FE: Awakening Hard Mode Tier List

[Blademaster!]

At least the rankings systems are objective and concrete. This is all made up rules and subjectivity that don't actually apply when you play the game. Barracks, event tiles, and risen challenges don't exist? What if Virion gets a Glass Bow!? Earlygame one-shotting of Wyverns! Yeah boy! When you actually play the game, things are so much different from this tier list and the fictional rules made for it. Rankings can be measured objectively.

The entire franchise can be argued to be subjective and luck based, and all tiers, let alone character ratings or any difficulty about the game in general, can be said to be in theory pointless. Just like there is a chance Virion could get a glass bow, there is also the chance that I can have Marty get a level, have every stat grow (even movement), and proceed to do this every level up for the rest of the game, not to mention I always send him into combat and he kills everything he fights in one hit thanks to critical hits. Barracks and event tiles don't exist because tiers attempt to remove the RNG as much as possible, otherwise there is nothing to argue or discuss since it isn't even subjective, but rather luck based. Risen challenges don't exist for the same reason grinding doesn't exist in other tiers, not to mention that if you can beat the game without grinding easily with X group of characters, then why bother using Y group of characters when they only become good if you grind them?

Additionally, what makes the in game rankings of FE4/5/6/7/12 any different than the terms and conditions set here? In one case, you have IS telling you how to play the game and what to do. In another, you have the conditions outlined in this tier. There is ultimately no difference between the two. In fact, just like how you don't like the conditions in this tier, I could argue I don't like the conditions set in FE7 since it's too easy.

My "brisk pace" for Chapter X is 6 turns. Yours is 5. Mine lets Donnel become a god. Yours doesn't. Subjective.

Then prove as much and mention that such is actually the case like I did with Nowi. I mentioned that using her on chapter 8 to become a god cost me a turn, and that was the only real negative I found in using her. You haven't even provided anything to help Donnel's case in early game which is why he is so low.

Also, there is nothing difficult to understand about a brisk paced run. It's just a LTC run that doesn't only look at the absolute minimum TC, but still tries to get in that range by about 1 or 2 turns. The whole reason SDS even mentioned that in the first place is probably so that you can't argue that Anna and Libra don't go up to S tier just because they can allow us to rescue chain and clear chapters in single turns.

[Legault!]

That's funny, because I see substantive discussions, the first of many test runs using the requirements, movement in the tiers based on arguments, etc. This isn't swimming, this is apparently delusion. Mass delusion, perhaps? What is the difference between mass delusion and mass agreement, in terms of results? You seem irritated that the tier list is accomplishing its goals, in spite of and in clear violation of your world view.

Look at Inui's post: if brisk pace is seven turns in a map instead of four, then Donnel's usefulness is much improved. Without a concrete standard, it's subjective.

Unfortunately when you have requirements that are contradictory, with a hundred places to tweak the results, and no clear way to adjudicate conflicts in style, success generally means denying the underlying problems to begin with. The advantage of a turn-based tier list, is that while people may differ on interpretation, everyone is moving in the same direction.

That's a lot of big words and a lot of missing the point. There are no "conflicts in style" in a Ranked run: the player must meet certain requirements, and some characters contribute more to the end goal than others. FE7's brilliant ranking system is a part of the reason it's an actual strategy game: you're forced to cycle through underleveled units, you can't abuse the arena, you need to preserve stat boosters and expensive weapons (especially on Normal ranked), etc.

This is directly relevant to Awakening because it highlights how broken the game is.

Also, there is nothing difficult to understand about a brisk paced run. It's just a LTC run that doesn't only look at the absolute minimum TC, but still tries to get in that range by about 1 or 2 turns.

1-2 turns per map? 1-2 turns per campaign? If it's the former, then I'm all aboard the Inui train and will advocate moving Donnel way up.

Edited March 26, 2013 by Legault!

[Seven Deadly Sins]

There appear to be two camps here: the people who are bitching about how much Awakening sucks to tier (Legault and He Who Must Not Be Named), and the people who are actually discussing and getting shit done. One of these groups should go do something constructive with their time and let people who actually want to talk about the game do so.

[Legault!]

Any game sucks to tier when there are no clear standards for how you're tiering.

"How good is Nino in FE7?"

"I dunno, how much importance are you giving to the experience rank? She's an excellent late-game experience boost."

"Consider this a 'Sort of Care About Experience' list. btw Nino sucks"

"I have no idea what that means and you can't really say Nino sucks with such a nebulous criteria."

"Go do something productive with your time "

[shadykid]

"Go do something productive with your time "

*ahem*

you should follow your own advice

[Legault!]

*ahem*

you should follow your own advice

My first stalker.

[Interceptor]

Look at xxxx's post: if brisk pace is seven turns in a map instead of four, then Donnel's usefulness is much improved. Without a concrete standard, it's subjective.

The "subjectivity" is the arena upon which we battle: fast play exposes the real differences between units. I don't think you'd get any serious support from people on that interpretation of a "brisk pace". Any fictional playthrough with that sort of gap, is not going to get any traction in an argument. You are welcome to try, of course, but a team that drags like that will get smoked by almost anything.

That's a lot of big words and a lot of missing the point.

Understood. I'll use single syllable words for you: YOU ARGUE SMART RANK HERE.

[Legault!]

The "subjectivity" is the arena upon which we battle:

Donnel is better when you have six turns to play with.

vs.

Donnel is worse when you have four turns to play with.

What is the "battle" here. This is confusion, not battle.

fast play exposes the real differences between units.

What is "fast play" and what is a "real difference." You're just using words.

Also please don't be wrong about rankings and then go ask me to make a separate topic explaining why you are wrong about rankings. I can do that just fine here.

[Constable Reggie]

So if no one's going to argue otherwise, Frederick needs to drop to the bottom of S tier.

[Legault!]

Frederick is your unanimous MVP up until (around) Chapter 8, at which point he and Avatar share that title. He gives killer Pair Up bonuses from the start (but how much credit do we give to such bonuses?) and requires zero investment. He is also helpful throughout the campaign. You'll need to provide more specific arguments before any kind of drop.

Edited March 26, 2013 by Legault!

[Interceptor]

What is "fast play" and what is a "real difference." You're just using words.

Oh goodness gracious, not "words"; what will the neighbors think?

Understand that we care about turn counts because going fast exposes the differences between units. When you are slow, and turtle your way across a map, nobody dies and even the most humble of characters can grow into their potential. But when you go quickly, things like concrete durability, chance to die, ability to ORKO, mobility, etc all begin to really matter. Training bad units has a measurable effect on how long it takes you to complete the game.

So, we go as fast as possible? Not really. Unfortunately, the logical conclusion of that line of thought, is that all fictional playthroughs other than the absolute best one, become invalid. There's nothing to discuss unless someone finds a new best way, and it's also rather boring in the process. Thus, we use this somewhat-modified version, which excludes the extreme case, while still preserving the imperative to go quickly. This does require one to have an ability to argue in a somewhat undefined space. But in most cases, conflict only happens in the margins, so it's generally not a problem.

Now, you have an issue with this. I understand where you are coming from, and your objection is perfectly legitimate. Unfortunately, your objection is also useless, because you have no solution to something that's already a non-problem for the majority of participants. Like someone who has to flip a light switch exactly 7 times, or can't have a digital volume on anything but an even number, you'll just have to learn to live in this crazy world.

Also please don't be wrong about rankings and then go ask me to make a separate topic explaining why you are wrong about rankings. I can do that just fine here.

This is perfectly acceptable to me; you can feel free to howl alone at the moon until you're able to follow directions.

[Constable Reggie]

He drops off heavily because of his inferior exp gain and relatively low base stats, starting from roughly around chapter 16-18, where enemy stats start to jump up quickly. When Lucina arrives, she'll destroy Fred in stats and is able to reclass into whatever she wants, with automatic aether and veteran pushing her even further. Chrom and Sully both roughly have the same availability as Frederick, and will easliy catch up to Fred's stats in around 10 levels (except def), where they can reclass/promote to just keep skyrocketing past him. Fred's great earlygame, but Chrom and Sully are no pushovers either, and can easily hold their own when paired up, unlike in Lunatic. Fred absolutely requires a speed pair up to stay relevant past mid game (he will never be doubling without one, either), but Chrom and Sully both have versatility in who they want to pair up with. The pair up bonuses are nice, but they don't make up enough for Fred's awfully mediocre lategame. Stahl has speed problems, like Fred (albeit much easier to fix), so I can see Fred still being above him. As for being helpful throughout the whole campaign, how is being relegated to a pairup bonus partner worthy of second top of S tier? None of the other S tier units have that problem.

I'm not arguing that Fred is terrible or anything, but he's seriously being overrated. I don't see how he can be considered better than Chrom and Sully, let alone Lucina. If this were lunatic mode, this would be an entirely different case.

Edited March 26, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Paperblade]

The problem with a tier list that only cares about turns is as follows:

Absolute LTC involves 80% of the cast doing nothing or having a very minimal involvement on what goes on, sometimes being interchangeable. Units will probably just be tiered based on how much they contribute to a perfect run and is basically entirely objective.

Non-absolute LTC is arbitrary. You aren't striving to be the very best (this is reflected in the tier list because Olivia+Rescuebots are below units that probably won't even be recruited) because you decided "going this fast is too fast," so the rules you're debating over ("brisk", "no renown", etc.) is chosen because it promotes discussion in a tier list rather than a real setting that people actually play the game in, which makes this absolutely an ivory tower discussion. Yes, you COULD play the game under the rules set up in the list, but the only reason you would do so is for the sake of the list. Additionally, words like "brisk" are intentionally left vague to promote discussion but what really happens is that people flipflop to support whatever.

Yes, this is a problem with any list that isn't purely objective (the difficulty/value of each rank is debatable FE4/5/6/7), but it's really magnified here because everyone has a different idea of what "brisk" means. Is brisk a flat number of turns slower than the minimum? If so, how many? Or is it a %? If so, how much? Also it doesn't help that when people complain about vague terms or interpret them differently, they get flamed and insulted by the regulars.

I think that technically reliability also matters in these kinds of lists but no one ever talks about it unless it's to shut down "This works 2% of the time" or "restart until you win" arguments (although the latter still slips through sometimes), the threshold of chance for a strategy to work is generally so low that it's not worth discussing.

Yes, ranks are technically arbitrary (why 1000 levels instead of 999 in FE4?) too, but it's something decided by the game itself rather than the people here, meaning you're less likely to get stupid arguments like this.

[Legault!]

Oh goodness gracious, not "words"; what will the neighbors think?

The obvious implication of my post is that you're using words [without considering what they mean i.e. nothing].

Understand that we

who

care about turn counts because going fast exposes the differences between units. When you are slow, and turtle your way across a map,

There are alternatives between wasting hundreds of turns turtling and speeding through the game at a near-absolute LTC pace. Like, say, taking seven turns on a map instead of four.

Thus, we use this somewhat-modified version, which excludes the extreme case, while still preserving the imperative to go quickly. .

Great. So does seven turns count as quickly, or four.

Like someone who has to flip a light switch exactly 7 times, or can't have a digital volume on anything but an even number, you'll just have to learn to live in this crazy world.

You're comparing your lack of standards to me having OCD. Are you high right now.

I'm more than willing to have an open conversation about what concrete standard we should adopt. Until others agree to have this discussion, nothing else can get done and these rankings will be utterly subjective.

This is perfectly acceptable to me; you can feel free to howl alone at the moon until you're able to follow directions.

You decided to wrongly criticize rankings, not me.

Edited March 26, 2013 by Legault!

[MercuryHg34]

I agree, Fred should drop to the Bottom of S. Actually, it may be a dumb question but other than starting off as a pre-promote on the prologue, what exactly makes him S-tier anyway? I'm sure there are good reasons if everyone agrees but I just don't know them.

[Constable Reggie]

He's really good in early and midgame (though not nearly as good compared to lunatic Fred), and he does give out great initial pairup bonuses if required. No one seems to care that he drops off really hard the start of lategame, though.

[Seven Deadly Sins]

Great. So does seven turns count as quickly, or four.

Here's where you fall flat. Technically, "both." That said, four is obviously better than seven, so the unit that requires us to take seven turns on a map will be ranked lower than the unit that requires us to take four turns on a map.

[Legault!]

Here's where you fall flat. Technically, "both." That said, four is obviously better than seven, so the unit that requires us to take seven turns on a map will be ranked lower than the unit that requires us to take four turns on a map.

Great logic. Let's see if I can follow this great logic all the way out:

Four turns is better than seven.

Three turns is better than four.

Two turns is better than three.

One turn is better than two.

We're now at an absolute LTC criteria. Great logic.

[Inui]

Additionally, what makes the in game rankings of FE4/5/6/7/12 any different than the terms and conditions set here?

Actual outlined turn counts instead of "brisk pace" which could mean anything to anyone.

Valuing cost efficiency is cool. Costing less money is better.

Etc.

FE7 HHM Tactics rank is lame cuz of a bug, but ranks in FE6 are great. That's the BEST game out there for debate and tiers.

Edit: Legault just ruined your lives LOL.

THE HURRICANE

Edited March 26, 2013 by Inui

[Seven Deadly Sins]

@Legault:

You seem to be literally the only person with a problem with it. Everyone else is humming right along. Either get over it or get out, but stop derailing the discussion. Before you came in, we were actually having a decent discussion about the Pegasus Knights... that seems to have evaporated.

Cut it out. This metaposting is doing nothing but pissing all over people who are having reasonable discussions in a way that you don't think they should, and it's just getting obnoxious at this point.

Edited March 26, 2013 by Seven Deadly Sins

[Legault!]

FE7 HHM Tactics rank is lame cuz of a bug,

Now hold the phone Mr. Inui. Zero-turn HHM requirements are totally a glitch / oversight, but they're a happy accident: they completely redefine how the game is played, demand greater attention to pre-planning, and provide a relevant difference between ENM/EHM and HNM/HHM. They're awesome.

And aren't FE6's ranks too lenient to really matter? I'm not all that familiar with them.

@Legault:

You seem to be literally the only person with a problem with it. Everyone else is humming right along. Either get over it or get out, but stop derailing the discussion.

Fun fact: Inui and Paperblade are my alternate accounts.

I do admire your "agree with me or leave" approach. It's a winning attitude.

[Seven Deadly Sins]

Sorry if I don't have an innate appreciation for a vocal minority of trolls derailing a legitimate thread because they don't like how the discussion is being operated, and want to remake it with their own mindset (which nobody other than the few of you espouse).

Pardon me if I don't think that a tier list of Avatar / Sumia / Fred / Anna / Libra / Olivia / Everyone Else is interesting.

[eCut]

@Legault:

You seem to be literally the only person with a problem with it. Everyone else is humming right along. Either get over it or get out, but stop derailing the discussion. Before you came in, we were actually having a decent discussion about the Pegasus Knights... that seems to have evaporated.

Cut it out. This metaposting is doing nothing but pissing all over people who are having reasonable discussions in a way that you don't think they should, and it's just getting obnoxious at this point.

Well, this pretty much says everything that I was thinking about saying... But to reiterate, respect the standards that were created. If you thought they were problematic then you should have personally PM'd Seven Deadly Sins instead of causing a huge fuss over a small thing.

Everyone, get back to the actual discussion instead of nitpicking over tier rules!

(Also, don't mini-mod, SDS. :E)

Edit:

@Legault: Funfact, I should hope not.

Edited March 26, 2013 by eCut

[Seven Deadly Sins]

Well, this pretty much says everything that I was thinking about saying... But to reiterate, respect the standards that were created. If you thought they were problematic then you should have personally PM'd Seven Deadly Sins instead of causing a huge fuss over a small thing.

Everyone, get back to the actual discussion instead of nitpicking over tier rules!

(Also, don't mini-mod, SDS. :E)

Thank you for that.

Now, where were we? Grandjackal seems to be gone so I'm all for putting the Pegasus Knight conversation on the back burner and moving on to Frederick for the time being.

(also i don't consider it mini-modding trying to keep control of a tier list but i'll keep it in mind :V)

Edited March 26, 2013 by Seven Deadly Sins

[Inui]

lol just make the tier list Lunatic mode instead of easy mode

Lunatic actually requires thinking and using good characters and prepping for major threats (such as Dark Fliers, which 2 shot your whole team, if not one-rounding some of your units, but VIRION one-shots like the god he is).

Now hold the phone Mr. Inui. Zero-turn HHM requirements are totally a glitch / oversight, but they're a happy accident: they completely redefine how the game is played, demand greater attention to pre-planning, and provide a relevant difference between ENM/EHM and HNM/HHM. They're awesome.

Well, that bug forces a ton of Marcus blitzkrieg action and team rotation. Tactics is quite stressful. But yeah, I'm playing it now again, and I'm thinking 10x more than I ever did in FE13. I'm already planning stuff like fielding a level 10 Guy and other low level kids in Crazed Beast to get huge EXP and getting the Lloyd map and finishing it in two turns. Stuff like that.

And aren't FE6's ranks too lenient to really matter? I'm not all that familiar with them.

Tactics is lenient but the rest are hard. It's like the opposite of FE7. But the lenient Tactics rank gives you wiggle room to get more EXP and money, even by using the arena plenty in Ilia or something. Combat is actually hard because the enemies are a lot better and attack at range more.

I do admire your "agree with me or leave" approach. It's a winning attitude.

SF FE discussion in a nutshell, sadly.

Edit: Sorry Moderator-chan, was typing the post before I saw yours.

Edited March 26, 2013 by Inui