Best/Worst in the Series: Round 43

[Ether]

Best: Speed

Worst: Res

[Dark Sage]

Most: Speed

Least: Luck

[BrightBow]

Best: Strength

I would say a 0 spd playthrough could be easier won then a 0 str playthrough.

Worst: Res

Considering all the FE games where this stat doesn't even exist in the first place, I think it can't be that important.

[Shadow Mir]

Best: speed

Worst: luck

I think resistance is a useful stat. Granted, it's not something that you need to have a growth in due to availability of Pure Water and Barrier, but having sufficient HP and res is crucial for certain strategies to work out. Additionally, for games with status staves, 1 point of res provides 5-6 staff avo. So, a full Pure Water or Barrier would reduce staff hit by 35-42, which is huge.

Also, from my 0% growth experience I find extra skl to be useful to have. Most people don't realize how unreliable hit rates actually are assuming no skl growths.

I can understand where you're coming from, but as I see it, having low luck can easily bite you in the ass, especially in Radiant Dawn, where a good portion of enemies have boosted crit scores. Then again, I am rather paranoid about getting critkilled, so...

[Narga_Rocks]

I can understand where you're coming from, but as I see it, having low luck can easily bite you in the ass, especially in Radiant Dawn, where a good portion of enemies have boosted crit scores. Then again, I am rather paranoid about getting critkilled, so...

And dondon doesn't seem to care too much about crits. He disparages GJ and me for being so concerned about it in fe6.

[dondon151]

And dondon doesn't seem to care too much about crits. He disparages GJ and me for being so concerned about it in fe6.

I've had 2 otherwise perfect runs of FEDS chapter 11 ended by Wendell getting critkilled, but I've had many more of them ended by an untimely miss.

[Narga_Rocks]

I've had 2 otherwise perfect runs of FEDS chapter 11 ended by Wendell getting critkilled, but I've had many more of them ended by an untimely miss.

so skill > lck. I don't disagree. If I had everyone with 90 hit and facing 2% crit, and you gave me the choice to bump all my units up to 100% hit or down to 0% crit against, I'd choose to take 100% hit. Or I think I would, anyway. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't like to have both 100% hit and 0% crit.

And so:

best: speed.

worst: res.

I love res. Really, I do. But there usually aren't that many magic users and I can generally arrange to take that powerful shot. I'd rather not risk getting criticaled or having my unit miss the enemy. And I like doubling and causing damage and being able to tank multiples of the more typical enemies (hence, I like def). Res is least useful, and hence least important, but still rather useful.

I'm assuming "most important to increase by 1" or something like that, since the difference between 0 and 1 hp is massive but after that it a change of one is rather minor. For the other stats it is always important to add 1 until you:

str/mag: OHKO everything

skl: hit everything

spd: dodge and double everything

lck: face no crit

def/res: take no damage

which takes a lot longer than "don't die instantly". Which is achieved by getting 1 hp.

[Junkhead]

This was already done before.

What am I supposed to do with nominations?

[NinjaMonkey]

This was already done before.

According to the list of previous rounds I inherited, we haven't.

What am I supposed to do with nominations?

Say "I'd like to nominate [ insert topic you want to nominate]" (preferably highlighted in bolded font, so it grabs my attention).

Edited June 13, 2010 by NinjaMonkey

[Peachy]

Best: Speed

Worst: Luck

Nominating Best/Worst Couple

[Junkhead]

According to the list of previous rounds I inherited, we haven't.

Say "I'd like to nominate [ insert topic you want to nominate]" (preferably highlighted in bolded font, so it grabs my attention).

My mistake, it was another topic.

Anyway, what is that for? (Nominations)

Best stat: Spd

Worst: Res

Really, what's up with everyone voting for Res when Luck comes most necesary in FE10?

Edited June 14, 2010 by Soul

[NinjaMonkey]

Really, what's up with everyone voting for Res when Luck comes most necesary in FE10?

Lets see: How about the fact that the number of magic-using enemies is much less than the number of non-magic-using enemies?

[Junkhead]

And the use of Luck usually being for some more Avo and Crit. Avo even when enemies don't have that much critical in previous titles?

Anyway, that doesn't answer my first question: What are nominations for?

[NinjaMonkey]

Anyway, that doesn't answer my first question: What are nominations for?

Ideas for future rounds.

[Florete]

Really, what's up with everyone voting for Res when Luck comes most necesary in FE10?

Well, neither are great, so think of them in the extremes.

1. If you had none of either:

Res - You'll live. Magic enemies aren't common anyway, and it's unlikely they'd be able to kill you in one shot.

Luck - Any enemy with at least 2 Skl has displayed crit. Unless you go into 4+HKO territory, this means the unit in question can potentially be killed by anything.

So, without Res, you need to be 2+HKOd to be safe. Without Luck, you need to be 4+HKOd to be safe. Lacking Res is safer than lacking Luck, so Luck wins.

2. If you had an abundance of both:

Res - Still doesn't really matter for the previous reasons. Magic enemies just aren't common, and Res won't save you from the common enemies.

Lck - That much more avoid, no chance of taking crits (and some more Hit in games where that means something). Remember that a high enough Spd/Luck combo can render all of HP, Def, and Res useless.

In the end, Luck helps against all enemies while Res only helps against less common enemies. All of this is why I find Luck to be > Res, and underrated in general.

Edited June 14, 2010 by Red Fox of Fire

[Narga_Rocks]

And the use of Luck usually being for some more Avo and Crit. Avo even when enemies don't have that much critical in previous titles?

To add onto what Red Fox said, I'd like to point out that fe10 isn't even where this is the biggest problem. In fe5 crit = skill and cev = luck/2, so you need a ton of luck for any units not holding scrolls if you want to negate possible crits. And unlike the later games where 14 mt will do 0 damage on a crit to 15 def, in fe5 the crit formula caused damage = power * 2 - damage. In other words, even Gatrie like units can't simply shrug off crits.

[Junkhead]

Ideas for future rounds.

I nominate Best/Worst Jeigan.

Well, neither are great, so think of them in the extremes.

1. If you had none of either:

Res - You'll live. Magic enemies aren't common anyway, and it's unlikely they'd be able to kill you in one shot.

Luck - Any enemy with at least 2 Skl has displayed crit. Unless you go into 4+HKO territory, this means the unit in question can potentially be killed by anything.

So, without Res, you need to be 2+HKOd to be safe. Without Luck, you need to be 4+HKOd to be safe. Lacking Res is safer than lacking Luck, so Luck wins.

2. If you had an abundance of both:

Res - Still doesn't really matter for the previous reasons. Magic enemies just aren't common, and Res won't save you from the common enemies.

Lck - That much more avoid, no chance of taking crits (and some more Hit in games where that means something). Remember that a high enough Spd/Luck combo can render all of HP, Def, and Res useless.

In the end, Luck helps against all enemies while Res only helps against less common enemies. All of this is why I find Luck to be > Res, and underrated in general.

That is convincing. I changed my vote to worst stat towards Res. Thanks.

[dondon151]

I love res. Really, I do. But there usually aren't that many magic users and I can generally arrange to take that powerful shot. I'd rather not risk getting criticaled or having my unit miss the enemy. And I like doubling and causing damage and being able to tank multiples of the more typical enemies (hence, I like def). Res is least useful, and hence least important, but still rather useful.

Let's say that a certain unit lacked luk to the extent where he would face 2 crit from every enemy unit on the map. If he had to face 4 enemy attacks over the course of a map, his success rate would still be 92.24%. But if a certain unit lacked res to the extent where he would be xHKO'd by magic users (and needs to survive x amount of attacks for a strategy to succeed), then his success rate would be 0%. Given this circumstance, I would argue that res is more useful than luk, simply because res can outright determine the possibility for a strategy to succeed whereas luk is only a safeguard for the rare instance where it doesn't succeed. In simpler terms, I would not be deterred from executing a strategy if I had to face 2% crit, but I would not even try to execute a strategy if a unit could not survive the necessary number of attacks.

While we're on the topic of cev, FE5 had scrolls to nullify enemy crit (no luk needed whatsoever) and FE6-8 had a plethora of support bonuses that would give partial or full cev. This renders luk even more useless.

Edited June 14, 2010 by dondon151

[Rewjeo]

So, this unit who's xHKOd also lacks the ability to avoid the attacks? If he faces 90 displayed in a 2RN game, he's doing almost as well as with the crit. Like, facing .37% higher chance of dieing, assuming x=4. If he faces 89 or below, he's got a better shot. If it's 1RN, he only needs to face 98 to be equal, 97 to be doing better.

And we also appear to lack pure waters and barrier. I doubt this, seeing as most of the games throw at least one of those at you early on, and I doubt that there's a circumstance where you're facing four mages near each other before, say, chapter 5 or so.

Edited June 14, 2010 by Slize

[Shadow Mir]

Let's say that a certain unit lacked luk to the extent where he would face 2 crit from every enemy unit on the map. If he had to face 4 enemy attacks over the course of a map, his success rate would still be 92.24%. But if a certain unit lacked res to the extent where he would be xHKO'd by magic users (and needs to survive x amount of attacks for a strategy to succeed), then his success rate would be 0%. Given this circumstance, I would argue that res is more useful than luk, simply because res can outright determine the possibility for a strategy to succeed whereas luk is only a safeguard for the rare instance where it doesn't succeed. In simpler terms, I would not be deterred from executing a strategy if I had to face 2% crit, but I would not even try to execute a strategy if a unit could not survive the necessary number of attacks.

While we're on the topic of cev, FE5 had scrolls to nullify enemy crit (no luk needed whatsoever) and FE6-8 had a plethora of support bonuses that would give partial or full cev. This renders luk even more useless.

Well, I won't contest the FE5 bit, but with the fact that the GBA support system gets a lot of criticism these days... (Who likes having to glue their units next to each other to build supports?)

[Anouleth]

Pure Water and Barrier raise resistance. If you need to use them, then you are conceding that resistance is necessary and useful.

[Narga_Rocks]

So, this unit who's xHKOd also lacks the ability to avoid the attacks? If he faces 90 displayed in a 2RN game, he's doing almost as well as with the crit. Like, facing .37% higher chance of dieing, assuming x=4. If he faces 89 or below, he's got a better shot. If it's 1RN, he only needs to face 98 to be equal, 97 to be doing better.

And we also appear to lack pure waters and barrier. I doubt this, seeing as most of the games throw at least one of those at you early on, and I doubt that there's a circumstance where you're facing four mages near each other before, say, chapter 5 or so.

I think you misinterpreted his example. The guy with a 2% chance of getting criticaled has a 7.76% chance of dying. They guy that is getting hit by magic is getting like an 81% chance of dying if the enemies have 90% true hit. That's a lot more. My problem, though, is that it isn't very often you even face multiple magic users consecutively before you can heal. With crit, it can be one shot and you are reaching for the reset button. If you know that someone will probably die from magic users, pick a different strategy and you won't have to reset. If a guy randomly dies on you, there's nothing you can do about it. There is no strategy that uses that character that is safe, so you are always rolling the dice.

[dondon151]

If you know that someone will probably die from magic users, pick a different strategy and you won't have to reset. If a guy randomly dies on you, there's nothing you can do about it. There is no strategy that uses that character that is safe, so you are always rolling the dice.

Different strategies have different outcomes, and in those cases you're forced to adopt an inferior one. Which is typically where a healthy dose of Pure Water comes in: making the impossible, possible.

[Rewjeo]

I think you misinterpreted his example. The guy with a 2% chance of getting criticaled has a 7.76% chance of dying. They guy that is getting hit by magic is getting like an 81% chance of dying if the enemies have 90% true hit. That's a lot more. My problem, though, is that it isn't very often you even face multiple magic users consecutively before you can heal. With crit, it can be one shot and you are reaching for the reset button. If you know that someone will probably die from magic users, pick a different strategy and you won't have to reset. If a guy randomly dies on you, there's nothing you can do about it. There is no strategy that uses that character that is safe, so you are always rolling the dice.

Wow, math fail on my part. I guess this is what happens after being awake for 20 hours after only sleeping for 5 the night before...

[Florete]

Pure Water and Barrier raise resistance. If you need to use them, then you are conceding that resistance is necessary and useful.

I look at this topic as "which one would you want your characters to have more of?" The existence of Pure Water and Barrier consequently push Resistance down that list since I can substitute the actual stat with those instead. It's the same logic that makes healing worse in FE10 on account of the buffed healing items; substitutes make the original less valuable, not more.