Titania is the best in the game.

[Swordsalmon]

Point is, it wasn't a problem until he started calling it fact. And I mean, actually using the word "fact." If it had just been left as the statement it is, we wouldn't be here. If someone makes a subjective statement, I automatically assume it's just their opinion, as most people probably do.

I'm the one of stated it as a fact. >__<

Opinions are never facts, and will never be so. That's why they are opinions. It's where individuality comes from. Are debates not born from two peoples' differing opinions?

Titania owns for a long time-FACT.

Titania is better than everyone else for 18 Chapters-FACT.

Titania is the best character in the game.

[Florete]

I'm the one of stated it as a fact. >__<

Titania owns for a long time-FACT.

Titania is better than everyone else for 18 Chapters-FACT.

Titania is the best character in the game.

Either way, it was stated as a fact. And the RNG would like to state otherwise. No facts there.

[Reikken]

dunno about these other d00ds, but when I say "best", I mean on average, so the RNG has no bearing on that.

[Florete]

dunno about these other d00ds, but when I say "best", I mean on average, so the RNG has no bearing on that.

On average, she isn't the best anyway. Pretty much all the other paladins beat her down on average.

[Reikken]

Also, I mean best at helping you beat the game quickly (in regards to number of turns), not most shiny green numbers at the end or anything like that.

Edited September 25, 2008 by Reikken

[sandmanccl]

On average, she isn't the best anyway. Pretty much all the other paladins beat her down on average.

Not really. The vast majority of the paladins are so even across the boards, they all end up "on average" with slightly below cap in every stat. Even Titania and Geoffrey.

This is partly why I think a Path of Radiance Average Stats page like the one we got for Radiant Dawn would be really useful.

[Reikken]

spd is easy for all (except Geoffrey) to cap. The Knight Ward gives +30% spd growth when equipped. Give each one a few levels here and there with it.

[Swordsalmon]

On average, she isn't the best anyway. Pretty much all the other paladins beat her down on average.

No, since she retains a massive level lead. The only Paladin that ever beats Titania until end-game is Oscar, and that's only because he has Ike A, Kieran B for massive durability. Titania still won't die, and maintains a pretty big offensive lead with Silver Axes and a Rhys support. So actually, Titania might still be beating him. ^_^

Not really. The vast majority of the paladins are so even across the boards, they all end up "on average" with slightly below cap in every stat. Even Titania and Geoffrey.

This is partly why I think a Path of Radiance Average Stats page like the one we got for Radiant Dawn would be really useful.

Though they all have massive Movement, excellent weapon combinations, and hax supports, with the exception of Geoffrey? O_o

Click me!

[Reikken]

The only Paladin that ever beats Titania until end-game is Kieran*

fix'd

because he starts winning offense lategame

[Defeatist Elitist]

You probably haven't noticed since you're new, but I've said countless times I hate debates. In my opinion, the rules are too restricting. Also, in a game with a random number generator (RNG), how can anything possibly be considered fact? What happens is random, no matter how likely things may be. Therefore, the only way to call the topic title a fact would be if Titania always had 100% to hit and kill, and could never be damaged, be it by 0% hit chance or by 0 damage. This isn't the case, so it isn't fact. Even if that were the case, it might possibly be still up for debate as to whether or not it is a hard fact.

I've learned from this past week and previous times how debators minds work. I know how to debate; If I wanted to, I could probably end up being pretty good at it. But the idea of tier lists and all that comes with debating will never make sense to me, especially in a single-player game. And so, I'll likely never involve myself in a serious debate.

Opinions are never facts, and will never be so. That's why they are opinions. It's where individuality comes from. Are debates not born from two peoples' differing opinions?

Then... Don't debate? I don't really see what I can, or should say in this situation. Anything else would seem disrespectful...

[Florete]

Then... Don't debate? I don't really see what I can, or should say in this situation. Anything else would seem disrespectful...

I do my best to avoid the serious debates.

[Swordsalmon]

fix'd

because he starts winning offense lategame

At Chapter 18, Kieran has only 2 Atk, while Titania has 2 AS. I think Kieran is beating Titania only around...Chapter 24 or so?

I do my best to avoid the serious debates.

Then don't post in this topic. -_-

[Don Draper]

No, since she retains a massive level lead. The only Paladin that ever beats Titania until end-game is Oscar, and that's only because he has Ike A, Kieran B for massive durability. Titania still won't die, and maintains a pretty big offensive lead with Silver Axes and a Rhys support. So actually, Titania might still be beating him. ^_^[/url]

Did I get through to you at all? Ike won't be in range of Oscar all the time. Kieran A, Ike B is far superior because Oscar isn't getting tied down by Ike all the time.

Edited September 25, 2008 by IOS

[Swordsalmon]

Did I get through to you at all? Ike won't be in range of Oscar all the time. Kieran A, Ike B is far superior because Oscar isn't getting tied down by Ike all the time.

Yes, I have. Oscar's durability is quite weaker with Kieran A, so getting the support is more detrimental. Ike has 7 Movement and Oscar 9, they'll be able to remain in support range.

[Reikken]

wut? -3 avoid (when he already has 90 as well as great hp/def) = quite weaker?

uh.....right........

+7 avo for those times Oscar wants to actually make use of that move of his is much better than +3 for when he's near Ike

Edited September 25, 2008 by Reikken

[Florete]

Then don't post in this topic. -_-

I had cut out of the original debate until people started calling it fact. People calling opinions facts is one of my pet peeves. I won't stand for it.

[Defeatist Elitist]

I had cut out of the original debate until people started calling it fact. People calling opinions facts is one of my pet peeves. I won't stand for it.

But that was kind of my point. Given that they where debating, and the standards and ideals of debate, what they said would be considered fact.

[Florete]

But that was kind of my point. Given that they where debating, and the standards and ideals of debate, what they said would be considered fact.

Something can be generally considered truth without being an absolute fact. However, this isn't even that kind of case. Fire Emblem is entirely subjective. People may say personal experience means nothing, but personal experience does happen, so this topic can't be declared fact.

[Reikken]

No, Fire Emblem is made up of numbers. Things are quite factual.

"personal experience" only lets you see a small portion at a time. Sure, things may turn out differently from play to play, but individual runs are not what we're talking about. Or at least not what I'm talking about. "Boyd has better offense than Nephenee" doesn't mean that Boyd always has better offense on every single run that will ever be made. It means that on average, he has better offense.

Edited September 26, 2008 by Reikken

[Florete]

No, Fire Emblem is made up of numbers. Things are quite factual.

"personal experience" only lets you see a small portion at a time. Sure, things may turn out differently from play to play, but individual runs are not what we're talking about. Or at least not what I'm talking about. "Boyd has better offense than Nephenee" doesn't mean that Boyd always has better offense on every single run that will ever be made. It means that on average, he has better offense.

Nothing is factual except base stats and joining conditions. Those aren't enough to make a character the best.

I understand that. I really do. At this point, it's becoming the difference between what's likely and what's possible.

[Reikken]

No, growth rates, supports, weapons, etc. etc. etc. are all factual as well. They may not have the exact same effect on every single individual play through, but they are indeed solid facts.

"I understand that. I really do. At this point, it's becoming the difference between what's likely and what's possible."

I'm not understanding you. What are you trying to say?

[Florete]

No, growth rates, supports, weapons, etc. etc. etc. are all factual as well. They may not have the exact same effect on every single individual play through, but they are indeed solid facts.

Growth rates are constant, but the actual growths (as in, level-ups) can fluctuate too easily. You can change supports around every game. Weapon type is constant, but there is plenty of variety in each. And the paladins choose a weapon on promotion, adding more change.

I'm not understanding you. What are you trying to say?

Just because something is likely doesn't mean something else can't happen.

Edited September 26, 2008 by Fox

[canas is back]

I thought it was you who said PEMN, and that's what you're using to argue is that personal experience fluctuates, we are saying with either the averages for something that is random or the best for something you can choose, of course you can't have everything (they make a note of this when doing supports, which knoll ends up OK with them but the people he supports already have better ones) but something like an item you can give to anyone so you state them as having it

[Reikken]

Growth rates are constant, but the actual growths (as in, level-ups) can fluctuate too easily. You can change supports around every game. Weapon type is constant, but there is plenty of variety in each. And the paladins choose a weapon on promotion, adding more change.

Just because something is likely doesn't mean something else can't happen.

Uh...okay? Have you been paying attention to any of my posts in which I clearly said that I mean best on average, not best every single time?

[Florete]

Uh...okay? Have you been paying attention to any of my posts in which I clearly said that I mean best on average, not best every single time?

Have you missed all my points where I said I don't care about averages? This is because a single stat point difference can make a change in the midst of battle. I don't care if people refer to them when looking for good characters, but I believe you can't really know if a unit is good or not unless you actually use him/her.