Best Overall Class for Handheld Fire Emblems

[RNG Princess]

Soul obviously pegs > wyverns they look so much cooler :D and they join like 10+ chapters before the wyverns do.

Wyverns are more balanced though, the only sucky one is Zeiss where as Pegs have sucky Yuno, late Farina and Syrene. The most outstanding is probably Vanessa ^_^ and Vanessa is there from start to end whereas Miledy joins on ch.14?

Edited March 29, 2011 by Queen_Elincia

[eclipse]

Maybe so, but I'm not the easiest to talk out of something once he makes up his mind. And I never even liked Heath's looks anyhow - Blaargh! That just makes me hate him even more than otherwise...

HEATH IS CUTE!!!

He shows up right when you'd like another flier, and unlike his horsey counterparts, does not die when someone with an axe looks at him funny.

[Radiant Dragon]

HEATH... does not die when someone with an axe looks at him funny.

Actually, I think Jasmine doubles and ORKO's (or at least comes close) base level Heath...

[Junkhead]

Soul obviously pegs > wyverns they look so much cooler :D and they join like 10+ chapters before the wyverns do.

Wyverns are more balanced though, the only sucky one is Zeiss where as Pegs have sucky Yuno, late Farina and Syrene. The most outstanding is probably Vanessa ^_^ and Vanessa is there from start to end whereas Miledy joins on ch.14?

Wyerns are better than Peggies as a class. The characters that compose them, though, make Pegs better because, like you said, they join pretty early. They have Rescue/Dropping advantages which are pretty useful. Something Ritcher could've mentioned when defending them other than saying "FE7 Pegs > Wyerns, because they double".

HEATH IS CUTE!!!

I'd say he's rather cool-looking. Just look at that hair. Totally a rockstar.

Actually, I think Jasmine doubles and ORKO's (or at least comes close) base level Heath...

Funny how you had to pick an overpowered boss that 1RKO's base level Heath that does even worse to Pegs. Edited March 29, 2011 by Soul

[Radiant Dragon]

Funny how you had to pick an overpowered boss that 1RKO's base level Heath that does even worse to Pegs.

Well, Queen Elincia did say anyone with an axe...

[eclipse]

Well, Queen Elincia did say anyone with an axe...

I'm eclipse! If Heath goes anywhere near Jasmine, then I've screwed up royally.

[Radiant Dragon]

I'm eclipse! If Heath goes anywhere near Jasmine, then I've screwed up royally.

I wonder how I screwed that up... For me, the only way Heath gets near Jasmine is if he's equipped with the Axereaver, and only if Jasmine is in OHKO range.

[Junkhead]

Yeah. Heath is easy to get at least two levels there. I got him four.

[dondon151]

Well, I thought we were ranking the class, rather than the units in it. As a class, I think Valkyrie's staff access trumps the better weapon selection of Paladins.

First, I wasn't contesting anything regarding the superiority of valkyries with regard to paladins and whatnot. I was pointing out that a lot of existing valkyries would like to have access to C+ rank tomes immediately because they typically have poor mag upon promotion, but enough AS to offset the WT. Or they just can't double some enemies anyway and would like to hit harder when given the chance. FE6 is a good example of this because valkyries start with E anima on promotion and it requires 50 attacks (minimal 25 rounds of combat) to even reach D tomes. Elfire and Aircalibur were out of the question and on efficiency runs, even Thunder was probably unusable. Furthermore, anima tomes didn't weigh anyone down in that game, and enemy HP was generally pretty high, which made Elfire and Aircalibur desirable weapons to use.

The problem also exists to a lesser extent in FE7 because Priscilla also gets only E anima upon promotion. Thunder is a whole 3 MT above Fire, and Priscilla won't likely be attacking often to reach D tomes in a short span of time. Possibly never in an efficiency run.

Second, how do we rank the classes without context? We're already judging them based on how useful flying, 8 move, re-move, staves, etc. are in their respective games, so why not rank the units in the class?

Maybe so, but I'm not the easiest to talk out of something once he makes up his mind.

OK. We know this already. Why do you keep posting? In fact, why can't you just admit that you are objectively wrong every once in a while instead of obstinately pointing out your own subjective opinion? We get it - you don't like Heath's looks, you like having overkill AS, you don't like fliers because they're weak to an easily avoidable weapon type, you apply your own experiences to examples that are completely unrelated - no need to bring that up over and over again.

Edited March 29, 2011 by dondon151

[Shadow Mir]

First, I wasn't contesting anything regarding the superiority of valkyries with regard to paladins and whatnot. I was pointing out that a lot of existing valkyries would like to have access to C+ rank tomes immediately because they typically have poor mag upon promotion, but enough AS to offset the WT. Or they just can't double some enemies anyway and would like to hit harder when given the chance. FE6 is a good example of this because valkyries start with E anima on promotion and it requires 50 attacks (minimal 25 rounds of combat) to even reach D tomes. Elfire and Aircalibur were out of the question and on efficiency runs, even Thunder was probably unusable. Furthermore, anima tomes didn't weigh anyone down in that game, and enemy HP was generally pretty high, which made Elfire and Aircalibur desirable weapons to use.

The problem also exists to a lesser extent in FE7 because Priscilla also gets only E anima upon promotion. Thunder is a whole 3 MT above Fire, and Priscilla won't likely be attacking often to reach D tomes in a short span of time. Possibly never in an efficiency run.

Second, how do we rank the classes without context? We're already judging them based on how useful flying, 8 move, re-move, staves, etc. are in their respective games, so why not rank the units in the class?

OK. We know this already. Why do you keep posting? In fact, why can't you just admit that you are objectively wrong every once in a while instead of obstinately pointing out your own subjective opinion? We get it - you don't like Heath's looks, you like having overkill AS, you don't like fliers because they're weak to an easily avoidable weapon type, you apply your own experiences to examples that are completely unrelated - no need to bring that up over and over again.

Bold: When did I ever say that? You make it sound like I said that when I didn't, and that's my pet peeve...

On a side note, I actually agree with you about weapon rank in FE6, since it rises at a snail's pace...

Edited March 29, 2011 by Metal King Slime

[dondon151]

Bold: When did I ever say that? You make it sound like I said that when I didn't, and that's my pet peeve...

Well, that's one thing, but OTOH, there's bows and magic to worry about...

Like usual, instead of admitting that you were objectively wrong, you make a meek attempt to defend yourself. Nice try.

[Radiant Dragon]

Bold: When did I ever say that? You make it sound like I said that when I didn't, and that's my pet peeve...

You brought up Bow weakness more than once, which is what I believe he's referring to.

Edit: Damn Ninjas

Edited March 29, 2011 by Radiant Dragon

[Shadow Mir]

Like usual, instead of admitting that you were objectively wrong, you make a meek attempt to defend yourself. Nice try.

I admit I brought up bow weakness, but saying that I don't like fliers because of it is going way too far.

[Junkhead]

The point is, you shouldn't argue if you aren't going to do it properly without having a basis behind it other than pure opinion. How do you expect people to listen to you if you don't listen to them?

[Anouleth]

First, I wasn't contesting anything regarding the superiority of valkyries with regard to paladins and whatnot. I was pointing out that a lot of existing valkyries would like to have access to C+ rank tomes immediately because they typically have poor mag upon promotion, but enough AS to offset the WT. Or they just can't double some enemies anyway and would like to hit harder when given the chance. FE6 is a good example of this because valkyries start with E anima on promotion and it requires 50 attacks (minimal 25 rounds of combat) to even reach D tomes. Elfire and Aircalibur were out of the question and on efficiency runs, even Thunder was probably unusable. Furthermore, anima tomes didn't weigh anyone down in that game, and enemy HP was generally pretty high, which made Elfire and Aircalibur desirable weapons to use.

The problem also exists to a lesser extent in FE7 because Priscilla also gets only E anima upon promotion. Thunder is a whole 3 MT above Fire, and Priscilla won't likely be attacking often to reach D tomes in a short span of time. Possibly never in an efficiency run.

There is nothing about the Valkyrie as a class that inherently means they have to have poor Anima rank. Cecilia, for instance, has a good Anima rank.

Second, how do we rank the classes without context? We're already judging them based on how useful flying, 8 move, re-move, staves, etc. are in their respective games, so why not rank the units in the class?

Because often, the units don't represent the potential of the class. Wyvern Lord, for instance, is obviously a great class, but because Heath and Vaida join late, the units in the class are not so good. I suppose if you were to define late join time as a feature inherent to Wyvern Lords, that might be an argument (since every Wyvern Lord ever joins relatively late).

[dondon151]

There is nothing about the Valkyrie as a class that inherently means they have to have poor Anima rank. Cecilia, for instance, has a good Anima rank.

Cecilia is prepromoted and thus has the capability to come with a base anima rank (she still sucks at combat, though). I don't know how you can confidently assert this when FE6 promo gains, FE7 promo gains, and FE8 promo gains directly state the contrary. Every valkyrie in these games, with the exception of Cecilia, is forced to start at E anima or D light upon promotion. That's terrible.

Heck, if you want to get really pedantic, just look at the class base stats. Valks have E anima or D light. Clearly, they inherently have a poor anima rank.

Because often, the units don't represent the potential of the class. Wyvern Lord, for instance, is obviously a great class, but because Heath and Vaida join late, the units in the class are not so good. I suppose if you were to define late join time as a feature inherent to Wyvern Lords, that might be an argument (since every Wyvern Lord ever joins relatively late).

You already defined the potential of the class with respect to the games that they appear in. What if I said that wyvern lords would suck if every enemy in the game had a ballista? That statement has no value whatsoever because it departs from reality.

Edited March 29, 2011 by dondon151

[whase]

Problem is, you don't want your mages attacking 1-Range unless it's against another mage. They have good avoid, but not good enough to rely on (and Tellius mages seem like they have no avoid at all).

for my style of playing, that is a little different. since I only use max 8 units, usually only about 6, my units get overpowered and evade practically anything. If I have 2 sages, they can keep on healing each other for those few unfortunate hits. I know most people don't play like that, but I do. Which makes sage best for me.

though for people who don't do that, I would say Paladin as well. I don't like them, but they truly are overpowered if not for horse slaying weapons.

[Shadow Mir]

for my style of playing, that is a little different. since I only use max 8 units, usually only about 6, my units get overpowered and evade practically anything. If I have 2 sages, they can keep on healing each other for those few unfortunate hits. I know most people don't play like that, but I do. Which makes sage best for me.

though for people who don't do that, I would say Paladin as well. I don't like them, but they truly are overpowered if not for horse slaying weapons.

Horse-slaying weapons aren't that common...

[whase]

Horse-slaying weapons aren't that common...

if they were common, you'd be a lot more looking out for them. they will surprise you more when they're uncommon.

[Junkhead]

Problem is, you don't want your mages attacking 1-Range unless it's against another mage. They have good avoid, but not good enough to rely on (and Tellius mages seem like they have no avoid at all).

They don't even have that. They just hit Res.

Mages are in no way better than Cavaliers, Peggies and Wyern Riders.

[General Horace]

Paladins, followed by Wyverns, due to availability slightly outweighing flight.

[Shadow Mir]

if they were common, you'd be a lot more looking out for them. they will surprise you more when they're uncommon.

The problem with horse-slaying weapons is that they're also unimpressive all in all, in addition to being uncommon; Halberd has a mere 60 hit, Longsword has only 12 (18) effective Mt, ansd the Horseslayer was only really worth looking out for in FE6.

[eclipse]

The problem with horse-slaying weapons is that they're also unimpressive all in all, in addition to being uncommon; Halberd has a mere 60 hit, Longsword has only 12 (18) effective Mt, ansd the Horseslayer was only really worth looking out for in FE6.

I guess Shadow Dragon, despite being a handheld FE, doesn't count. . .

[Shadow Mir]

I guess Shadow Dragon, despite being a handheld FE, doesn't count. . .

Whoops! I was thinking about the GBA FEs...

[shrang]

FE6 Sages have got to be one of the most broken non-Lord or non-Special character classes ever. This is probably due to the fact that Anima magic is just plain overpowered in FE6 (Hell, just look at Aircalibur: 2 Wt, 8 Power and 85 hit, ridiculous) and the fact that most of your enemies have like zero resistance.