Titania is the best in the game.

[Tino]

EDIT: Never mind.

Edited September 21, 2008 by Tino

[Tino]

Stop flaming!

No wonder he doesn't respect your arguments if you're verbally abusing everyone!

This. Listen to Leonri.

By 50% of the time, you really mean like 80% of the time, because it's very rare that the vast majority of your army gains experience on the enemy turn.

I didn't say all or most of your characters gain EXP on the enemy turn. But at least they get EXP on the enemy turn every two or three turns, while Rolf never sees any action on the enemy turn, except for a couple of battles, perhaps, but even that is unlikely.

How can you not see that telling someone that something is completely not worth using is the same as telling someone to not use that unit?

How can you not see that even though a unit or class can suck, I don't tell people not to use their favorite characters and/or classes?

That doesn't make what I said any less relevant, you bloated pillar of fat molecules. Game Mechanics are the most important thing. End of discussion. Everything else is trying to figure out how to achieve a certain specific goal within the game mechanics. End of discussion. There is nothing else that can be said about it because that is the cold, hard facts.

Again, what do you understand under "game mechanics"?

You're forgetting the part where your healer gets Rolf back up to full health, asshole. Stop changing the story to try and make it fit your ideals.

Yeah, sure, you could attack that guy with a mage. You're forgetting the part where there's an enemy unit with a ranged attack that has enough speed to double-attack the guy directly behind Brom. Ilyana is not a fast unit, and her defense is sage-like terrible, and she has low HP. She dies this next round. Rolf has better defense than Ilyana does. He'd survive it assuming you raised him right. Looks like I still win, because I laid down a scenario that actually happens quite often. Hmm, I guess you wouldn't understand anything about that because you have to bullshit your way through everything by changing the situation to fit your needs instead of giving me any credit for when I have a point.

Funny thing is, Ilyana is still on my team. She's busy helping nuke other things, though. It happens. That's one of the reasons you get to front 10 to 15 guys on maps.

Also keep in mind that path of radiance is decidedly super easy. My healers, more often than not, sit around doing nothing. Rhys STILL isn't promoted and I'm at chapter 22, even though whenever a unit takes even a pip of damage or even just gains a single HP from a level up, he's there to fix them up. It'd take a shitload of bonus experience to make him worthwhile. On the other hand, Rolf is a level 1 sniper now and holds his own against, well, everything I can come against.

Predition: you're going to say PEMN. Too bad this is fact, my friend. There's rarely a situation where my guys even get hurt because ON AVERAGE, Brom, Makalov, and even Astrid have enough defense to not take damage outside of maybe the final two fights in the game and from bosses, and Ike and Zihark are fast enough to dodge very well (AND they have good defense considering how weak enemies are) and my other units never get attacked because I'm not stupid. Considering they are my front three, no one is even getting hurt and so I feel like my healers are useless. I HAVE to put my weaker guys in harm's way to make my healers worthwhile.

You take no damage at all when you use a mage instead of an archer, and your healer will be able to do other things instead of having to heal unnecessary wounds of an archer.

You simply act like I didn't say this. Your healer has better things to do than constantly heal a character that is a piece of crap even when fully healed.

Ilyana has more than enough AS to make sure she isn't doubled. Also, Mordecai + Zihark support gives her some awesome durability boosts. 4 Defense and 10 Avoid is a really good boost.

As for me not admitting I lost a point, when I lose, I admit that, but when I can find a counter against the argument thrown against me, then I obviously counter. It's much better to use a mage than an archer, so you haven't won the point yet.

Your healer gets to do something every turn, whether it be healing, using support staves or something else with staves. There is always someone in the need of healing, even if it is only one HP. Healing one HP not only adds a little bit to the durability of the helaed character, but also gives the healer extra EXP, so it is in no way a bad thing if you heal only one HP. Yes, I know you also said this, but you forgot to mention that there is always some use for a healer every turn. Using a staff always adds something to the team, no matter how small the difference will be with when you wouldn't have used the staff. Healers generally level faster than your fighters.

You're telling how everything went in your game, so indeed, PEMN. Indeed, it's a fact that it happened in your game, but it's still what you experienced yourself, or in other words, personal experience.

He's got 8 speed at level 20/0. Sorry, Mr. Logical Fallacy, that's pretty awful. And before you say OH HE SHOULD BE HIGHER LEVELED, the fuck how? I've already explained I've used him every time I could, which unfortunately equated to maybe 3 turns on any given map. Brom starts out with more than that. Also I'm ignoring everything else you posted with the exact numbers and shit because none of that has ever, ever come into play for me, ever. A guy is either slow enough to be double-attacked or not. He's still getting double-attacked, therefore, he's slow.

Pretty much all countered above and in the stats I've shown previously, which proves that Rhys's speed isn't as bad as you think. And your own experience doesn't matter a single thing.

Also, 8 Speed at level 20/0? Lol no. Try 12.

It's not a terrible idea to have an archer near your healer at most times, anyway, because quite often there's Wyvern Knights and Pegasus Knights to fly in. Archers are very good for taking those out.

Wind magic way more effective because it also has the bonus bows have and it hits Resistance, of which Wyvern Riders have pretty much nothing, and Pegasus Knights are weak enough to be killed easily by axes or lances.

You fucking do. Pull your head out of your ass and use real-life assessment skills to review what you're saying. You are so telling people to not use archers because they "suck" and are "useless." You've used those adjectives. That is saying to not use them. How can you not see that? I've pointed it out to you like a hundred times, and so have the mods, and you still refuse to see it because you feel like you can hide behind your stupid "debate guidelines" that were laid down by people OTHER than the community you are currently addressing. I can keep telling you that you're full of shit for saying GENERAL DEBATING GUIDELINES BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW because just like 10 pages ago, there's only a handful of people who give a shit. That fact has not changed. The fact you keep using "general debate guidelines" to back up your arguments instead of your own opinions on how people should approach the game suggests to me you have down syndrome or Asperger's syndrome or something like that.

You really don't get it, do you?

I don't tell people not to use characters they like. I'm debating, and I'm seriously sick of you not understanding such a simple thing. Seriously, grow up and just admit that you're wrong on this point.

I don't care if people don't give a shit about the general debating standards, but if they want to debate, they have to follow them, and you are not an exception. I didn't make those rules, so you also can't bash me for it.

And I state what I think is true and back that up with arguments, so I definitely also use my own opinions, but backing up your arguments with opinions doesn't work and is invalid.

I fixed what you just said right here. I hope you realize this is what is going on. This is all about you, man. You keep saying "we" but it's all about you. You are trying to tell us what we can and cannot argue for, just for YOUR sake, so that YOU can be right.

I won't even bother replying to this, because it's the biggest piece of crap I've ever seen on this entire forum.

You don't use him correctly. You have not countered that. The fact is it's very possible to gain Rolf a lot of experience with relatively little effort. You HAVE NOT COUNTERED THAT. You think you have, but it's a FACT people have been able to raise up Rolf without any difficulties, NUMEROUS times. That is FACT. That is not PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, but just plain FACT. You are NOT using him right if you can't make him worthwhile. That is FACT.

I've countered it all. Too bad for you.

Rolf gains low experience and I've shown you that even at level 13 he still sucks, while you guys seem to think that he is massive ownage already at level 5 or something. Aparently, you were all wrong, because I've proven you wrong.

It's indeed a fact that people have managed to raise him to an awesome unit. I've done it multiple times myself. That does not change the fact, though, that on average he sucks and is the most worthless character at your disposal in this game.

[VincentASM]

Hopefully this doesn't end up sound like a cheap remark, but I sometimes really dread seeing this topics. Not because I think one side is wrong, but because the resulting clash usually gets ugly, fast.

Anyway, I've tried my best to read as many pages as possible, but I'm kind of tired and have other things to do. So I'll probably wait for a moderator to take a look, or check out things tomorrow.

For now, I'll say a few things.

During debates, someone is always going to "lose". If you're going to debate, I recommend keeping a cool head at all times. More often that not, if you bring up a point, it's going to be attacked from all sides. Now I've never debated for real before (only a few times before "real" debating came to being), but I can imagine what it feels like to be attacked. If you really can't take it, I suggest leaving the debate altogether. There's nothing worse than seeing a debate degenerating into a flaming contest.

People who don't regularly debate- You can't win. Seriously. Unless you're facing pseudo-debaters. Besides, there's nothing to win (unless you're in a debating contest, but that's arguable still).

The first paragraph thus applies to you.

Unless you want to become a serious debater, I suggest never reading a "best" topic and choosing to stick with "favourite" topics. The line isn't going to be clear to everybody, but still...

People who regularly debate- Hopefully I don't sound too biased, but I really can't see any fault in them. Sure, their methods might seem unorthodox, but that's the way "serious" FE debating has become

However, I would prefer if they could hold back a little against people who obviously don't spend their time debating. Sometimes, and this is a really stupid comparison but, I feel like I'm watching Paladins with Silver Sword fighting Cavaliers with Iron Swords here...

I don't know if it's just me, but if you tell a non-debater that Marcus or Titania is the best, they're obviously not going to accept it. If they did, that would be a minor miracle. Naturally, non-debaters won't "believe" most things such as (on a lower scale) average stats and PEMN.

Hopefully that didn't sound too stupid. I suck at writing rants.

Edited September 21, 2008 by VincentASM

[Don Draper]

sandmanccl needs to look up Ad Hominem Attack

That was actually well said, VincentASM. People who don't debate really shouldn't be bringing in their personal experiences to a debate topic. For example, "Rolf is better then Titania at Endgame" is completely false using averages.

[Meteor]

I suck at writing rants.

It's because you aren't offensive enough.

No but seriously, I agree.

[sandmanccl]

sandmanccl needs to look up Ad Hominem Attack

That was actually well said, VincentASM. People who don't debate really shouldn't be bringing in their personal experiences to a debate topic. For example, "Rolf is better then Titania at Endgame" is completely false using averages.

I never said a damn thing about Titania. I'm defending someone calling a unit with worth as "worthless." Titiania is good. Not really a whole lot more I can say about that. The only argument I can give Rolf over here for 20/20 is if you plan to import into Radiant Dawn and want to get him a skill boost whereas Titania isn't likely to cap anything at 20/20 in POR.

Also I'm completely aware of what an Ad Hominem attack is. Pay attention to what I'm doing. I am completely aware of everything I'm saying and the effect it's having. That's the fun thing about genuinely hating the way someone else approaches everything. You can do things "wrong" because you know it upsets them and ruins their day.

Tino is ridiculous. I'm being more ridiculous in the attempt to leave a sour enough taste in his mouth he'll take a step back and realize what a completely douchebag he's being. It's a weird form of Satire that maybe I only understand, but that's the only person who really needs to get it.

I don't expect anyone to believe me, but I'm actually a really nice guy. It makes me sick to my stomach to see people act like elitist jerks. Honestly, it makes me angrier than anything else I can think of off the top of my head, except maybe Pedophiles and "anonymous" (as in the 4chan group). I know I've brought up some great points, but if Tino doesn't want to see it because I'm calling him names out of sheer dislike of everything he's ever tried to do and say towards other members of this board, that's his issue.

With that, I'm away.

[Tino]

Perhaps you don't like my, fine, but you can at least treat me with some respect. I also don't like you because of the way you treat me, but I still show some respect, of which you don't seem to have anything.

You just are not used to the debating I do, with the standard everyone but you follows, and that's why you start flaming the hell out of me. You have brought up some good points, I won't deny that, but I countered them and then you start flaming.

[Florete]

You just are not used to the debating I do, with the standard everyone but you follows, and that's why you start flaming the hell out of me. You have brought up some good points, I won't deny that, but I countered them and then you start flaming.

The bolded part is the part I disagree with. Almost no one at this forums cares about the rules. No offense or anything, it's just the way we are. You have to accept that not everyone plays the same way you do.

[Swordsalmon]

The bolded part is the part I disagree with. Almost no one at this forums cares about the rules. No offense or anything, it's just the way we are. You have to accept that not everyone plays the same way you do.

Tino's not defending anyone's playing style. In debating, it's assumed you want to beat the game with gaining maximum BEXP. Individual playing styles have no place in an unbiased debate, which Tino and I have been doing.

[Metal Rabbit]

wouldn't it be more realistic to view it from a non-elitists way? us casual players outnumber you by alot.

i admit though, that elitists trump casuals in debate.

Edited September 22, 2008 by Metal Arc

[Florete]

Tino's not defending anyone's playing style. In debating, it's assumed you want to beat the game with gaining maximum BEXP. Individual playing styles have no place in an unbiased debate, which Tino and I have been doing.

He stated everyone uses those rules, but we don't. We don't generally care. A "debate" doesn't have to be defined by the standards you set. If I want to say a character is good because of how they turn out, you have no place to tell me I'm wrong.

[Swordsalmon]

wouldn't it be more realistic to view it from a non-elitists way? us casual players outnumber you by alot.

i admit though, that elitists trump casuals in debate.

Isn't what you just considered your group be elitist? :o Besides, all debators were originally casuals. ^_^

He stated everyone uses those rules, but we don't. We don't generally care. A "debate" doesn't have to be defined by the standards you set. If I want to say a character is good because of how they turn out, you have no place to tell me I'm wrong.

There needs to be a definate conclusion to a debate.

I'm fine if anyone uses bad characters they like. It's wrong when they try to pass off said characters as good.

[Metal Rabbit]

Isn't what you just considered your group be elitist? :o Besides, all debators were originally casuals. ^_^

I'm fine if anyone uses bad characters they like. It's wrong when they try to pass off said characters as good.

me an elitist?

LAWL

I'm a stupid teenage punk who hates the government and craps angst.

The most hardcore thing I've done on any FE game is beat FE8 hard without skirmishes, arena or tower abuse.

If you all are casual players too, then wouldn't it be better to lower your own debate standards?

[Swordsalmon]

me an elitist?

LAWL

I'm a stupid teenage punk who hates the government and craps angst.

The most hardcore thing I've done on any FE game is beat FE8 hard without skirmishes, arena or tower abuse.

If you all are casual players too, then wouldn't it be better to lower your own debate standards?

Well, you were stating that we should lower are standards because the larger group doesn't accept it.

If we lowered our debate standards, the hobby would become much less entertaining.

[Florete]

I'm fine if anyone uses bad characters they like. It's wrong when they try to pass off said characters as good.

There you go again. All you debators think your own opinions are fact. Just because you don't think they're good, doesn't mean someone else can't think they are. You keep your opinions and let us have ours.

[Swordsalmon]

There you go again. All you debators think your own opinions are fact. Just because you don't think they're good, doesn't mean someone else can't think they are. You keep your opinions and let us have ours.

If someone believes a character is good or bad, he/she will attempt to prove it, yes? A good way to start debates. ^_^

[Florete]

If someone believes a character is good or bad, he/she will attempt to prove it, yes? A good way to start debates. ^_^

All of your reasoning and "rules" gives us no chance. You have your tier list, and so you give us no option to have our own opinions, when really, the tier list is one big opinion.

[Swordsalmon]

If you can prove a character is good, the character is risen. Tier lists are based off factual evidence and the character's usefullness throughout the entire game.

[Metal Rabbit]

And not your own opinions? :o

[Florete]

If you can prove a character is good, the character is risen. Tier lists are based off factual evidence and the character's usefullness throughout the entire game.

You completely missed my point. We're just not seeing eye to eye on this. Just let me keep my opinions.

[DragonBladeSniper]

If you can prove a character is good, the character is risen. Tier lists are based off factual evidence and the character's usefullness throughout the entire game.

But some of you guys NEVER stop adding or repeating pros of your character no matter how much pros are said for the other character.

[Swordsalmon]

And not your own opinions? :o

I try to keep baseless opinions to a minimum.

But some of you guys NEVER stop adding or repeating pros of your character no matter how much pros are said for the other character.

Because often the other character's 'pros', are much more of a hindrance. -_-

[Florete]

I try to keep baseless opinions to a minimum.

Because often the other character's 'pros', are much more of a hindrance. -_-

Too bad, because that was an opinion.

[Swordsalmon]

...One person stated that being able to attack only indirectly was a positive quality, if I'm not mistaken. That weakens Combat, Experience, Tactics, and in FE9, BEXP. Thus, it's not a good trait.

Just one example. Would you like a 1-on-1 debate? It'd be fun. :)

[Florete]

...One person stated that being able to attack only indirectly was a positive quality, if I'm not mistaken. That weakens Combat, Experience, Tactics, and in FE9, BEXP. Thus, it's not a good trait.

Just one example. Would you like a 1-on-1 debate? It'd be fun. :)

Combat - Nothing can hurt your combat rank. I'd like to see someone with a 1-star combat rank, just because it's a hell of a better accomplishment than 5-stars.

Experience - How? Getting one more experience, and the enemy isn't even hurt. It isn't much, but it's something.

Tactics/BEXP - If you're letting it hinder these, you suck and you aren't doing it right. Plain and simple.

No, I would not. If I can use archers abilities to the best possible, and turn their one weakness into a strategical strength (Which I can do, by the way), that's all I care about it. Let me keep my opinions, and you can keep yours.