Is Volug still good?

[Dark Sage]

Well for some people maybe but not most of us. I don't really care that much about LTCs these days for example

Edited November 30, 2014 by Black Frost

[Irysa]

Likewise more strength allows for better fighting of enemies, stronger weapons (at points), and more reliable killing all-around.

Look, I 'get' why movement is valued so highly, but I don't think I will ever accept the reason behind it as I will never see turn-counting as a justifiable measure of a units value. No matter what can be said it will, in my eyes, always be a stupid measure in-place more for people who love to flaunt how exceptional they are and ruin the point of the list instead of actually inform people.

I've just demonstrated that movement isn't only applicable to turncounts though...

Stats like str can be worked around with different weapons or forges. The point is, can the mounted unit get kills reliably? Generally speaking, the answer is yes. As a result because they have extra movement on top of acceptable stats, they're better. They're more versatile than the unit with lower mov who either has equal, or overkill stats. Balanced mounted units deserve to be ranked higher for being more flexible to all sorts of playstyles.

If the mounted unit can't get kills reliably, but is still useful for rescuedropping then personally, I advocate that in a different category of usefulness (same for staffbots), although really the only mount that comes to mind for being nearly useless for combat but useful for ferrying is Shanna/Thany in FE6. The vast majority of other mounted/flying units are actually quite acceptable combatants.

Edited November 30, 2014 by Irysa

[Snowy_One]

No. They deserve to be ranked lower for having an over-investment in a stat that had no direct application to combat and really only applies to LTC play.

Also, if that's true, why is Zihark below Boyd?

Okay. I know what you're gonna say, 'Boyd joins earlier, has a better weapon, and 1-2 range', and would result in me placing Boyd higher-up, but that's kind of not the point.

Both 'get by' in combat, on acceptable stats. But Boyd overkills STR (least in PoR), has some speed issues, and has a poor skill. Zihark has a great skill and a critical bonus that he can also link into Vantage.

Yet I'm sure that, if we discounted those three factors I mentioned earlier (A Boyd with the same stats, but joins at the same time as Zihark with swords), you'd still say Boyd is better. Why? Are 'average stats' suddenly not acceptable?

[Lord Raven]

Nothing you said forms a coherent point after the first line.

No. They deserve to be ranked lower for having an over-investment in a stat that had no direct application to combat and really only applies to LTC play.

Imagine you have a character in trouble for whatever reason and you need them to get protected or get out of there ASAP. Do you a) leave them there and rely on them to dodge, b) rescue them and get away or c) get a few durable units around her?

a) is really stupid. However, b) allows you to rescue and get away so the mounted unit doesn't get hit and get doubled due to worse stat boosts and c) is much easier when you have 2 or so mounts on the field.

Do you see the words LTC anywhere in my statement? It's one situation, but I'm attempting to illustrate how tactical flexibility due to a mount is irrelevant of LTC play. But this jackass has me on ignore so I doubt he'll read this.

Edited November 30, 2014 by Lord Raven

[dondon151]

i wholeheartedly agree with snowy, but i think he's not exhaustive enough with his examples.

we all know that healing items in this game are so abundant and so strong that they outclass healing staves. so if healing items are enough to beat 90% of the game, why does it matter that another unit can use staves? is there a demonstrable importance to it? after all, staves have 0 effect on combat, especially since we don't get any of the juicy status staves in FE10. tier lists that focus on turncounts overrate staff-using units because they have some sort of magical "utility" that is really completely useless.

i know what you LTC-fags are going to say next. a staffer heals a unit so that the unit doesn't have to heal himself! but the only reason why it's important that a unit not have to heal himself is because it we're measuring that unit's value by turn-counting.

i also think that other parameters such as weapon rank and weapon selection are overrated. if iron lances are enough to beat 90% of the game, why does it matter that another unit can use silver lances? or if swords are enough to beat 90% of the game, why does it matter that another unit can use lances or axes? tier lists that focus on turncounts overrate units who excel at these parameters because the only reason why axes and lances are better than swords is because all of the LTC-fags have a raging hard-on for turncounting and don't want to use anything but hand axes and javelins.

turncounts are an idiotic metric that only nerds who spend their entire lives taking this game too seriously use to impress upon normal people how much better they are at a video game.

[Florete]

(I forgot about this topic after I made my first post)

If 5 movement is enough to beat 90% of the game, why does it matter that one unit has 7? Is there a demonstrable importance to it?

It's almost 2015 and Snowy is still saying this shit. Sigh.

Then again, reading through this topic, no one seems to have changed, for better or worse. Snowy is still Snowy, Chiki is still being what makes the rest of the FE community hate tier lists. It's actually rather interesting seeing Chiki and Snowy, two people on complete opposite ends of the spectrum, talking in the same topic.

Oh, right, the topic.

Volug is good if you know what you're doing but aren't specifically LTCing. As good as we once considered him? Maybe, maybe not, but the only part 1 unit I would rate above him is Sothe.

[Mekkah]

Then again, reading through this topic, no one seems to have changed, for better or worse.

I'm expecting smash fanatic to wander in any second to tell his hilarious stories about how good Volug is compared to the worst units in the DB, followed by a Shakespearean rebuttal from Interceptor and a tl;dr from Narga.

[Snowy_One]

(I forgot about this topic after I made my first post)

It's almost 2015 and Snowy is still saying this shit. Sigh.

Then again, reading through this topic, no one seems to have changed, for better or worse. Snowy is still Snowy, Chiki is still being what makes the rest of the FE community hate tier lists. It's actually rather interesting seeing Chiki and Snowy, two people on complete opposite ends of the spectrum, talking in the same topic.

Oh, right, the topic.

Volug is good if you know what you're doing but aren't specifically LTCing. As good as we once considered him? Maybe, maybe not, but the only part 1 unit I would rate above him is Sothe.

Eh. I disagree, but I've never been a big fan of using the Laguz in general, so I'm not going to whine with that assessment.

Volug can be good, really good, but he's not the best in chapter 1.

[Chloe Neo]

Volug doesn't seem to ever be good in my experience late game, like part IV.

[Junkhead]

i know what you LTC-fags are going to say next. a staffer heals a unit so that the unit doesn't have to heal himself! but the only reason why it's important that a unit not have to heal himself is because it we're measuring that unit's value by turn-counting.

i also think that other parameters such as weapon rank and weapon selection are overrated. if iron lances are enough to beat 90% of the game, why does it matter that another unit can use silver lances? or if swords are enough to beat 90% of the game, why does it matter that another unit can use lances or axes? tier lists that focus on turncounts overrate units who excel at these parameters because the only reason why axes and lances are better than swords is because all of the LTC-fags have a raging hard-on for turncounting and don't want to use anything but hand axes and javelins.

turncounts are an idiotic metric that only nerds who spend their entire lives taking this game too seriously use to impress upon normal people how much better they are at a video game.

Is that you, dondon?

[Snowy_One]

*shrug* If that's what he said then he's kind of missing the point of that post. No real reason to respond to him.

[Lord Raven]

It's called satire folks!

[dondon151]

what the hell are you all talking about

[Irysa]

snowy how many people do you have on ignore in this thread?

[dondon151]

snowy only hears what he wants to hear. if he's curious why he's toxic to an argument, look no further.

[Junkhead]

All this time, I thought most here thought turns were pretty damn important, especially for dondon. Maybe I didn't realize the difference in the context.

[Lord Raven]

Do you know what satire is Juliet?

[Loki Laufeyson]

Volug doesn't seem to ever be good in my experience late game, like part IV.

Dude, really? So that invalidates what Volug does do earlier in the game? So what if he aint all that great in Part 4. Neither is Vika, but both units are decent in Part 1. Funny how three units: Volug, Vika, and Sothe all suck in part 4, but are invaluable early on.

Is that you, dondon?

That is a joke.

[Snowy_One]

snowy how many people do you have on ignore in this thread?

Just two. Dondon and Raven. Ever since putting them on ignore I've been a lot happier.

[Lord Raven]

Because we're the only two that disagree with you and bother to be vocal about it...

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Volug is good if you know what you're doing but aren't specifically LTCing. As good as we once considered him? Maybe, maybe not, but the only part 1 unit I would rate above him is Sothe.

In part 1 I think Sothe is still better than Volug.

Volug only has much more HP and higher movement. The other stats are pretty much the same as Sothe's.

Sothe with a good weapon can deal more damage than Volug.

For example in 1-6-2 two elfire mages can kill Volug.

Volug doesn't seem to ever be good in my experience late game, like part IV.

If Volug gets an A-support in earth and is in Tibarn's party (authority star boosts in evasion), most of the enemies will have a hitrate <20%.

Especially in hard mode he's very useable thanks to his high speed.

Edited December 1, 2014 by The Taninator

[Florete]

Because we're the only two that disagree with you and bother to be vocal about it...

To be fair, I'm a mod, so he can't ignore me.

In part 1 I think Sothe is still better than Volug.

Volug only has much more HP and higher movement. The other stats are pretty much the same as Sothe's.

Sothe with a good weapon can deal more damage than Volug.

For example in 1-6-2 two elfire mages can kill Volug.

Thus, as stated, I would rate Sothe higher than Volug.

[-Cynthia-]

Dude, really? So that invalidates what Volug does do earlier in the game? So what if he aint all that great in Part 4. Neither is Vika, but both units are decent in Part 1. Funny how three units: Volug, Vika, and Sothe all suck in part 4, but are invaluable early on.

I wouldn't say Vika is invaluable in Part 1. Volug has some Part 1 value, but is not usually our most valuable unit. Sothe I can agree to.

On Volug's Part 3- his combat is better than most in 3-6 without investment but it takes several turns of grassing to get there so he's still not great. He doesn't do much in 3-12 due to enemy density and 1-2 range weapons- I think he can provide a Shove in 3-13 but doesn't really have the stats to kill Ike. I wouldn't say Volug's Part 3 helps him much in practice.

[dondon151]

okay so now that we've established that my post was satirical

the point is that it uses the same rhetoric that snowy wields in order to dismiss the utility of movement. if snowy wants to be consistent in his position, he needs to elaborate why he thinks staves are useful or weapon triangle control is useful (or why stats are useful at all) but movement is not useful. and because he's not really interested in engaging with articulate opposing viewpoints, someone will have to quote this post and challenge him on these inconsistencies.

Edited December 1, 2014 by dondon151

[Dark Sage]

I wouldn't say Vika is invaluable in Part 1. Volug has some Part 1 value, but is not usually our most valuable unit. Sothe I can agree to.

On Volug's Part 3- his combat is better than most in 3-6 without investment but it takes several turns of grassing to get there so he's still not great. He doesn't do much in 3-12 due to enemy density and 1-2 range weapons- I think he can provide a Shove in 3-13 but doesn't really have the stats to kill Ike. I wouldn't say Volug's Part 3 helps him much in practice.

Volug seems to be one of those characters who's really at his best at 0% growths. I haven't played 0% growths myself so dondon are there other characters like that?

Also Volug can kill Ike but it requires Resolve/Wrath; I've done it before. He's not the optimum guy to do it unless its 0% growths though.

Volug would probably fit in well at bottom of High/top of Upper Mid. He's great early on and is serviceable later but he lacks the indespensibleness (is that a word?) of the units above him.

Edited December 1, 2014 by Black Frost