Titania is the best in the game.

[Zanryu]

Wrong. It isn't the same for everyone, because everybody who uses personal experience has those characters at different levels, so everybody has a different experience gain for them.

Sigh... here we go again... Person experience means nothing.

I'm only gonna comment on these, because you don't seem to grasp when Swordsalmon has even shoved his own points into the ground by stating Oscar beats Titania in at least one thing. Titania can't be the best if she's not winning in everything now can she?

First quote:

No, the experience gain is the same. A level 15 Oscar gains the same experience against certain level enemies as another level 15 Oscar against the same enemies. The value will never change until the level difference changes. What I'm saying is, if used right, Oscar will promote earlier than SS has stated because if you DO use Oscar right, the experience gain will be 90% the same.

Second quote:

In this case it does. If I can have Oscar promoted on these chapters while using other characters, then it can be done easily. If it can be done easily, then it means something now doesn't it?

[Tino]

I'm only gonna comment on these, because you don't seem to grasp when Swordsalmon has even shoved his own points into the ground by stating Oscar beats Titania in at least one thing. Titania can't be the best if she's not winning in everything now can she?

She destroys Oscar for 50% chapters, then gets beaten slightly by Oscar for the other 50% of the chapters. Titania clearly wins.

No, the experience gain is the same. A level 15 Oscar gains the same experience against certain level enemies as another level 15 Oscar against the same enemies. The value will never change until the level difference changes. What I'm saying is, if used right, Oscar will promote earlier than SS has stated because if you DO use Oscar right, the experience gain will be 90% the same.

What I meant is that with personal experience, one player will have Oscar at level 14 at chapter X, while another player will have OScar at level 18 at chapter X.

In this case it does. If I can have Oscar promoted on these chapters while using other characters, then it can be done easily. If it can be done easily, then it means something now doesn't it?

No. Everybody gets the same amount of kills if possible, which most of the time is possible, and the same amount of BEXP.

[Florete]

How can you say archers will never see action on the enemy phase? Enemy has a ranged weapon. Put archer in that range. Archer retaliates. What? And since most archers generally have good avoid, this gives them great use as ranged units.

Besides, who is shoving one guy in the middle of 16 enemies to fight anyway? Action on the enemy phase is not always the greatest idea. And about the argument of not being able to counter attack on one range, if you actually let that happen, you're either an idiot or you planned it.

[Tino]

How can you say archers will never see action on the enemy phase? Enemy has a ranged weapon. Put archer in that range. Archer retaliates. What? And since most archers generally have good avoid, this gives them great use as ranged units.

Then melee fighters come in, kick the archer's butt and leave the player behind without having hurt a single enemy at all. Longrange fighters will never prioritize an archer over a melee fighter, unless the archer has no weapons or is OHKO'd. This is why this is a bad strategy.

Besides, who is shoving one guy in the middle of 16 enemies to fight anyway? Action on the enemy phase is not always the greatest idea. And about the argument of not being able to counter attack on one range, if you actually let that happen, you're either an idiot or you planned it.

Who said I put one guy in the middle of all enemies? I said that you shouldn't put an archer in the middle of all enemies, because he won't be able to do shit and will get damaged while not being able to do nothing in return.

Also, lolwut at the last comment. What do you mean?

[Florete]

Then melee fighters come in, kick the archer's butt and leave the player behind without having hurt a single enemy at all. Longrange fighters will never prioritize an archer over a melee fighter, unless the archer has no weapons or is OHKO'd. This is why this is a bad strategy.

Who said I put one guy in the middle of all enemies? I said that you shouldn't put an archer in the middle of all enemies, because he won't be able to do shit and will get damaged while not being able to do nothing in return.

Also, lolwut at the last comment. What do you mean?

If your archer is attacked close up, you're doing something wrong, or you planned it to draw the enemy near, which is possible with archers' generally good avoid. There will be plenty of opportunities to get them in good range of another ranged enemy that melee fighters may not be able to reach or effectively counter on the enemy phase.

This is entirely speculative, but it's always felt to me that archers gained more exp. as well, as they often end up passing the rest of my team in level (especially Rebecca). It may be a result of me using them too much, though.

[Tino]

If your archer is attacked close up, you're doing something wrong, or you planned it to draw the enemy near, which is possible with archers' generally good avoid. There will be plenty of opportunities to get them in good range of another ranged enemy that melee fighters may not be able to reach or effectively counter on the enemy phase.

Well, that was what you said. Put the archer in enemy range.

This is entirely speculative, but it's always felt to me that archers gained more exp. as well, as they often end up passing the rest of my team in level (especially Rebecca). It may be a result of me using them too much, though.

I think that's the case, because a level 3 archer gains just as much EXP as a level 3 weapon knight, for example. They gain EXP slower, though, because they have no enemy phase action (okay, next to no enemy phase action).

[Florete]

Well, that was what you said. Put the archer in enemy range.

I said to put them in range of a ranged weapon....

I think that's the case, because a level 3 archer gains just as much EXP as a level 3 weapon knight, for example. They gain EXP slower, though, because they have no enemy phase action (okay, next to no enemy phase action).

Then I use archers too much.

[Tino]

I said to put them in range of a ranged weapon....

Sorry. Misread your post. My bad.

And then there's one of your other characters in range of the ranged weapon/magic user and that character becomes the target.

[Florete]

And then there's one of your other characters in range of the ranged weapon/magic user and that character becomes the target.

That's why you avoid doing that. A rather simple task. Most maps are big enough that your other units can be nearby, yet still easily out of range.

[Tino]

That's why you avoid doing that. A rather simple task. Most maps are big enough that your other units can be nearby, yet still easily out of range.

The problem is that playing the game this defensively makes everything go slower, which means you won't get max BEXP anymore. Plus, there is always also at least one melee fighter that can reach your archer. If not, you're playing too defensively no matter what and can't get max BEXP anyway.

[Florete]

The problem is that playing the game this defensively makes everything go slower, which means you won't get max BEXP anymore. Plus, there is always also at least one melee fighter that can reach your archer. If not, you're playing too defensively no matter what and can't get max BEXP anyway.

Most chapters give you enough time to play somewhat defensively and still get max BEXP. If anything, that slightly "defensive" style will get you to the end one turn later, but without much, or any, risk. Look at chapter 27 for example. 13 turns? I think both you and I can easily beat that chapter within 10 turns, hands down. I know I can, I have. And I used Rolf as well.

EDIT3: fix'd

Edited September 17, 2008 by Fox

[CGV]

And then there's one of your other characters in range of the ranged weapon/magic user and that character becomes the target.

for this, I just put my units in the last space the enemy can reach so my archers/snipers can retalliate

[Tino]

for this, I just put my units in the last space the enemy can reach so my archers/snipers can retalliate

If you keep doing this, you will get in time trouble. That's what I meant.

[CGV]

If you keep doing this, you will get in time trouble. That's what I meant.

what exactly do you mean by that... time trouble?

[Florete]

what exactly do you mean by that... time trouble?

You won't be able to get max BEXP, which I've already argued against anyway. He has yet to reply to that.

[CGV]

Oh, well I don't have all my units stand in the back while one of my archer kills one of the enemy archers...

[Tino]

Here's my reply ;)

Most chapters give you enough time to play somewhat defensively and still get max BEXP. If anything, that slightly "defensive" style will get you to the end one turn later, but without much, or any, risk. Look at chapter 27 for example. 13 turns? I think both you and I can easily beat that chapter within 10 turns, hands down. I know I can, I have. And I used Rolf as well.

EDIT3: fix'd

So that means you give your archer one turn of action on the enemy turn in the entire chapter. That still fails massively compared to what your non-archer characters can do on the enemy phase.

"And I used Rolf as well" is personal experience. And you know how much personal experience means, right? Indeed, nothing.

[sandmanccl]

I like how Tino is conveniently ignoring every argument made against him.

I didn't think there'd be a bigger ass than myself here on the forums, but I was wrong. :D

Your arguments ARE NULL, you fucking cuntrag. I don't know how you can continue to say "BUT BUT BUT" when you're clearly in the minority on how you play the game. Seems like THE VAST MAJORITY of us here don't have guys that see more than a battle or two on any given enemy phase. I don't know what the fuck you're doing differently that means you've got a guy who's "getting all the action" on the enemy phase but I'm also sure you like restarting because all that needs to go against you is a few bad RNGs for hit and crit and you're ever-so-loved unit is now dead.

Here's another argument against you, Tino: No one is listening to you. Even the people agreeing with some of the main points you've said are still disagreeing with you on your approach. There's a difference between arguing and forcing your ideals on HOW TO PLAY A SINGLE FUCKING PLAYER GAME to other people who already enjoy it the way they play it.

And yes, I know I do a lot of things "wrong" for how to "win" a debate. Good thing this isn't fucking debate class, you hack. Fun thing about the real world: I can treat people who treat other people like shit like the scum of the earth they are.

[Tino]

I like how Tino is conveniently ignoring every argument made against him.

I ignore every argument? I reply to every argument made against me, so I don't know where you got this crap from. I mean, seriously.

I didn't think there'd be a bigger ass than myself here on the forums, but I was wrong.

Just because you can't stand it that you're losing debates doesn't mean that I'm all of a sudden a bigger ass than you. Perhaps I am an ass, but that doesn't matter. If you can't have it that you lose, then just stop debating here right now.

Your arguments ARE NULL, you fucking cuntrag. I don't know how you can continue to say "BUT BUT BUT" when you're clearly in the minority on how you play the game. Seems like THE VAST MAJORITY of us here don't have guys that see more than a battle or two on any given enemy phase. I don't know what the fuck you're doing differently that means you've got a guy who's "getting all the action" on the enemy phase but I'm also sure you like restarting because all that needs to go against you is a few bad RNGs for hit and crit and you're ever-so-loved unit is now dead.

Seriously, you have flamed me enough now. A simply debate is not a good reason to start flaming, man.

I might be in the minority, but (yes indeed, I say "BUT") that doesn't matter at all. If 100 people say that 1 + 1 = 3 and I am the only person who says that 1 + 1 = 2, then I'm clearly the one who is right. Same story here. I'm right, you're not.

Like I said before, it has nothing to do with playing style, because everybody plays the game in a different way. However, that doesn't mean that all those people who play the game so defensively get max BEXP on Hard Mode. In fact, I'm sure that most don't, and the ones who do get max BEXP see how their archers see next to no combat on the enemy phase.

You seriously should calm down.

No, I don't like restarting, but sometimes I have to. Point is, we don't debate according to playing styles, but rather according to averages, facts, goals and debating standards.

Here's another argument against you, Tino: No one is listening to you. Even the people agreeing with some of the main points you've said are still disagreeing with you on your approach. There's a difference between arguing and forcing your ideals on HOW TO PLAY A SINGLE FUCKING PLAYER GAME to other people who already enjoy it the way they play it.

Perhaps nobody is listening to me, but I honestly don't care. It's just a matter of you people not wanting to admit that you're wrong. I mean, let me pick one thing I said somewhere in this debate...

"Archers have no close-range option at all, just long range. That fails."

It's simply the truth. Nobody can prove me wrong on this, yet you all say that I'm wrong. Very nice.

And yes, I know I do a lot of things "wrong" for how to "win" a debate. Good thing this isn't fucking debate class, you hack. Fun thing about the real world: I can treat people who treat other people like shit like the scum of the earth they are.

This indeed isn't debate class, this is an actual debate, and if you want to participate in it, you should follow the standard debating rules and standards.

You're not even trying to win the debate anymore, you are simply pissed off that you couldn't win and now you're flaming me as much as you can. That, good sir, is a sign of weakness, in my opinion. And that's not meant as an offense, but rather as something for you to think about.

[CGV]

Tino, archers/snipers are in FE for a reason (like providing extra firepower from behind). If you can't figure out how to use them effectively... you just suck at using them...

And what about healers? What do you think of healers? Are they completely useless because they can't even attack?

Edited September 18, 2008 by CGV

[Leonri]

Calm down. It's just a friendly debate, just a game. Nothing important at all.

Let's think about this for a moment logically. Your main arguement is that archers cannot counter-attack, and you obviously put much store in this. Myself, I don't put much store in this at all. So, pros and cons of archers.

Pros

Has long range

Can deal with dangerous melee opponents without risk

Has excellent weapons

Good critical

High avoid

Bonus against flying units

With long/double bow can reach opponenets no one else can

Cons

Cannot counter melee opponents

Enemies target archers

Expensive weapons

Add as you see fit. ;)

Edited September 18, 2008 by Leonri

[CGV]

Calm down. It's just a friendly debate, just a game. Nothing important at all.

[sarcasm]hey... debates are serious business[/sarcasm]

[Tino]

Tino, archers/snipers are in FE for a reason (like providing extra firepower from behind). If you can't figure out how to use them effectively... you just suck at using them...

You guys never actually read, now do you? For extra "firepower" from behind, you're better off using mages or long-range weapons, because those characters also have an actual close-range option. Close + Long range >>>>>> Long range.

And what about healers? What do you think of healers? Are they completely useless because they can't even attack?

No, but they add something to the team in their own unique way. Archers and snipers add nothing to the team at all.

Has long range

Can deal with dangerous melee opponents without risk

Has excellent weapons

Good critical

High avoid

Bonus against flying units

With long/double bow can reach opponenets no one else can

1. All your other characters, except for Swordmasters and Ike until he gets Ragnell have this, too. Cancelled out.

2. All your other characters can do this too, because they also have long-range options. Cancelled out.

3. Second weakest and no close-range option? Easily the worst type of weapon (Knives excluded >_>). Cancelled out.

4. Sure.

5. That's completely character dependent. It has nothing to do with the class. Cancelled out.

6. Go Wind magic and Sonic Sword. Aside of that, it's true, but not a big advantage because there are also other options.

7. Long-range magic also exists. Cancelled otu.

Edited September 18, 2008 by Tino

[Florete]

Archers generally have better range advantages than anyone else except mages, since hand axes, javelins and the like are usually weaker and less accurate. But you aren't having your mages attack from close range, are you? In this case, they're in a similar position, occasionally worse.

And just because I use an archer to counter a ranged weapon doesn't mean my entire army is being held back. They may have less use on the enemy phase, but not by much. Like I said, you aren't sending one unit in to take on an army anyway.

[Tino]

Archers generally have better range advantages than anyone else except mages, since hand axes, javelins and the like are usually weaker and less accurate. But you aren't having your mages attack from close range, are you? In this case, they're in a similar position, occasionally worse.

No, no, no, no and no.

They're not in a similar position at all. Mages can actually counter enemy attacks, archers can't. Mages can choose when they are countered, archers can't. Etcetera.