Want to make a new tier list?

[Vorena]

I do not think I have ever seen DD151 support an argument using a plethora of stat uses for a single character before on prep for a singular chapter really late into the game. Its surprising to think that those stat boosters or money from selling (to use on forges) cannot be used to save turns earlier on or provide better reliability.

Edited March 18, 2015 by Vorena

[Irysa]

I'm arguing that they shouldn't. No one can do what Jill can with favoritism, period.

I'm not saying they can do what Jill literally does. I'm saying she is broadly speaking, replicable in terms of routing enemies throughout the game where she is available. Other characters will do it worse but it is not some unreachable, unobtainable, unrealistic goal that requires spending like an extra buttload of turns training some other unit due to the way resource allocation works in this game. Most other FE games in a non rigged environment require you to actively slow down to train units to attempt to replicate the roles of other units (EG, FE6 Percival or Miledy), but Tellius you don't have to slow down on the maps to train, you just allocate your base resources elsewhere. Oscar is in the same tier as Marcia in FE9 for basically this reason, he can be BEXP dumped into a Paladin and rambo through the game, functioning as a worse Marcia due to lack of flight (costs a few turns here and there). We don't excessively penalise Oscar for not being the best choice.

Jill is deserving of being where she is as a high tier unit because she is far and away the best at what she does in the areas she exists and does some exclusive things, but penalising other characters for not being Jill is bizzare because it results in the situation I pointed out where suddenly other units would be rated significantly(?) higher as the next Go To option if Jill didn't exist.

I'm going to back down on this point now however because this is going in circles. I'm not advocating for the upper mid units to get bumped up to high, just for a few units in mid and below who can pull off some good combat in late part 3/all of part 4 to move up a little . Basically Tanith from mid to high, Geoffrey to at least mid (honestly think he's bottom of upper mid material along with Kieran, and he should not be rated worse than Kieran when he comes with a free Paragon, and it's ballocks that somehow Cain is rated mid but Geoffrey isn't), and potentially Neph to bottom of High. Those are all units that, given a solid chunk of favouritism, are pretty good at the whole killing shit thing.

Edited March 18, 2015 by Irysa

[dondon151]

I do not think I have ever seen DD151 support an argument using a plethora of stat uses for a single character before on prep for a singular chapter really late into the game. Its surprising to think that those stat boosters or money from selling (to use on forges) cannot be used to save turns earlier on or provide better reliability.

in routing 0% growths again, i've stretched my monetary resources very thin and determined in the process that you simply don't need a whole lot of money for the GMs, period. if you don't manage money carefully, you probably won't be able to afford the 3-3 dracoshield, which is a significant but bearable loss. if you manage money carefully, you can definitely blow 8000G on the 3-3 dracoshield just to slightly improve tanith for 4-2 so that the dragonmasters can go to 4-P and 4-3 and increase reliability there.

[Snowy_One]

This is basically tiering philosophy again. Do we really need to continue?

[Junkhead]

I'm not saying they can do what Jill literally does. I'm saying she is broadly speaking, replicable in terms of routing enemies throughout the game where she is available. Other characters will do it worse but it is not some unreachable, unobtainable, unrealistic goal that requires spending like an extra buttload of turns training some other unit due to the way resource allocation works in this game. Most other FE games in a non rigged environment require you to actively slow down to train units to attempt to replicate the roles of other units (EG, FE6 Percival or Miledy), but Tellius you don't have to slow down on the maps to train, you just allocate your base resources elsewhere. Oscar is in the same tier as Marcia in FE9 for basically this reason, he can be BEXP dumped into a Paladin and rambo through the game, functioning as a worse Marcia due to lack of flight (costs a few turns here and there). We don't excessively penalise Oscar for not being the best choice.

Jill is deserving of being where she is as a high tier unit because she is far and away the best at what she does in the areas she exists and does some exclusive things, but penalising other characters for not being Jill is bizzare because it results in the situation I pointed out where suddenly other units would be rated significantly(?) higher as the next Go To option if Jill didn't exist.

A few units can match or even surpass Jill's combat potential, thing is...Mov. + Flight. The way she makes it exclusive in her own team, as well. Haar's doing the same thing among the GMs.

I'm going to back down on this point now however because this is going in circles. I'm not advocating for the upper mid units to get bumped up to high, just for a few units in mid and below who can pull off some good combat in late part 3/all of part 4 to move up a little . Basically Tanith from mid to high, Geoffrey to at least mid (honestly think he's bottom of upper mid material along with Kieran, and he should not be rated worse than Kieran when he comes with a free Paragon, and it's ballocks that somehow Cain is rated mid but Geoffrey isn't), and potentially Neph to bottom of High. Those are all units that, given a solid chunk of favouritism, are pretty good at the whole killing shit thing.

I like how you want to make it more fair to the other characters シ, but you have to understand, being in a lower spot doesn't necessarily mean you're bad. It's also a case of others simply being better. Like, if Ike's bottom of Top Tier, that doesn't mean it's because he isn't living up to his possible hype (like you said, throwing in the best resources at a character=, it's just that Jill, Titania & Haar will always be better. I raised Tanith & Sigrun from their previous Low/Lower Mid spots because of the resources they can be given to actually be solid when they're around. Edited March 18, 2015 by The Red Queen

[Elieson]

Can we just stick Jill in her own damn tier and move on with this? It's evident that Jill does X important job better than everyone else. Just decide on what Jill gets, and assume the rest is split between the other 60 cast members or whatever.

[XeKr]

The opportunity cost problem boils down to whether those resources have inherent value outside being used to improve efficiency/turncount/reliability. Some people consider it “better” simply if a character requires less investment (a pure input to output comparison in a vacuum). Personally I agree, yet only insofar as the resources saved significantly impacts clears elsewhere.

This is a different (but related) issue than the optimal deployment problem (which, to my knowledge, no one really likes because it results in stuff like FE9 Jill in bottom). To some extent it is also an opportunity cost issue, deployment slots can be thought of as a “resource” as well, but tricky because of occasional forced deployment and the fact we’re tiering the characters.

To be clear, I consider this a different issue because treating deployment with opportunity cost results in classic conundrums. For example, whether the hypothetical identical Sath diminishes Seth (or Rody/Draug/Ryan vs. Luke), whether low tiers are better on the bench, whether Karel should be penalized for losing Harken and whether Renning (or whoever) should be the worst ever because he’s essentially strictly worse than 11 other Endgame fillers, independent of RNG. However, I think deliberately allocating other resources (besides deployment slots) suboptimally is simply less efficient play, and the tier list should reflect the highest known level of play. don't attack me for calling other playstyles "bad" plz. So it seems preferable to have optimal resource allocation with varying team composition. (to be more clear, I don’t particularly care either way, but this manner is ultimately more intuitive, I think)

In this specific case, it has been shown that Tanith can be a solid contributor without crippling the team elsewhere (I’ll accept this, even if I remain skeptical wrt the reliability). In that case, I can see the argument; a team containing Tanith, even given the resources invested, is more probable (in both the random-sample-from-the-ensemble sense and the chance-of-success sense) to clear chapters quickly and reliably than a team containing Skrimir. Or the absence of Tanith in such clears is more impactful (even given the resources that can now be allocated elsewhere). This might apply for more optimal teams, in which Tanith is a 2nd or 3rd string routing behind Jill/Haar/etc and for less optimal teams where Tanith is the primary router. Such arguments are sound even outside the absolute lowest turn count case. Exactly what context (team composition) then is she worse than Skrimir? (maybe the reliability is trash, I haven’t investigated it deeply)

The real argument is the logically subsequent Sigrun vs. Skrimir

@Snowy: It was always just tiering philosophy. We’re literally “debating” how to rank the characters from “best” to “worst” in a video game. To me it’s at least (somewhat) interesting until the “what’s the meaning of life/purpose of tiering?” discussions. >_>

[Moishe Oofnik]

Titania>Sothe

Oscar>Mia

Same speed base with titania at 20/10 he basicly mia on a horse with more 2 range options only problem that he has is endgame assuming we are bringing anyone who isnt a royal.

Jill in the same tier as haar or the highest of Top seems fair

just change the name to dragon stomp

Edited March 18, 2015 by TTPK_Tal

[Irysa]

Here's an interesting question that isn't entirely related to the current discussion - since we traditionally attribute items that thieves obtain exclusively via stealing and the like to be items the thieves "get" us, and some tierlists also give points to units for recruting others (although outside of the FE12 tierlist I don't really remember which others used this), can an argument be made that if a unit comes with a valuable item/weapon that we attribute their inventory towards part of their benefit to the team? This seems potentially really messy, and maybe it's been gone over before, I don't know.

A few units can match or even surpass Jill's combat potential, thing is...Mov. + Flight. The way she makes it exclusive in her own team, as well. Haar's doing the same thing among the GMs.

Undoubtedly, which is why they're top, and I'm not arguing otherwise.

I like how you want to make it more fair to the other characters シ, but you have to understand, being in a lower spot doesn't necessarily mean you're bad. It's also a case of others simply being better. Like, if Ike's bottom of Top Tier, that doesn't mean it's because he isn't living up to his possible hype (like you said, throwing in the best resources at a character=, it's just that Jill, Titania & Haar will always be better. I raised Tanith & Sigrun from their previous Low/Lower Mid spots because of the resources they can be given to actually be solid when they're around.

Being in a lower spot indicates that your contributions/potential contributions aren't as significant as the people above you. Current High tier characters do their job the best, but the High tiers do not have a total monopoly on facilitating efficient and reliable clears in this game. Like, trying to beat the first couple of chapters of FE6 HM without Marcus has an extremely significant impact on your speed and reliability. To put it into perspective, a Marcusless Chapter 1 (I have done this) takes about at minimum 20 turns, four times greater than the standard fairly reliable clear. Additionally, once you run out of Vulneraries you're essentially screwed as there's no way to heal and Wolt and Bors@Javelin don't stand a chance of killing the boss from range safely. Rutger is in a similar position because Dieck and Marcus can't double non Knight bosses without rigging or some kind of insane slowdown on previous maps (and I mean insane), and Marcus likely can't use the Killing Edge either anyway. This is the biggest reason FE tierlists have traditionally given earlygame crutch units such a strong bias, because there's generally only going to be a very small amount of ways to efficiently beat those maps. It's not solely limited to earlygame though, it's basically impossible for any other earlygame staffer besides Saul to even use Warp in an efficient playthrough.

FE10's midgame is not nearly as restrictive as the earlygame, because at worst you're losing a few turns here and there for not using the best units as opposed to losing like, 20 or something ridiculous. The amount of turns and reliability you lose for not fielding ANY of the good units is what will hit your turns in that fashion.

...

So it seems preferable to have optimal resource allocation with varying team composition. (to be more clear, I don’t particularly care either way, but this manner is ultimately more intuitive, I think)

...

I'm on board with this, but given RD's awkward deployment situation, you're essentially forced to give people like Ed, Neph and Geoffrey big boosts to their tiering since they are basically mandatory for clearing some maps efficiently. I'm comfortable with this, but I'm not sure everyone else is.

[Snowy_One]

@Snowy: It was always just tiering philosophy. We’re literally “debating” how to rank the characters from “best” to “worst” in a video game. To me it’s at least (somewhat) interesting until the “what’s the meaning of life/purpose of tiering?” discussions. >_>

Yea. But here, instead of debating the value of a certain character compared to another, we're debating just HOW the characters should even be compared in the first place and what is and is not fair. That seems like... well... a tier-list philosophy debate than one of actual character placement.

[Chiki]

I'm not saying they can do what Jill literally does. I'm saying she is broadly speaking, replicable in terms of routing enemies throughout the game where she is available.

Not true in Part 3 DB chapters. Regardless, same goes for Haar.

Oscar is in the same tier as Marcia in FE9 for basically this reason, h

Wtf are you talking about? No one today in their right mind thinks Oscar is in the same tier as Marcia. LOL

Jill is deserving of being where she is as a high tier unit because she is far and away the best at what she does in the areas she exists and does some exclusive things, but penalising other characters for not being Jill is bizzare because it results in the situation I pointed out where suddenly other units would be rated significantly

Why wouldn't you penalize other units for not being as good as another unit? That's like the most basic concept in a tier list; compare units to each other and see which one is better and which one is worse. When some unit is worse than another, penalize them. I think you're just getting so confused that you're forgetting the basics.

Edited March 18, 2015 by Chiki

[Snowy_One]

Why wouldn't you penalize other units for not being as good as another unit? That's like the most basic concept in a tier list; compare units to each other and see which one is better and which one is worse. When some unit is worse than another, penalize them. I think you're just getting so confused that you're forgetting the basics.

Because there is a huge difference between not being as good as another unit, and being penalized for not being as good as another unit. It's the difference between getting beaten 2-0 in a game of Soccer against an opposing team, and losing 1-0 at half-time and having the ref shoot out the kneecaps of the losing team.

When you penalize units for not being as good as other units you end up with it devolving down to finding just the best units then excluding everyone else. Because they not only have to now struggle against their own weaknesses and shortcomings, but against the strengths of every other unit above them.

[Chiki]

Because there is a huge difference between not being as good as another unit, and being penalized for not being as good as another unit. It's the difference between getting beaten 2-0 in a game of Soccer against an opposing team, and losing 1-0 at half-time and having the ref shoot out the kneecaps of the losing team.

When you penalize units for not being as good as other units you end up with it devolving down to finding just the best units then excluding everyone else. Because they not only have to now struggle against their own weaknesses and shortcomings, but against the strengths of every other unit above them.

It's not really that complicated. The reason FE9 Ilyana is worse than Soren is because of availability. Ilyana is ranked lower because she doesn't have Soren's availability; in other words, Ilyana is ranked lower because she's not as good as Soren.

It's a completely trivial notion in the end (penalizing units for being worse than others), because we do it all the time.

[Baldrick]

Say there was a unit that contributed more than Ilyana when Soren was in play, but less when he wasn't in play because Ilyana is the best mage substitute for Soren. You could optimal team composition; because Soren is the best mage, he's always in play and so the order should be Soren > unit > Ilyana. Alternatively, you could consider optimal resource allocation with varying team composition; Ilyana is better than the other unit when Soren is not in play, so Soren > Ilyana > unit.

In both, Ilyana is worse than Soren, but only in the former situation is she penalised for being worse than Soren. Do you understand now?

[Elieson]

What would a Chiki's tier list look like, I wonder?

and why

[Snowy_One]

Say there was a unit that contributed more than Ilyana when Soren was in play, but less when he wasn't in play because Ilyana is the best mage substitute for Soren. You could optimal team composition; because Soren is the best mage, he's always in play and so the order should be Soren > unit > Ilyana. Alternatively, you could consider optimal resource allocation with varying team composition; Ilyana is better than the other unit when Soren is not in play, so Soren > Ilyana > unit.

In both, Ilyana is worse than Soren, but only in the former situation is she penalised for being worse than Soren. Do you understand now?

There is also the problem that 'penalizing' units results in a top-down measurement where the best units are already decided upon and the remainder is, effectively, who hurts the team the least outside of the best units as opposed to whom helps the team the most with the top units just being the most helpful.

[dondon151]

that's not a problem if you don't say that it is.

[Snowy_One]

that's not a problem if you don't say that it is.

A lot of things aren't problems if I don't say that they are.

[Zkirsche]

Why are Aran and Kyza mid and Aran king of mid?

Stefan is flat out worse than Volke in like every non-superfluous parameter including availability.

Is Gareth's durability really a super problem in efficiency or LTC? Blood Tide's only use is in 4-E realistically and there aren't that many spirits. Just ward + magic water and he's fine. Maybe a talisman too because who the fuck cares about those. He should be just below Ena.

Don't think Lyre is a tier worse than oliver and co. Eventual rend + 9 mov is surely better than whatever Oliver or Kurth brings.

Other thoughts: Sanaki/devdan can probably drop because of their mov and non-factor passive skills. Lehran probably does more even in just 4-E. Lehran > Bastian unless we can get some kind of long-range tome easily/quickly) (Is it possible Chiki?). Nephenee looks high too but it might be Shinon bias.

Tbh as a "tier veteran" (what an honour) I'm much more interested in an LTC run than an "efficiency" one because the latter has been pretty much completed before in RFoF's topic and I'm interested in the possible differences between the two. Definitely more interested in Chiki's list as of right now and I'll probably go look up his LTC run.

Edit: Also Chiki what did you do with celerity your run doesn't have base stuff.

Edit2: Also after watching some of your PT I think I'm on Haar's side for the Haar vs Jill(T) debate under LTC? I just don't think she saves the sheer number of turns Haar does before Part 4 and once we get to part 4 they're both incredibly necessary. I'm struggling because it's super close and I hate high tier debates but even just in terms of availability Haar wins? 3-3 to Jill's 3-6, his 3-4 to Jill's 3-13, 3-11 to Jill's 3-12 and I can't imagine all the turns he saves in 3-8/3-2/3-10, probably as much as Jill's part 1 which is before she really gets going. This is before adding on 2-E.

Edited March 19, 2015 by kirsche

[Yojinbo]

Afaik he's currently looking into improving some of his turn counts and tries to cut it down to about 150. I know there are a few turns that can be saved here and there but I don't think it'll have any major impacts on a hypothetical LTC tier list.

I don't really know how or why you'd compare Haar and Jill. The only time they're actually part in the same army is in 4-P and 4-3, for every other chapter they might as well be in two entirely different games and have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Imo, if you want a legitimate tier list you have to be able to actually compare the performances of different charactes in one and the same scenario. In Haar's and Jill's case that's 2 chapters + endgame out of like 30 chapters overall, which imo simply isn't enough to actually rank them together in a tier list for all of FE10. Splitting tier lists up into one for Part 1 + 3-6, 3-12 and 3-13, one for Part 4 + Endgame and another one for the remaining chapters is the only way I can see the idea of a FE10 tier list work out without endless talk about the fundamental arrangements.

[Junkhead]

Why are Aran and Kyza mid and Aran king of mid?

I think Anoulethe explained it pretty well, here:

I have already mentioned these numbers. Kysha takes 99 BEXP initially, then in the 3-7 base, he takes maybe 80EXP (since he gained some CEXP in 3-4), then you do the same in the 3-8 base. The total cost is somewhere in between 7000 and 8000 varying on how much CEXP he gets. That puts him on 26AS, also known as "fine for the rest of Part 3". 34ATK is a little bit below Ulki, so he's a reasonable canditate for a Drop: Ulki's not in urgent need because he has much more reliable Adept proc rates, but he sees more combat in general.

Now, for Kysha to have 28AS for Part 4, he needs more Blossom. Two more levels, to be accurate. That seems like a lot given how much we gave him already, but it comes after you have access to a huge amount of BEXP from the CRKs and taking that BEXP isn't so bad because it comes just before a huge windfall at the end of Part 3. Moreover, all that CEXP he gains between 3-8, 3-10, and 3-11 (a non-negligible amount) cuts the amount we need to give him. I specify doing this before Part 4 starts, because even though you can give him a Blossom level in 4-2, it means he's stuck with Blossom for the rest of the chapter, and as I've discussed Blossom is bad if you gain good CEXP as Kysha does in Part 4. Kysha almost certainly has S Strike as well; over his six Part 3 chapters, he would only need to enter combat 6 times per chapter when he doubles. That is easily manageable. So at the start of Part 4, he's sitting on 41ATK/28AS... which is pretty good, all things considered. He can go to the desert, or to 4-2 as he pleases: he can feasibly reach 30AS for 4-3. But his attack is still an issue. 41ATK doesn't 2HKO much. Sadly he's still in the position of only ORKOing Sages and Bishops reliably. A Drop fixes that to some extent but even with the Drop he's short on Halberdiers and Generals. Alternatively, you could try Adept, since his speed isn't so bad and he perpetually 3HKOes. Now that I consider it, Resolve isn't such a bad idea just to buff his proc rate with Adept. I found that I wasn't really using Resolve much myself in Part 4 and just using it as an easy durability fix for frailer units.

So really, Kysha's speed is pretty fixable with Blossom and BEXP, but his strength remains an issue. He's perpetually short of ORKOing. The question is, is that so much worse than certain low tier units? Makalov is never reliably going to 2HKO and has movement issues. He's much harder to dig out of his hole since it's just as expensive to BEXP him, you have to do it for more levels, and you can't even Blossom slowplay. Sigrun makes Kysha's strength and speed look good. She is not going to double in 4-3 full stop. Even with a max mt silver forge she struggles to match Kysha's attack. And her durability is miles behind Kysha. She also lacks the option of switching to Hawk Army.

Got me curious to actually using him for the first time, and he seems pretty salvagable. He's like a sort of Cat, without the awful gauge and with excellent durability.

Stefan is flat out worse than Volke in like every non-superfluous parameter including availability.

Stefan arrives pretty much when the chapter ends and Volke has one chapter that he might as well sit out of. I put Stefan above him (only switched their spots around) because he has Alondite access, which allows for flexibility in positioning, thanks to 2-range. There's also the fact he can bless a Wyrmslayer, if you wish to count flower petals.

Is Gareth's durability really a super problem in efficiency or LTC? Blood Tide's only use is in 4-E realistically and there aren't that many spirits. Just ward + magic water and he's fine. Maybe a talisman too because who the fuck cares about those. He should be just below Ena.

Yeah, I think so too. I didn't pay too much attention to his spot then.

Don't think Lyre is a tier worse than oliver and co. Eventual rend + 9 mov is surely better than whatever Oliver or Kurth brings.

Eventual Rend + 9 Mov is a bit hard to get to when you're really far from doing any bit of substantial damage...she's really awful, and it Cat gauge doesn't help. I'd really like to raise her, but the best she's got is probably Shoving (and even other NON-Laguz are better for that than her, unfortunately). And I thought Oliver could do something with Rescue, as redundant as it may seem (yeah yeah, we have Micaiah, but that doesn't take away his capability of doing and adding flexibility to the team)

Other thoughts: Sanaki/devdan can probably drop because of their mov and non-factor passive skills.

I raised Sanaki because I think she has a bit of potential in Resolve/Daunt + Miracle. Danved? Yeah, I'll have to see about him. I don't think he's that useless with all the BEXP they have going starting 3-11, maybe he can do something with it?

Lehran probably does more even in just 4-E. Lehran > Bastian unless we can get some kind of long-range tome easily/quickly) (Is it possible Chiki?). Nephenee looks high too but it might be Shinon bias.

I've never even unlocked Lehran, honestly. Does he contribute in killing Auras?

Nephenee looks high too but it might be Shinon bias.

You know she's kind of like Mia...with 2-range. Eventually solid 2-range, decent combat potential. She can't be much worse than her. She's even pretty key for 2-1 and sort of helps in 2-2 (Shoving Leanne around). As much as I (also) like Shinon, I have to admit, his lack of solid 1-range options is a major draw-back.

3-3 to Jill's 3-6, his 3-4 to Jill's 3-13, 3-11 to Jill's 3-12 and I can't imagine all the turns he saves in 3-8/3-2/3-10, probably as much as Jill's part 1 which is before she really gets going. This is before adding on 2-E.

Couldn't Titania or Oscar replicate a 2-turn by dropping someone off in 3-2? In my run, I'm having Haar drop off Shinon to critikill the boss (which, surprisingly, might be even more reliable...). Also, you're forgetting just how badass Haar is in 3-3 & 3-4. In both of those, he's responsible for 4-turns. I think I couldn't make less than 7-8 turns without him, but that was a loooong time ago (I used Celerity Heather for that strategy, lawl).

[Chiki]

Afaik he's currently looking into improving some of his turn counts and tries to cut it down to about 150. I know there are a few turns that can be saved here and there but I don't think it'll have any major impacts on a hypothetical LTC tier list.

I don't really know how or why you'd compare Haar and Jill. The only time they're actually part in the same army is in 4-P and 4-3, for every other chapter they might as well be in two entirely different games and have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Imo, if you want a legitimate tier list you have to be able to actually compare the performances of different charactes in one and the same scenario. In Haar's and Jill's case that's 2 chapters + endgame out of like 30 chapters overall, which imo simply isn't enough to actually rank them together in a tier list for all of FE10. Splitting tier lists up into one for Part 1 + 3-6, 3-12 and 3-13, one for Part 4 + Endgame and another one for the remaining chapters is the only way I can see the idea of a FE10 tier list work out without endless talk about the fundamental arrangements.

Because they're in the same game. I don't think your reasoning is sound here because it's possible to compare units in diff games; for example, FE8 Seth is obviously better than FE9 Makalov. No need to deny the truth.

Why are Aran and Kyza mid and Aran king of mid?

Stefan is flat out worse than Volke in like every non-superfluous parameter including availability.

Is Gareth's durability really a super problem in efficiency or LTC? Blood Tide's only use is in 4-E realistically and there aren't that many spirits. Just ward + magic water and he's fine. Maybe a talisman too because who the fuck cares about those. He should be just below Ena.

Don't think Lyre is a tier worse than oliver and co. Eventual rend + 9 mov is surely better than whatever Oliver or Kurth brings.

Other thoughts: Sanaki/devdan can probably drop because of their mov and non-factor passive skills. Lehran probably does more even in just 4-E. Lehran > Bastian unless we can get some kind of long-range tome easily/quickly) (Is it possible Chiki?). Nephenee looks high too but it might be Shinon bias.

Tbh as a "tier veteran" (what an honour) I'm much more interested in an LTC run than an "efficiency" one because the latter has been pretty much completed before in RFoF's topic and I'm interested in the possible differences between the two. Definitely more interested in Chiki's list as of right now and I'll probably go look up his LTC run.

Edit: Also Chiki what did you do with celerity your run doesn't have base stuff.

Edit2: Also after watching some of your PT I think I'm on Haar's side for the Haar vs Jill(T) debate under LTC? I just don't think she saves the sheer number of turns Haar does before Part 4 and once we get to part 4 they're both incredibly necessary. I'm struggling because it's super close and I hate high tier debates but even just in terms of availability Haar wins? 3-3 to Jill's 3-6, his 3-4 to Jill's 3-13, 3-11 to Jill's 3-12 and I can't imagine all the turns he saves in 3-8/3-2/3-10, probably as much as Jill's part 1 which is before she really gets going. This is before adding on 2-E.

Personally, I think people like Soul who attempt to debate on which unit is better or worse based on "brisk play" (without even bothering to even define it) have no idea on what they're talking about. Before you want to debate on something, you need to agree on what brisk play is. So efficient LTC (LTC with reliability, no crit abuses or stuff like that) is the way to go for tier lists.

Haar doesn't save any turns in chapters other than maybe 2-E, definitely 3-3 and 3-4 btw.

Say there was a unit that contributed more than Ilyana when Soren was in play, but less when he wasn't in play because Ilyana is the best mage substitute for Soren. You could optimal team composition; because Soren is the best mage, he's always in play and so the order should be Soren > unit > Ilyana. Alternatively, you could consider optimal resource allocation with varying team composition; Ilyana is better than the other unit when Soren is not in play, so Soren > Ilyana > unit.

In both, Ilyana is worse than Soren, but only in the former situation is she penalised for being worse than Soren. Do you understand now?

Lol..... it follows trivially from logic that, in the end, Ilyana is penalized for not being as good as Soren, since Ilyana's position in the tier list is determined based on both situations. Not the best counterargument when you actually unwittingly defend it.

Edited March 19, 2015 by Chiki

[Junkhead]

"Efficient LTC" sounds pretty on-point, yeah.

[CT075]

so in that scenario which position would she be

[Chiki]

Jill T would be above Haar, and Haar would be above Jill N.