why are jeigans in high tiers?

[shadykid]

To bring things back to the original topic a bit, Snowy, where would you place Titania in the current tier list, assuming no other units are being moved? I say Titania because FE9 is what we've been discussing the most, but feel free to use a different game. Also, just for fun, I decided to figure out what a tier list would look like if instead of using efficiency, we used a metric that is popular among people who passionately hate the "turn" part of a turn-based strategy game (growths).

S Tier:

Tibarn Naesala Giffca Muarim

A Tier : Lethe Ulki Nasir Janaff Shinon Mordecai Lucia Ena

B Tier : Bastian Titania Sothe Ranulf Elincia Ike Geoffrey Devdan

C Tier : Gatrie Reyson Tanith Rhys Stefan Boyd Largo

D Tier : Mia Marcia Mist Zihark Calill Tauroneo Oscar Rolf Kieran Nephenee Jill

E Tier : Soren Ilyana Volke Brom Astrid Makalov Tormod Haar

yeah, but the same people hating on Jeigans aren't going to be using laguz, especially not laguz royals

I mean really, D and E tier are the fan favorites (Mia, Nephenee, Jill, Soren, Ilyana), only one of which is good in a real tier list

Edited April 13, 2013 by shadykid

[bottlegnomes]

Hawkeye, out of curiosity, how did you rank them? Total growths, giving weight to the better growths (ie speed, str, def, health)? I only ask because I'd probably put Mak higher if it were the latter, since he has similar health to Oscar and Kieran and better strength, speed, and defense, but in exchange for lower skill and res.

[Snowy_One]

To bring things back to the original topic a bit, Snowy, where would you place Titania in the current tier list, assuming no other units are being moved? I say Titania because FE9 is what we've been discussing the most, but feel free to use a different game. Also, just for fun, I decided to figure out what a tier list would look like if instead of using efficiency, we used a metric that is popular among people who passionately hate the "turn" part of a turn-based strategy game (growths).

Below Keiran. I disagree with several tier placements though.

Anyways, a very short while ago, the realization that I may be simply super-paranoid due to a past RP experience was brought to my attention. I haven't decided if it's true or not, but if it is true, it would explain a lot. Me being paranoid and seeing the LTC tier list as merely a means for a group of elitist players to enforce their style of play on others while spurning anything that threatens that tier. It makes sense given my reactions, though there are other explanations for it. I need to take some time (shouldn't be more than a day or two) to think and decide if I really have a legit point, or if I've simply been paranoid and the equivalent of the guy shouting for kids to get off his lawn while wrapping his head in tinfoil so the CIA and KGB can't spy on his collection of lawn gnomes. Might even be both (I have a point, but it's become mired in paranoia). When I have come to a conclusion, I will let you know, and respond fully then.

[Life]

I don't. I just ignore claims irrelevant to the topic at hand. In this case, that Jeigans get horribly overrated due to a biased tiering system that holds no basis in reality except to a very select few players. In the prior case, because you were claiming that supports should hold no value in the category that they were meant to be in. Well, gee. In a category dedicated to supports, utility, and flexibility, I should ignore something that should be worth at LEAST one third of the total score? Wonder why I didn't even bother to respond?

Wrong. You ignore math. Let me bring up some recent examples.

- Me proving that Stefan at base level with an Iron Blade has equal attack to a ?/7 Lethe when you continued to claim that Stefan needs Silver to beat her in attack. Coincidentially, you never replied to that point.

- Me showing why Haar with a Silver Axe after an Arms scroll 2HKOs the rest of FE9, regardless of his speed. That was something that nobody can replicate but you looked at his AS and determined that MT means nothing.

Must I go on?

But the real problem that I have with this answer is the fact that you are trying to justify supports as being worth 1/3 of a unit's worth. Keep in mind that a support's bonuses melt away when there is a distance of over three squares between the units... Like Mordecai and Ilyana.

Have a problem with Jeigans. I couldn't care less. But nobody is forcing you to be here. If you're sick of talking to people with more intelligence than you, leave. Stop threatening to do it already and either put your money where your mouth is or sit down and shut up.

As I said in the topic. If someone could prove to me that movement affected combat in even the most minor of ways, as in 'actually had an effect on how well a unit fights', I would have factored it in to combat. Even if movement gave one point of crit evade, I would have at least considered it. It doesn't. People looking for the best combat units would do well to ignore efficiency.

Also, it may be a very poor idea to decide the entire list based on just the top few characters considered to be among the best in the game by most as they'll likely have high all-around scores.

Are you really that pig-headed about units? Tier lists are not ranked BY movement. It just so happens that sone of the units with the best combat also have the mose movement. And you still need to show why combat is not related to efficiency because the two are intertwined, no matter how hard you're trying to seperate the two.

Firstly, they are not around for 50% of the game. You can start building them ASAP and they have an effect right off the bat. Having two matching boosts can give as much as +1 attack, +1 defense, or +5/7.5/10 hit/avoid right off the bat at C-level. May not be gamebreaking, but not negligible either. Yes, if you make a horrible C pairing, like Ike and Titania, you won't see much in terms of bonuses for a long while and they'll be largely negligible for a, a while. The fact that you suck at such pairings shouldn't impact that though.

Secondly, 50% of the game, even if that was true, is still a LOT. This is basically a 30~ chapter game (assuming 17 is two chapters). And, hey, you know what? Plenty of units ranked well on the tier list have about or less than 15 chapters available to them. Reyson, Tanith, Muarim, Calill, Tormod, and Stefan. All ranked mid or higher. All joining during or after 15. So if a support should be discounted for affecting only half the game, these units should also be discounted for affecting half the game.

Lastly, yes, I know the goal in your tiering is LTC. That was not the goal in my tier list. So, no, 'but those are units who reduce turn count' doesn't work because the criteria were different.

I don't know where to begin.

Ok Snowy. I want a specific example of where +2 Def from a support is going to make a huge difference. Let's have the example from about chapter 18. In fact, I want multiple examples from that chapter.

If you can't do that, then yes, the bonus IS negligible. That's before you consider gimping the movement range of your own units and reducing efficiency. Oh wait, supports now has a toe in the door of efficiency. So that's another problem in your analysis.

Lastly, the tier list is not LTC. How many times do we have to tell you this? Not everyone here is Jushiro who argues over mundane thing like a single shove. Efficiency is being able to finish the game with a RELATIVELY (not bare-bones) low turn count but use resources to their fullest ability. This is the cause of all of your problems. You fail to differentiate the two and equate them instead.

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

". In this case, that Jeigans get horribly overrated due to a biased tiering system that holds no basis in reality except to a very select few players."

In another case Ests get horribly overrated due to a biased tiering system that holds no basis in reality except to a very select few players

[BBM]

ITT Snowy wants tier lists to be something they're not and gets mad because of it.

[Hawkeye]

Hawkeye, out of curiosity, how did you rank them? Total growths, giving weight to the better growths (ie speed, str, def, health)? I only ask because I'd probably put Mak higher if it were the latter, since he has similar health to Oscar and Kieran and better strength, speed, and defense, but in exchange for lower skill and res.

They're strictly ranked by their total growths, all weighted equally. You can see the full document in the topic I made.