proposal. It is the same as simply making a rule that says "Recruitment arguments are invalid and will be ignored," isn't it? As for "it does not mean that such a rule is put in place to keep her from moving up," then such a rule is put in place to rule out the argument which could move her up. However you want to word it, it's pretty much the same thing.

Of course I think a rule about the silver card is ridiculous; it has no reasoning and would simply exists to sandbag Mathew. However, a rule that forces us to recruit all characters exists for a reason completely separate from the characters. That is "Mathew > Guy because Mathew recruits Guy" doesn't seem like an accurate representation of what the characters can do and needs to be gotten rid of. If Nino gets screwed over by it then Nino gets screwed over by it. Too bad for her.

As you can see, we have to perfectly good sets of rules and the difference in whether or not Nino gets credit for 28x boils down to board opinion on recruitment arguments.

[CATS]

Yes, it is true that the game does not force us to recruit all characters. However, we must recruit characters in order to tier them, so it isn't unreasonable to say that all characters have to be recruited.

You don't have to assume that all characters are recruited on every run. You only have to assume that the unit in question is recruited. For example, in an FE6 efficiency list, of course when tiering Treck you have to assume he's recruited. However, when tiering Roy or w/e, you don't necessarily have to assume that Treck is recruited.

Of course I think a rule about the silver card is ridiculous; it has no reasoning and would simply exists to sandbag Mathew. However, a rule that forces us to recruit all characters exists for a reason completely separate from the characters. That is "Mathew > Guy because Mathew recruits Guy" doesn't seem like an accurate representation of what the characters can do and needs to be gotten rid of. If Nino gets screwed over by it then Nino gets screwed over by it. Too bad for her.

So if this logic were used against Matthew, it would not be "ridiculous" and wouldn't "have no reasoning" despite the fact that it is using the exact same principles which you are using against Nino here? You say that it would simply exist to sandbag Matthew, but if that's the case, then I don't see how your proposed rule wouldn't exist simply to sandbag Nino.

As you can see, we have to perfectly good sets of rules and the difference in whether or not Nino gets credit for 28x boils down to board opinion on recruitment arguments.

Sure. If you had a community of people who happened to have a strong negative opinion of stealing arguments, would it be acceptable for that community to declare "The player is forced to steal everything that he possibly can on each playthrough" and place Matthew in low tier as a result?

[Life]

As wonderful as arguing about Nino is (slightly more enjoyable than vomiting yesterday's lunch and tonight's alcohol into the garbage), I want to go back to the middle tiers. There are so many problems with one unit being better than another but worse than a third unit even though it's not reflected on the list.

Let's look at all of the Upper and Lower Mid characters. Something here isn't right and most of this comes from Chief's points about Bartre vs. Dorcas.

-Upper Mid-

Pent

Lucius

Harken

Geitz

Dorcas

Legault

Fiora

Canas

Hawkeye

-Lower Mid-

Heath

Athos

Lyn

Isadora

Jaffar

Bartre

Pent - Right spot for him. What keeps him out of High for me is the giant lack of availability and then being tied down with a Louise support. IcexLight isn't horrible... But Louise is which makes it problematic. Auto A is nice, though. Everything else about him is great and the A staves is just the icing on the cake.

Lucius - His defense is the problem. Glass Cannon doesn't even begin to describe him, it's more like Straw Bazooka. Fantastic offense, horrible durability, C staves on promotion but won't promote until the 3rd or 4th Guiding Ring... Can he move down? Possibly.

Harken - If we penalize Karel for taking away Harken and the Brave Sword, it stands to reason that we should penalize Harken from taking away Karel and the Wo Dao. Aside from that and his late availability, he really doesn't have any problems as the Isadora support he has is fast and both can be used in the lategame.

Dorcas - Discussed in this topic and the previous one but I'll recap. As much as Chief would hate to admit it, he's probably the second best offensive weapon you have in the early game thanks to the LHM bonus levels. But once you get past those first couple of levels, his speed and defense problems start to appear while Bartre grows stronger than him. My own opinion of him is that his early game is much better than Chief would give him credit for and his lategame is much worse than Mori would give him credit for.

Geitz - If God was ugly as sin, there's a pretty good chance he'd look like this guy. Geitz doesn't come as late as Pent or Harken but not as early as Fiora or Canas (who are both below him, go figure). But then again, he has a free promotion, gets all entitled access to the Brave Bow and probably any Killer Bows you buy from the Secret Shop in 20. Comes as a low level prepromote with HHM inflated bases and just generally destroys stuff. Dorcas above him is something I don't agree with.

Legault - Thieving utility and if we promote a thief, he's probably going to be the guy who gets the Fell Contract. Even though Inui on SF put forth a rather ludicrous way to gain a stupidly high amount of Exp in 32x which involves promoting Legault, I have to admit that if we can get away with using the Fell Contract, it seems like a good way to get a leg up on the Exp requirement as long as we don't mess up Tactics. Aside from that, he's a thief.

Fiora - She could probably stand to move up. She's the second flier and since fliers are important in this game, she has a rather important role. Is there a tier difference between her and Flo? I say no but I like my Peg Knights in general.

Canas - Move up. I can toss him the Body Ring (his only real competition for this thing is Isadora IIRC) and he now loses 3 AS when sniping late game bosses like Denning or Sonia with Luna. Thor's Ire will knock his Crit up to ~35. The guy doesn't need to be promoted to do significant damage in the late game.

Hawkeye - He'll probably end up moving to the bottom of Upper Mid as nobody's really opposed it yet. I personally think that Hawkeye is the stepping stone between "slightly good" and "mediocre" as he misses out on half the game, is a strain on the Exp rank, is fantastic in his joining chapter and Genesis right afterward and then just cruises along for the rest of the game.

Heath - Honestly, I'm sick and tired of dealing with Heath now. If we recruit Farina, she gets the 3rd Elysian Whip because it's a waste of 20k otherwise. If we don't, there's really no guarantee that Heath will promote thanks to Vaida doing a very similar job as him (and she's actually not that bad at it) and the fact that he can't get played in 23 thanks to it being a FoW chapter while he's underleveled. I'm personally biased against him but I know where my limits are. He could possibly move down but he does have flying utility.

Athos - I personally put Athos on the list (as in argued him to this spot and nobody's touched it since) with the intent of putting him in striking range of the desert man. That being said, Athos has very small negatives that outweigh his very small positive IMO. He is your Tactics rank in Light with his two Prf tomes that do stupidly high damage but hurts the Exp rank of the last chapter by gaining 0 for any work he does. You need 3000 Exp in Light (30 levels in 10 turns, basically) and not only does Athos contribute nothing to that rank, but he in fact takes away from it by hurting any possible Exp gain by any other of your units. If we count Marcus' early game as a negative towards Exp when he gains 4 for a kill versus Eliwood who gains 30, then what does that say about Greybeard here?

Lyn - I've been arguing for this girl to go up since the beginning of time and nobody's done anything about it. She has her own Prf weapon that costs nothing and has 45 uses that can get double the uses if you spend 600 Gold on a Hammerne use. She's given access to an Angelic Robe in her mode which she can use to nullify her durability issues without hurting the HHM Funds rank. She's forced in certain chapters which is better than knocking out a better unit. And she gets a Prf weapon at the end of the game so as long as she has more than 37 HP, she can do some hurt to the Dragon. Obviously I'm slightly passionate about moving her up the list and I know what her faults are but she just gets spat on way too much.

Isadora - Rather decent with pretty big problems and pretty nice returns if you can get past those problems. Her Con is probably the biggest problem of all as it always sits at a paltry 6. She's probably the other contestant for the Body Ring and she uses it just as well as Canas does, believe it or not. 8 Def and 6 Res isn't exactly wonderful but a 40 +4 support with Harken gives her 15 Avo, 1 Def and 15 Crit, which helps out her durability and gives Harken a nice amount of power with the extra Crit. She's not bad at being a Paladin, she's just mediocre when compared to the other 4 horse riders.

Bartre - Must I recap him? He gets doubled in his early game by a couple of enemies, has a medium speed support with... *gasp* Dorcas which give 5 Avo when it's a C (realistically won't be higher than a C) and doesn't have great Hit, not to mention terrible durability throughout his adult life. If you spend some time with him for a while, he'll probably end up better than Dorcas but he suffer from a disease called 'willnotpromoteitis' in which Raven and Guy snag the first 2 Hero Crests and the third one isn't guaranteed to be used for the sake of Funds.

Jaffar - I've said it once and I'll say it again. Jaffar is a combat unit in the same sense that ordering combo number 4 at a KFC means that you are dining at a 4* restaurant. Assassins have always seemed like a gimmick class to me and Jaffar is really no exception. He gets an Exp boost when he hits Silencer but it doesn't happen that often and he's only got 7 levels to capitalize on it so it just seems all for naught. He could stand to move down but I'm not going to push hard (or push at all for that matter) on the issue.

And that's where we stand. Something is off here and I can't figure out what it is. As much as I think that Canas and Fiora should move up, where can they go? Harken and Pent are better units than them (Harken for combat prowess and lack of needing a promo item while Pent has staff utility and is arguably the best magic user in the game) and only suffer because of the lack of availability. It's just so convoluted in my mind.

[Florete]

(slightly more enjoyable than vomiting yesterday's lunch and tonight's alcohol into the garbage)

I dunno man, that's pretty popular these days.

Lucius - His defense is the problem. Glass Cannon doesn't even begin to describe him, it's more like Straw Bazooka. Fantastic offense, horrible durability, C staves on promotion but won't promote until the 3rd or 4th Guiding Ring... Can he move down? Possibly.

@Bold: I've got to say, I don't really like these kinds of arguments. It makes it sound like the first Guiding Ring has some sort of special quality to it, which obviously isn't true. And how many magic users do we plan on using anyway? I would think the strict competition alone would advise us not to use more than 3 at all.

Otherwise, I think it's best to compare units as if both got the same promotion item. Why does Erk get a Guiding Ring over Lucius? Because he's higher on the list? We all know the circular logic behind that one, right? Maybe he could go down but I don't think this is the right reasoning.

Legault - Thieving utility and if we promote a thief, he's probably going to be the guy who gets the Fell Contract. Even though Inui on SF put forth a rather ludicrous way to gain a stupidly high amount of Exp in 32x which involves promoting Legault, I have to admit that if we can get away with using the Fell Contract, it seems like a good way to get a leg up on the Exp requirement as long as we don't mess up Tactics. Aside from that, he's a thief.

Legault is really hard to tier. I care not where he goes as long as he stays at least a tier under Matthew.

Fiora - She could probably stand to move up. She's the second flier and since fliers are important in this game, she has a rather important role. Is there a tier difference between her and Flo? I say no but I like my Peg Knights in general.

I definitely see a tier difference between these sisters. Fiora comes at level 7 in The Dread Isle, Florina could possibly be even higher when she joins 4 chapters earlier (I usually have Florina at 8-9 in ranked LHM runs). If I assume Florina can be lv 11 when Fiora joins, stat differences are as follows:

Florina wins - 2 HP, 1 Str, 1 Skl, 1.5 Spd, 6 Lck, .5 Res.

Fiora wins - .5 Def

Or if Florina has managed a B with Lyn already, Fiora wins nothing and Florina's offensive wins just go higher (B Lyn is +2 atk, +1 Def, +10 Hit, +10 crit, +5 Dodge).

And then growths:

Florina wins - 5% Str, 5% Spd, 20% Lck.

Fiora wins - 10% Hp, 10% Skl, 5% Def, 15% Res.

Make of that what you will, but Florina will pretty much always be the superior on offense while Fiora might pass her up in Def. Add the relatively good possibility of Florina getting LM's Angelic Robe and I don't think Fiora stands a chance at all. The only real advantage is slightly better Magic tanking in Genesis and Cog of Destiny, but Pure Water Florina should be just as good, if she even needs it.

It is worth noting that Fiora has 1 more Con, but I don't see that making any kind of significant difference.

Then again, I also think Florina is too low. I easily see her > Eliwood and likely > Erk and Guy. I showed in my debate with Inui that she actually gives Guy a run for his money in durability after promotion, and she obviously beats him in the mobility/utility department and likely doesn't lose by much in offense.

Canas - Move up. I can toss him the Body Ring (his only real competition for this thing is Isadora IIRC) and he now loses 3 AS when sniping late game bosses like Denning or Sonia with Luna. Thor's Ire will knock his Crit up to ~35. The guy doesn't need to be promoted to do significant damage in the late game.

@Body Ring: Pegs? They'd love it.

Hawkeye - He'll probably end up moving to the bottom of Upper Mid as nobody's really opposed it yet. I personally think that Hawkeye is the stepping stone between "slightly good" and "mediocre" as he misses out on half the game, is a strain on the Exp rank, is fantastic in his joining chapter and Genesis right afterward and then just cruises along for the rest of the game.

Well, he's already there on this list, but I agree.

Heath - Honestly, I'm sick and tired of dealing with Heath now. If we recruit Farina, she gets the 3rd Elysian Whip because it's a waste of 20k otherwise. If we don't, there's really no guarantee that Heath will promote thanks to Vaida doing a very similar job as him (and she's actually not that bad at it) and the fact that he can't get played in 23 thanks to it being a FoW chapter while he's underleveled. I'm personally biased against him but I know where my limits are. He could possibly move down but he does have flying utility.

Vaida doing a similar job? Same for the pegs. The only difference in these classes is sprites and caps. Why does this count against him but not the pegs? Plus, he has 15 promoted Aid to Vaida's 8. That's nearly double. That is pretty good.

Also, I don't see why he can't be deployed in Living Legend. He can probably have gotten a level in Kinship's Bond, though I haven't actually looked at his performance in either map so I don't know for sure.

Athos - I personally put Athos on the list (as in argued him to this spot and nobody's touched it since) with the intent of putting him in striking range of the desert man. That being said, Athos has very small negatives that outweigh his very small positive IMO. He is your Tactics rank in Light with his two Prf tomes that do stupidly high damage but hurts the Exp rank of the last chapter by gaining 0 for any work he does. You need 3000 Exp in Light (30 levels in 10 turns, basically) and not only does Athos contribute nothing to that rank, but he in fact takes away from it by hurting any possible Exp gain by any other of your units. If we count Marcus' early game as a negative towards Exp when he gains 4 for a kill versus Eliwood who gains 30, then what does that say about Greybeard here?

I dunno. I guess it should count against him, but I'd think you'd have the Experience rank mostly settled by now, so using Athos wouldn't be much of an issue. Also, I'm pretty sure you already get 0 Exp from the Fire Dragon if that helps his case.

Lyn - I've been arguing for this girl to go up since the beginning of time and nobody's done anything about it. She has her own Prf weapon that costs nothing and has 45 uses that can get double the uses if you spend 600 Gold on a Hammerne use. She's given access to an Angelic Robe in her mode which she can use to nullify her durability issues without hurting the HHM Funds rank. She's forced in certain chapters which is better than knocking out a better unit. And she gets a Prf weapon at the end of the game so as long as she has more than 37 HP, she can do some hurt to the Dragon. Obviously I'm slightly passionate about moving her up the list and I know what her faults are but she just gets spat on way too much.

I agree. I think Lower Mid is too low for the girl.

Jaffar - I've said it once and I'll say it again. Jaffar is a combat unit in the same sense that ordering combo number 4 at a KFC means that you are dining at a 4* restaurant. Assassins have always seemed like a gimmick class to me and Jaffar is really no exception. He gets an Exp boost when he hits Silencer but it doesn't happen that often and he's only got 7 levels to capitalize on it so it just seems all for naught. He could stand to move down but I'm not going to push hard (or push at all for that matter) on the issue.

I'd like to say he should go down, but looking at those below him...I don't know who to argue > him.

Also, Ima pull an Inui now.

*Co-signs all of Narga's and nflchamp's posts*

Edited March 29, 2010 by Red Fox of Fire

[nflchamp]

You don't have to assume that all characters are recruited on every run. You only have to assume that the unit in question is recruited. For example, in an FE6 efficiency list, of course when tiering Treck you have to assume he's recruited. However, when tiering Roy or w/e, you don't necessarily have to assume that Treck is recruited.

The unit we recruit has to compete against every other character who may or may not be in play. Just because they aren't the unit being used doesn't mean they don't factor into the comparison.

So if this logic were used against Matthew, it would not be "ridiculous" and wouldn't "have no reasoning" despite the fact that it is using the exact same principles which you are using against Nino here? You say that it would simply exist to sandbag Matthew, but if that's the case, then I don't see how your proposed rule wouldn't exist simply to sandbag Nino.

It doesn't exist simply to sandbag Nino because it affects everyone who recruits someone else. I mean, seriously, if recruitment arguments were allowed, Priscilla would be in her own tier three tiers above top because she recruits Raven and gets all of his contributions (which, of course, includes all of Lucius' contributions) on top of her own. Well, I guess Hector would compete with her considering all the people he can recruit. But I digress; the point is, just because it hurts Nino doesn't mean it simply exists to do so. It's there to stop ridiculous looking top tiers from happening that don't reflect what the characters do at all (but rather what the characters and everyone they recruit do). Nino just happens to get caught up in it.

Sure. If you had a community of people who happened to have a strong negative opinion of stealing arguments, would it be acceptable for that community to declare "The player is forced to steal everything that he possibly can on each playthrough" and place Matthew in low tier as a result?

If a community believes that stealing arguments gave an improper view of how characters contribute, then yes they could do so and Mathew would drop like a rock. Sucks for Mathew, doesn't really matter. (Note: I still think the argument would be ridiculous because I highly doubt you could even make the argument without contradicting yourself, but it doesn't mean the rule can't be there.) The opinion of the community is going to play a factor somewhere. It isn't like you can claim that you aren't trying to impose you're opinion here, after all.

Either way, I'm done. It wasn't like I actually thought I'd convince you that this was the right way of doing things. I really only cared because GE was saying that his argument must be implemented because it's logical and you seemed to jump on board. I do hope you're convinced that there are other logical arguments out there that can and will be implemented. It stinks to hold the viewpoint that isn't generally accepted, but that's life.

[CATS]

The unit we recruit has to compete against every other character who may or may not be in play. Just because they aren't the unit being used doesn't mean they don't factor into the comparison.

Yes, I guess you could still compare someone to Treck in order to show how their stats stack up even if he's not recruited. That's not the basis of the argument, though. You seemed to be arguing that we have to assume all units are recruited on each playthrough in order to do a tier list (correct me if I'm wrong). I don't think that's the case; I don't see any reason to assume that Karla is recruited when you're tiering Geitz.

It doesn't exist simply to sandbag Nino because it affects everyone who recruits someone else. I mean, seriously, if recruitment arguments were allowed, Priscilla would be in her own tier three tiers above top because she recruits Raven and gets all of his contributions (which, of course, includes all of Lucius' contributions) on top of her own. Well, I guess Hector would compete with her considering all the people he can recruit. But I digress; the point is, just because it hurts Nino doesn't mean it simply exists to do so. It's there to stop ridiculous looking top tiers from happening that don't reflect what the characters do at all (but rather what the characters and everyone they recruit do). Nino just happens to get caught up in it.

Fair enough.

If a community believes that stealing arguments gave an improper view of how characters contribute, then yes they could do so and Mathew would drop like a rock. Sucks for Mathew, doesn't really matter. (Note: I still think the argument would be ridiculous because I highly doubt you could even make the argument without contradicting yourself, but it doesn't mean the rule can't be there.) The opinion of the community is going to play a factor somewhere. It isn't like you can claim that you aren't trying to impose you're opinion here, after all.

As far as Nino's placement is concerned, no, I'm really not trying to impose my opinion. I won't deny that I'm trying to impose my opinion about, as you said, the fact that the opinion of the community is going to play a factor somewhere. Of course its influence cannot be entirely removed; I still don't think it should have such a strong influence as this. But at least you recognize what is really going on here (that a community can use "rules" to outlaw certain arguments and alter placements based on nothing more than their personal opinions of said material), so w/e.

Either way, I'm done. It wasn't like I actually thought I'd convince you that this was the right way of doing things. I really only cared because GE was saying that his argument must be implemented because it's logical and you seemed to jump on board. I do hope you're convinced that there are other logical arguments out there that can and will be implemented. It stinks to hold the viewpoint that isn't generally accepted, but that's life.

Yep. I'm well aware of the fact that I'm not going to make any progress here, but it's not like that's anything new for me, either. Like I said earlier: Oh well, at least I tried.

[Narga_Rocks]

Are we done now? Please please say we can get back to tiering. Please?

(and by that, I mean I'm strongly considering moving every further post on the recruitment args subject to the other topic)

[Dat Nick]

I'm not trying to cause a huge shitstorm here, but CATS, on this list you probably would have to recruit most if not everybody, Survival Rank and all.

anyway holy fuck I'm glad that's over, and it was settled much better than Tyrant would have done it

anyway imma go through the captain's wall of text

Lucius - His defense is the problem. Glass Cannon doesn't even begin to describe him, it's more like Straw Bazooka. Fantastic offense, horrible durability, C staves on promotion but won't promote until the 3rd or 4th Guiding Ring... Can he move down? Possibly.

I think it's possible too. Individual enemies aren't that big a deal in this game so durability matters a lot more than offense.

Harken - If we penalize Karel for taking away Harken and the Brave Sword, it stands to reason that we should penalize Harken from taking away Karel and the Wo Dao. Aside from that and his late availability, he really doesn't have any problems as the Isadora support he has is fast and both can be used in the lategame.

He's already being penalized for it. Just nobody cares a whole lot because neither Karel or the Wo Dao are worth very much.

Dorcas - Discussed in this topic and the previous one but I'll recap. As much as Chief would hate to admit it, he's probably the second best offensive weapon you have in the early game thanks to the LHM bonus levels. But once you get past those first couple of levels, his speed and defense problems start to appear while Bartre grows stronger than him. My own opinion of him is that his early game is much better than Chief would give him credit for and his lategame is much worse than Mori would give him credit for.

Maybe I'm just being nitpicky here, but even though I agreed on IM that there probably isn't a tier gap between Dork Ass and Barf Tray, but Bartre's speed/def issues earlygame are just as bad as Dorcas's (actually, worse, he risks doubles on some thing, Dorcas gets doubled by nothing, okay maybe swordies but who cares bartre sucks against them too)

7-8 Dorcas coming out of LM? It takes Bartre until 11-12 to tie 7 Dorcas's spd. Yes, defense he has pretty easily, but not by much (3-ish points at 11-12 vs 7/8 Dorcas, and Dorcas will most certainly have gained more levels by then, higher than 11-12 too) Has Dorcas's earlygame lead been exaggerated for a long time? Yes. Is Bartre better on promotion and lategame? Yes. Does this happen in a "couple levels"? Not at all. I absolutely agree the gap between them can close, but let's not exaggerate Bartre's advantages either: They take a long time to show.

Geitz - If God was ugly as sin, there's a pretty good chance he'd look like this guy. Geitz doesn't come as late as Pent or Harken but not as early as Fiora or Canas (who are both below him, go figure). But then again, he has a free promotion, gets all entitled access to the Brave Bow and probably any Killer Bows you buy from the Secret Shop in 20. Comes as a low level prepromote with HHM inflated bases and just generally destroys stuff. Dorcas above him is something I don't agree with.

Earlygame utility vs being a solid (albet outclassed) unit lategame. I don't have an opinion.

Fiora - She could probably stand to move up. She's the second flier and since fliers are important in this game, she has a rather important role. Is there a tier difference between her and Flo? I say no but I like my Peg Knights in general.

I disagree. 5 turning 17x alone is more than enough flier utility for a tier gap.

Canas - Move up. I can toss him the Body Ring (his only real competition for this thing is Isadora IIRC) and he now loses 3 AS when sniping late game bosses like Denning or Sonia with Luna. Thor's Ire will knock his Crit up to ~35. The guy doesn't need to be promoted to do significant damage in the late game.

Move up to where, exactly? Above Fiora at worst, I can agree with (it's better combat vs mov/flier utility, i'm leaning towards the former). Red Fox pointed out the thing with the Guiding Ring already, but I don't think it's a massive dent to the argument since Canas does fine without it, so w/e.

Heath - Honestly, I'm sick and tired of dealing with Heath now. If we recruit Farina, she gets the 3rd Elysian Whip because it's a waste of 20k otherwise. If we don't, there's really no guarantee that Heath will promote thanks to Vaida doing a very similar job as him (and she's actually not that bad at it) and the fact that he can't get played in 23 thanks to it being a FoW chapter while he's underleveled. I'm personally biased against him but I know where my limits are. He could possibly move down but he does have flying utility.

To add on to what Red Fox said, why does Vaida existing make Heath any worse? Florina existing doesn't make Fiora any worse. Dorcas existing doesn't make Bartre any worse. Rebecca existing doesn't make Wil any worse. If Heath drops, it should be because his performance can't recover fast enough, not because he's inferior to Vaida (which the tier list already acknowledges)

Hawkeye - He'll probably end up moving to the bottom of Upper Mid as nobody's really opposed it yet. I personally think that Hawkeye is the stepping stone between "slightly good" and "mediocre" as he misses out on half the game, is a strain on the Exp rank, is fantastic in his joining chapter and Genesis right afterward and then just cruises along for the rest of the game.

Does he have easy access to Killer Axes? If so, higher's possible.

Lyn - I've been arguing for this girl to go up since the beginning of time and nobody's done anything about it. She has her own Prf weapon that costs nothing and has 45 uses that can get double the uses if you spend 600 Gold on a Hammerne use. She's given access to an Angelic Robe in her mode which she can use to nullify her durability issues without hurting the HHM Funds rank. She's forced in certain chapters which is better than knocking out a better unit. And she gets a Prf weapon at the end of the game so as long as she has more than 37 HP, she can do some hurt to the Dragon. Obviously I'm slightly passionate about moving her up the list and I know what her faults are but she just gets spat on way too much.

@ Bold: Huh? Using the statups gets you a lower rank gem. So yes, it does hurt HHM funds rank. As for the Sol Katti, it sucks, that thing is WAY too heavy to be viable at all, so I don't think it counts much for her.

Bartre - Must I recap him? He gets doubled in his early game by a couple of enemies, has a medium speed support with... *gasp* Dorcas which give 5 Avo when it's a C (realistically won't be higher than a C) and doesn't have great Hit, not to mention terrible durability throughout his adult life. If you spend some time with him for a while, he'll probably end up better than Dorcas but he suffer from a disease called 'willnotpromoteitis' in which Raven and Guy snag the first 2 Hero Crests and the third one isn't guaranteed to be used for the sake of Funds.

Then this actually punches a pretty major hole in the Bartre up movement; since Bartre only resembles "good" once he promotes. And to be frank, even that takes a while.

Jaffar - I've said it once and I'll say it again. Jaffar is a combat unit in the same sense that ordering combo number 4 at a KFC means that you are dining at a 4* restaurant. Assassins have always seemed like a gimmick class to me and Jaffar is really no exception. He gets an Exp boost when he hits Silencer but it doesn't happen that often and he's only got 7 levels to capitalize on it so it just seems all for naught. He could stand to move down but I'm not going to push hard (or push at all for that matter) on the issue.

Being an Assassin sucks and all but Jaffar actually has decent stats for one; compare him to Geitz, for instance. Similar str and hp/def figures. Sure, Geitz is prolly still better because of availability and 2-range, but that's why Geitz is a tier up. Hell, Lyn needs to be something silly like 20/11 just to be on the same page as him. Sure, he's not the best combat unit you can pick from but he's a long way off from shit.

[Life]

I disagree. 5 turning 17x alone is more than enough flier utility for a tier gap.

You have to remember that I only 5 turned 17x (16x for me) in ENM and I've yet to try it for EHM, never mind HHM. HHM only demands 10 turns too so don't look at my own results in that chapter.

Move up to where, exactly? Above Fiora at worst, I can agree with (it's better combat vs mov/flier utility, i'm leaning towards the former). Red Fox pointed out the thing with the Guiding Ring already, but I don't think it's a massive dent to the argument since Canas does fine without it, so w/e.

Going back to Fox's comment, my whole thing with the Guiding Ring is that Erk and Serra will get the first two unless you decided to deliberately shaft Erk. I don't have to explain why Serra gets a Guiding Ring and Erk wants it to start healing, which lets him draw Exp from the infinite staff pool. It's not circular logic to say that Lucius and Canas fight for the 3rd or 4th Guiding Ring because chances are, they won't get either of the first two.

To add on to what Red Fox said, why does Vaida existing make Heath any worse? Florina existing doesn't make Fiora any worse. Dorcas existing doesn't make Bartre any worse. Rebecca existing doesn't make Wil any worse. If Heath drops, it should be because his performance can't recover fast enough, not because he's inferior to Vaida (which the tier list already acknowledges)

In case none of you realized, I hate Heath. I hate talking about him, I hate arguing him, I hate using him. If you guys come to a consensus on his position, I'll go along with it. If I think he's too high, I'll speak up but I won't push for him lower (goes under "hate arguing him"). If he's too low, good.

Does he have easy access to Killer Axes? If so, higher's possible.

The Secret Shop in Dragon's Gate (bottom right) sells Killer Axes. I've gotten to it by Turn 10 in ENM so I figure that 16 turns in HHM isn't that much of a stretch.

@ Bold: Huh? Using the statups gets you a lower rank gem. So yes, it does hurt HHM funds rank. As for the Sol Katti, it sucks, that thing is WAY too heavy to be viable at all, so I don't think it counts much for her.

What are you talking about? Lyn has access to the LHM Angelic Robe which has no impact on the HHM Funds rank. She's not the only one who wants it, per say, but she's for sure a viable candidate thanks to her low Def and HP.

EDIT: Missed the "gem rank" thing. You can use at least 1 big cost item (Fox claims both Energy Ring and Angelic Robe) and still end up with the White Gem.

Then this actually punches a pretty major hole in the Bartre up movement; since Bartre only resembles "good" once he promotes. And to be frank, even that takes a while.

I don't know how to deal with Bartre. We're probably going to have to move Dorcas down but that's a problem in itself because whom below him is he worse than?

Being an Assassin sucks and all but Jaffar actually has decent stats for one; compare him to Geitz, for instance. Similar str and hp/def figures. Sure, Geitz is prolly still better because of availability and 2-range, but that's why Geitz is a tier up. Hell, Lyn needs to be something silly like 20/11 just to be on the same page as him. Sure, he's not the best combat unit you can pick from but he's a long way off from shit.

Which would probably explain why he's in Lower Middle and not Low. But then again, Jaffar's main thing is Silencer and yet, he only has 7 levels of use.

Edited March 29, 2010 by Admiral Lifey Crunch

[Florete]

@ Bold: Huh? Using the statups gets you a lower rank gem. So yes, it does hurt HHM funds rank. As for the Sol Katti, it sucks, that thing is WAY too heavy to be viable at all, so I don't think it counts much for her.

I've used both statups and still gotten the White Gem later. It just means you can't use the Knight Crest.

[Dat Nick]

I've used both statups and still gotten the White Gem later. It just means you can't use the Knight Crest.

Then what am I doing wrong? Buying weapons, even if it's just 1 or 2? Using too many weapons? Going to 7x?

[Colonel M]

Which would probably explain why he's in Lower Middle and not Low. But then again, Jaffar's main thing is Silencer and yet, he only has 7 levels of use.

Consider that it's still +700 EXP for the EXP rank that can also be made within 32X if you want to play the desperate game.

In case none of you realized, I hate Heath. I hate talking about him, I hate arguing him, I hate using him. If you guys come to a consensus on his position, I'll go along with it. If I think he's too high, I'll speak up but I won't push for him lower (goes under "hate arguing him"). If he's too low, good.

I don't think he's honestly too low, though that depends on how good you classify Hawkeye to flying + decent combat after some training + early Whip.

anyway holy fuck I'm glad that's over, and it was settled much better than Tyrant would have done it

*Shrugs*. I didn't see the issue of pulling the ban and hoping that someone would be considerate enough to make a topic in regards to it instead. Like I've stated many times: I didn't really care to hear it, and that's why this list is now Life's (well, the person in charge of changing the OP).

Also, Ima pull an Inui now.

*Co-signs all of Narga's and nflchamp's posts*

You're scaring me here...

Edited March 29, 2010 by Tyranel M

[Florete]

Then what am I doing wrong? Buying weapons, even if it's just 1 or 2? Using too many weapons? Going to 7x?

Well, I always get by without buying even a single weapon. I also only get Serra up to 5 or 6 instead of the usually determined 8 or 9.

You're scaring me here...

I wanted to say something but didn't want to be dragged back into the shitstorm argument.

[chrysalid]

You can stick a large number of levels on Heath during the ch24->ch28x leg of HHM, the enemies are mostly terrible and have a lot of tolerance for Heath's low starting speed (steel lance gimps in 4FO and Crazed Beast can get him over the speed hump in particular) and there are several chapters in there where you are either forced or nearly forced to wait around for a lot of turns that beg for you to work on XP rank. Once he's promoted (early or not) and out of being a quasi- ranking project he's got a better statline than most characters and can fly.

Do people acknowledge the above and still put him at the top of lower mid just because of availability/the fact that the game is pretty easyboring at that point, or what?

Edit - Geez did I kill the thread with this somehow? I think Heath got sucked down in tiers because of hangover from efficiency arguments, whereas he's perfectly positioned in ranked to make a lot of levels in an easy run of chapters where you should logically be XPing-up someone or other. I consider him an auto-used unit in most chapters from 24-on (not VoL) except in the case where I'd use Farina for fun. Now that's partly because I don't play LM and Florina and the red/green cavaliers are hard to keep continuously overlevelled (and they're all extremely sensitive to short term stat-screwing in that case), which makes Heath a slam dunk as an 8-move unit with solid aid and a statline that makes him more than just rescue chain filler.

Edited March 30, 2010 by chrysalid