Ike is overrated

[Shadow Mir]

I never said Boyd's winning at base, even if he has 2-range access earlier. Ike's actually winning 3-P - maybe 3-5, which is the time Boyd can take The Crown and beat him under the setup I proposed (which nobody seems to have read, and that it doesn't even imply actual, full BEXP levels). Boyd's realistically winning 3-8 - 3-E, they're a rough tie by Part 4 (both kill everything) and Boyd's insignificant advantage of being better at 4-E-5.

Ike: 3-P - 3-5 (6 chapters)

Boyd 3-7 - 3-E (5 chapters)

So, yeah. Turns out Ike wins by, like, 1 chapter. This is assuming either of them are doing anything at 3-5 & 3-11. And I'm not counting 4-E-5, lol.

This turned into Boyd vs. Ike pretty quickly. I may have made it seem that way, but it was only an example of how an underrated unit can actually matchup to Ike. The others beat him, for sure.

Boyd needs a level beforehand before the Angelic robe caps his HP, which you blissfully ignored. Also, I wouldn't really see him gaining a level in 3-P because most of the grunt work is done by the laguz, and IIRC he'd need about 5 kills to level up. And not everyone's willing to save scum just so Boyd can get a speed level via BEXP.

[Junkhead]

Again, if you've actually read that part, I didn't. And, dude, if I can 7-turn 3-P AND get him 80-90 Exp while also levelling up characters like Mist, Ike and something like 80 Exp on Titania...yeah, there's no need to explain beyond that.

[Shadow Mir]

Again, if you've actually read that part, I didn't. And, dude, if I can 7-turn 3-P AND get him 80-90 Exp while also levelling up characters like Mist, Ike and something like 80 Exp on Titania...yeah, there's no need to explain beyond that.

Okay, so you're recommending a BEXP level when Boyd's HP ISN'T capped. I call that "Not helping your case".

Edited December 2, 2015 by Levant Colthearts

[Junkhead]

10-20 Exp for HP/Str/Def, yes. I take it those costs are so, so high, that it sends your team to an inevitable oblivion where you won't be able to have a 20/1 Mist and Rolf take over the latter half of Part 3.

[Shadow Mir]

10-20 Exp for HP/Str/Def, yes. I take it those costs are so, so high, that it sends your team to an inevitable oblivion where you won't be able to have a 20/1 Mist and Rolf take over the latter half of Part 3.

Pfft, it's more like "I'd rather take my chances with a normal level up than settle for that". Well, that, and the fact that in my eyes, the fact you'd recommend that speaks volumes about just how desperate you are to create a situation where Boyd could match up against Ike.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Levant Colthearts

[Junkhead]

I use averages + BEXP to deduce a realistic scenario.

[Dunal]

It's mostly the fact that Boyd only becomes on par with Ike (or slightly surpassing him) with an Robe, Speedwing, Master Crown (only two of them available) and BEXP (extremely limited on HM). Crowning Boyd means not crowning Titania/Haar and then you have Oscar/Mia/Shinon/Gatrie maybe Soren(?) who are more or less as good as candidates as Boyd.

While Ike needs none of that. It's a fair assessment that he's better based on that.

Unless the argument is "Giving these resources to Boyd provides more efficiency/less turn count than with any other unit" then that's a fair argument (otherwise it's considered favouritism), but I'm not sure if that's been brought up yet. Forgive me if it has.

There's a lot of variable though. If Haar fails to gain speed then giving both speedwings to him does a lot more than with Boyd. That's not necessarily favouritism to Haar (Well... it kinda is) the argument is that said favouritism is more beneficial for you. And in that scenario Ike is quite a bit better than Boyd at all stages.

There is a lot of examples of the above, it's kinda why discussing unit strength can sometimes be very variable. But in the end, Ike's outcome as a unit is strongly in his favor.

There is credit to thinking "Boyd benefits from resources more an Ike" and that's a very valid point. If Boyd/Ike were the only units you could give resources to then the argument that Boyd could be better is reasonable. But it's not as clear cut as that.

That's my overall stance on unit value, I suppose. Someone like Meg can be pretty usable with some resources (Robe/Shield, two levels of BEXP and a forge) and heck, she could well benefit from that more than any other unit you have. But in the overall scope of things that doesn't really benefit you as much as other things.

Edited December 2, 2015 by DLuna

[Shadow Mir]

I use averages + BEXP to deduce a realistic scenario.

Because a realistic scenario is one where Boyd would get lucky with 4 speed growths in as many levels when it';s directly competing against skill, right? Hah! That sounds like just another case of you trying to rig the argument in Boyd's favor.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Levant Colthearts

[Gradivus.]

Boyd needs a level beforehand before the Angelic robe caps his HP, which you blissfully ignored.

Pedantic argument, that one point of HP doesn't make any significant difference. Missing the cap by one point is equivalent to hitting the cap, especially for stats like HP.

What you're ignoring is the fact that you have literally no half solid arguments, everything you're saying here revolves around "I ain't convinced" and similar with no sort of reasoning.

Because a realistic scenario is one where Boyd would get lucky with 4 speed growths in as many levels when it';s directly competing against skill, right? Hah! That sounds like just another case of you trying to rig the argument in Boyd's favor.

>implying a minor number of skl procs less reduces the value of speed growths

(and don't give me "yes, I'm implying this" because it's obvious that my point is "this isn't true". Counter the latter instead of just confirming that you made an implication without evidence; you're trying to rig the argument by saying that skill is as important as speed.)

Really I don't know what I'm siding with (I feel inclined to say Ike is better, although Soul said that the point of the topic is not Ike vs Boyd and is just about Ike in general), as I haven't played this game extensively, but since you typically don't bother to give good arguments and instead just bring up nitpicks, discussions with you aren't very productive.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Gradivus.

[Shadow Mir]

>implying a minor number of skl procs less reduces the value of speed growths

(and don't give me "yes, I'm implying this" because it's obvious that my point is "this isn't true". Counter the latter instead of just confirming that you made an implication without evidence; you're trying to rig the argument by saying that skill is as important as speed.)

Really I don't know what I'm siding with (I feel inclined to say Ike is better, although Soul said that the point of the topic is not Ike vs Boyd and is just about Ike in general), as I haven't played this game extensively, but since you typically don't bother to give good arguments and instead just bring up nitpicks, discussions with you aren't very productive.

Going by what Soul was doing with Boyd - getting him close to a level up, then BEXPing him to the next level at base - there's a 50/50 chance that speed goes up (assuming that Strength and Defense, both being his highest growths after HP is capped, get boosted as well), yet Soul's supposed "realistic scenario" completely ignores that. I'm not even trying to imply that skill is as important as speed.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Levant Colthearts

[Gradivus.]

If BEXP levels work like FE12 drill grounds in that the number of stats given is one proc per 100% of growth total (I'm assuming not since the main site says nothing about it), then not being at capped HP makes a difference for one level, this is really minor whereas the statement that "it is completely ignored" would imply that it makes a major difference. If you want to present a good counter-argument, throw in a calculation as to what stats Boyd is likely to have at a realistic level. Also, unless there's a mechanic I don't know of, Boyd's Def growth is only 5% higher than his Skl/Spd growths and his Str growth is "only" 65%, so you can't safely assume they're always going to proc.

You also ignored the rest you quoted (the part that would be inconvenient to argue against, probably) by proceeding to point out minor inconsistencies in an argument after I explicitly told you that it doesn't help your case. I suppose repeating it isn't going to change anything.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Gradivus.

[Dunal]

I think you can assume that Boyd will get 2 speed in every 3 levels with BEXP + Robe. I agree that the 1 extra HP is very very minor, since that chance of him getting speed on that level drops by maybe ~15% or something?

Overall that's 6 levels + Speedwing. Or 6 levels + Master Crown, to double a lot of what's in part 3. That's a fair assessment.

The argument then simply comes down to the fact that Boyd needs those contested resources to do what a lot of other units can do too, including Ike who needs almost none. Ike can literally gain 0 EXP and be really strong until 3-11 or something (a lot of enemies still have 19 AS).

That mean Ike's extremely flexible, you can choose to give him a variable amount of attention and he'll still be solid. Boyd not so much.

But to answer the actual OP, Ike is overrated sure -- I have overrated him in the past too. He's no god. It's a lot to do with Ike's circumstances though. Add a lot more enemy magi and his usability drops quite a bit. He's lucky that there isn't many at all.

[Shadow Mir]

If BEXP levels work like FE12 drill grounds in that the number of stats given is one proc per 100% of growth total (I'm assuming not since the main site says nothing about it), then not being at capped HP makes a difference for one level, this is really minor whereas the statement that "it is completely ignored" would imply that it makes a major difference. If you want to present a good counter-argument, throw in a calculation as to what stats Boyd is likely to have at a realistic level. Also, unless there's a mechanic I don't know of, Boyd's Def growth is only 5% higher than his Skl/Spd growths and his Str growth is "only" 65%, so you can't safely assume they're always going to proc.

You also ignored the rest you quoted (the part that would be inconvenient to argue against, probably) by proceeding to point out minor inconsistencies in an argument after I explicitly told you that it doesn't help your case. I suppose repeating it isn't going to change anything.

I'm not sure BEXP can be compared to the drill grounds... Also, wrt the thing about using stats that Boyd would have at a realistic level, the way BEXP works throws a wrench into that, since BEXP always boosts three stats, with priority to the highest growths, meaning that averages get thrown out the window if a unit's leveling strictly through BEXP. As for the bold, you're right, and that was something I pointed out before, but at the same time, I don't think it'd be sound to assume that BEXP actually misses a higher growth stat. That said, DLuna stated something I ultimately agree with - Boyd needs to take contested resources from the team just to do what other units can do.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Levant Colthearts

[Gradivus.]

That said, DLuna stated something I ultimately agree with - Boyd needs to take contested resources from the team just to do what other units can do.

Then perhaps you should bring it up instead of talking around the point next time.

As a small addition to the boyd thing, if bexp levels make spd procs less likely, it's probably of benefit to give him some on-map levels.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Gradivus.

[Shadow Mir]

Then perhaps you should bring it up instead of talking around the point next time.

As a small addition to the boyd thing, if bexp levels make spd procs less likely, it's probably of benefit to give him some on-map levels.

I guess I tend to lose it when I get worked up... Guess I'll do that.

That's how I see it... I don't consider BEXP used to get a HP/Str/Def level BEXP well spent, after all. At least an on-map level might score a speed proc...

Edited December 3, 2015 by Levant Colthearts

[Dunal]

I think speed is statistically more likely to increase with BEXP than CEXP since it's slightly less than a 3/5 chance which is 60%. A rough estimate is ~56%.

Without capped HP it's a bit under 40% (2/5).

It's a little lower in both cases due to STR and DEF being higher growths.

[Junkhead]

It's mostly the fact that Boyd only becomes on par with Ike (or slightly surpassing him) with an Robe, Speedwing, Master Crown (only two of them available) and BEXP (extremely limited on HM).

I never. Ever, ever, mentioned a Speedwings. Ever. All he needs is a tiny (and I just can't seem to make a big enough emphasis when I mean "tiny"...) AND The Crown (which, contrary to popular belief, not that many people itch for it).

Crowning Boyd means not crowning Titania/Haar and then you have Oscar/Mia/Shinon/Gatrie maybe Soren(?) who are more or less as good as candidates as Boyd.

Let me break it down exactly as it is:

Haar - Doesn't really need a Crown to do his job. He flies, and that's 90% of his utility. I pull great turncounts in Part 3 by only really using Haar's flight much more than his actual prowess in combat. aka, something he can do regardless of promotion or level. He can promote naturally about 3-10 (26 AS doubles everything in Part 3 that isn't a Swordmaster)

Titania - The exact same as Haar, except she has a 25 AS (aka, fine for most of Part 3) cap and can promote naturally around 3-8/3-10, by the time she needs it.

Oscar - One of the two that's actually competing for the Crown. But then again, he'd also appreciate a Speedwings. Otherwise, he's actually not much better than Boyd (and actually slightly inferior in the long run, given his decline in Part 4 areas).

Mia - She's a weaker Ike

Shinon - Again, really? Lack of (good) melee range is enough to limit him the use of a Crown.

Gatrie - The other one who's actually competing with Boyd for the Crown. I'd say they're roughly on par, Gatrie's only marginally better because he can make use of the Crown as early as 3-4 (+Celerity).

While Ike needs none of that. It's a fair assessment that he's better based on that.

If you're going to the "if he costs something, he's worse", it's not a very good one. A unit's not worse because they cost something (something rather negligible, might I add, see above)

Unless the argument is "Giving these resources to Boyd provides more efficiency/less turn count than with any other unit" then that's a fair argument (otherwise it's considered favouritism), but I'm not sure if that's been brought up yet. Forgive me if it has.

Did you not read the part where I've been saying that all along? This isn't to make a unit not-trash. This is to make an actual great unit that can potentially be akin to the likes of Titania (which Oscar and maybe Gatrie can also replicate).

There's a lot of variable though. If Haar fails to gain speed then giving both speedwings to him does a lot more than with Boyd. That's not necessarily favouritism to Haar (Well... it kinda is) the argument is that said favouritism is more beneficial for you. And in that scenario Ike is quite a bit better than Boyd at all stages.

Even if Ike were to start with capped stats, it wouldn't make much of a difference because he wouldn't be going around his "issues" (which is, lack of strengths, in this case). He'd still be worse than three mounts (because of the lack of mobility and even Boyd & Gatrie (who can both pack Celerity and not sacrifice the ability to 1RKO from range. If you'd read what I said from the very opening post, you'd see Ike is actually winning in raw stats even there.

I even admitted in another post that Ike truly wins by only a chapter (3-P through 3-5) by the time Boyd takes the Crown and takes over.

Also, we don't go by "if said unit doesnt gain", etc. Yes, that could very well happen in an actual run (and it can happen to either Ike, Boyd, pretty much anyone), but for the very sake of consistency, we go with averages.

That's my overall stance on unit value, I suppose. Someone like Meg can be pretty usable with some resources (Robe/Shield, two levels of BEXP and a forge) and heck, she could well benefit from that more than any other unit you have. But in the overall scope of things that doesn't really benefit you as much as other things.

Someone like Meg takes a crapton of favoritism that only really pays off by the time Part 4 arrives, assuming we're not taking our time here. Meg needs virtually every statbooster you get on the team to be something *resembling* average...at the very best. And she's taking it from a team that isn't doing very well in the first place, as well as kills from others who'd very well appreiate it and make better use of them in the long run (Edward, Nolan, hell, even Leo who can insta-promote at lvl.10 so he can use Beastfow + Crossbows). This isn't anywhere close to that.

Pedantic argument, that one point of HP doesn't make any significant difference. Missing the cap by one point is equivalent to hitting the cap, especially for stats like HP.

What you're ignoring is the fact that you have literally no half solid arguments, everything you're saying here revolves around "I ain't convinced" and similar with no sort of reasoning.

>implying a minor number of skl procs less reduces the value of speed growths

(and don't give me "yes, I'm implying this" because it's obvious that my point is "this isn't true". Counter the latter instead of just confirming that you made an implication without evidence; you're trying to rig the argument by saying that skill is as important as speed.)

Really I don't know what I'm siding with (I feel inclined to say Ike is better, although Soul said that the point of the topic is not Ike vs Boyd and is just about Ike in general), as I haven't played this game extensively, but since you typically don't bother to give good arguments and instead just bring up nitpicks, discussions with you aren't very productive.

That's why I don't feel like bothering much anymore. I said everything, and he just goes with "[insert biased comment]" for an eternity, expecting answers that to questions they're not even opened to understand.

There are non more deaf than those who will not listen.

The argument then simply comes down to the fact that Boyd needs those contested resources to do what a lot of other units can do too, including Ike who needs almost none. Ike can literally gain 0 EXP and be really strong until 3-11 or something (a lot of enemies still have 19 AS).

When the likes of Mia, Shinon or Ike do 80% of the heavy-lifting and 3/4-turn 3-8 & 3-10, I'll come back to you.

And no, the average enemy has about 21-22 AS (Halberdiers, Warriors & Snipers) and Paladins have 20-21 AS.

Then perhaps you should bring it up instead of talking around the point next time.

As a small addition to the boyd thing, if bexp levels make spd procs less likely, it's probably of benefit to give him some on-map levels.

Past level 9 (which is his first level, when he hits HP/Str/Def & caps HP), every level after really comes down to Str/Def & Skill/Spd (tied to 3rd highest). From there on, it's really a battle between Skill & Spd, and a smart player will soft reset those (and not rig something crazy like 20% growths, inb4 "thats bs").

And (again) contrary to popular belief, we're not using Haar AND Titania in every single run possible. I thought effeciency was awesome, until I remember this one part where a unit can't be good because he takes away from someone who doesn't actually need it and actually pays off very well. We're playing Communist Emblem.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Soul o:

[Florete]

Wrt the tower, I agree with 4-E-3 through 4-E-5 being more PP-based. I question the other chapters, barring perhaps the part where you might want to rush Hetzel (although I think it's non-essential because the restore staff can solve that), and even then 4-E-1's general design is kind of a clusterfuck and many of the generals have melee, so the royals do the job of mass counterkilling well. Let me list a bunch more significant examples too.

4-E-1 is the only 4-E map that is really EP focused. 4-E-2 is kind of in the middle, I guess. It's just that kind of map.

- 1-9 and 1-E

1-9 emphasizes careful positioning and eliminating problem enemies much more than most chapters, so I'm not sure how that can be considered very EP focused. 1-E is another that I'd say is more in the middle since the nature of the map (3 stars against you, uphill battle) makes enemies pretty threatening, but you also have two god tier units. So I guess it kinda depends how you play it and how much you want the chest items.

- 2-3 and 2-E

2-3 is pretty EP focused. 2-E is only EP focused if you're playing it out, not if you go in for the kill.

- 3-10, 3-11, 3-E

- 3-earlygame to a smaller, but still noticeable extent

I will agree that from about 3-8 onwards they are largely maps that are EP focused (not so much before that; earlier part 3 maps don't have a lot of enemies compared to how many units the player has). Thing is, this still leaves a large chunk, possibly as much as half, of the game being not so EP focused. Recall that I never said this game was hugely PP focused, just that it emphasizes it more so than some previous games and, therefore, 1-2 range combat, while obviously still nice, isn't as big of a deal as some people make it out to be. That's the ultimate point here. And, funnily enough, when the game really starts to get more EP focused, Ike gets Ragnell.

Honestly, I think this whole discussion is just the result of a misunderstanding of the degree to which I meant that the game has a greater focus on smart player phase action. It sounds like you two thought I meant that enemy phase is never important.

You're using some wildly different definition to what others use for PP centric vs EP centric then.

I don't think I am, though I was speaking pretty generally there. Put simply, if the map largely requires you to slaughter a bunch of enemies without worrying too much about positioning or extra objectives, it's clearly EP focused. 4-P to 4-4 are all clearly EP focused maps, for example.

On the other hand, if you have specific stronger enemies you need to kill, side objectives to handle in a limited time-frame (like the villages/Heather in 2-1), or your units just aren't capable of taking hits well (much of part 1), it's more PP focused.

Also Shinon is mad overrated in general lol.

Is he? I'm not sure how people view him lately. I think he's good, but not great. Like, 7/10 or so.

[Radiant head]

Well I keep seeing people quote that post about how godly Shinon is. He's at best helpful in Part 3, but doesn't really become holy shit amazing until he promotes to Marksman. Until then, he's just a slow swordmaster with no EP.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Radiant head

[Junkhead]

Shinon's as good as lack of (good) 1-range allows him to be. I've actually found him really useful in places like 3-1, 3-3, 3-4 & 3-5.

Well I keep seeing people quote that post about how godly Shinon is. He's at best helpful in Part 3, but doesn't really become holy shit amazing until he promotes to Marksman. Until then, he's just a slow swordmaster with no EP.

What post are you talking about? Do you mean that little tidbit I quoted, liek, once? Who're these "people".

ee-mo, he comes as a bit of a shock, seeing as FE always gave us these mediocre Bow users. Then this one tanky Sniper with great stats across the board comes along and puts them all to shame lol. Maybe it's just that impression. He's great for a Sniper, but just about "good/solid" as far as average units go (if only for the fact he's limited the way he is sadly).

Edited December 3, 2015 by Soul o:

[Irysa]

I think the point is more Shinon not being garbage doesn't say anything about FE10 not being EP orientated. The casual correlation here is that Bow Users are good in games that are PP focused and Shinon is good in FE10 so FE10 must be a PP focused game, but that's not a sensible argument because there are good bow users in games we would say are EP orientated. Contextually, Shinon vs good units like Haar or Titania is like comparing Eirika route Innes to Seth or Franz, there's a really big gap. Okay Shinon is better than Innes but not by much.

I don't think I am, though I was speaking pretty generally there. Put simply, if the map largely requires you to slaughter a bunch of enemies without worrying too much about positioning or extra objectives, it's clearly EP focused. 4-P to 4-4 are all clearly EP focused maps, for example.

On the other hand, if you have specific stronger enemies you need to kill, side objectives to handle in a limited time-frame (like the villages/Heather in 2-1), or your units just aren't capable of taking hits well (much of part 1), it's more PP focused.

Nah come on. Positioning matters no matter what the objective is. If it's rout you need to be positioned properly to kill as many enemies as possible without dying. If it's seize you need to be positioned properly to clear a path for the Lord/Rescue chain the Lord there. If it's defend you need to be positioned properly to hold a choke.

They have different levels of strategic depth but "not worrying too much about positioning" is not a good argument when we're assuming fast clears. If we start ignoring that then seize can't count either.

I agree that Part 1 is PP orientated, but this is about the game as a whole. Side objectives don't change the focus of the game, otherwise FE9 would end up being a more PP orientated game than FE10, and that makes no sense. (lol stealables)

Edited December 3, 2015 by Irysa

[Radiant head]

Shinon's as good as lack of (good) 1-range allows him to be. I've actually found him really useful in places like 3-1, 3-3, 3-4 & 3-5. What post are you talking about? Do you mean that little tidbit I quoted, liek, once? Who're these "people".ee-mo, he comes as a bit of a shock, seeing as FE always gave us these mediocre Bow users. Then this one tanky Sniper with great stats across the board comes along and puts them all to shame lol. Maybe it's just that impression. He's great for a Sniper, but just about "good/solid" as far as average units go (if only for the fact he's limited the way he is sadly).

I mean I didn't pay attention to who is posting each time, but I've seen that post quotes like dozens of times since I joined last year.

[Junkhead]

Oh, sorry. I doubt others would have quoted smash though, lol.

[Gradivus.]

It sounds like you two thought I meant that enemy phase is never important.

It's more that I interpreted your statements as "PP is more important than EP", which I think isn't true. Fair enough if some of my examples are inaccurate, but what you're defining as clearly EP-focused only applies for "wholly EP-focused". A map can be clearly largely EP based even if PP actions play a noticeable role. I just think many of RD's lategame maps (which are mainly the topic of this thread, it's true that much of the earlygame relies on PP action) count as such since EPs take up roughly 80-90% of the combat.

An (extreme hypothetical) example: assume a map makes you approach it from four sides and three sides have one combat unit, the other has a dancer and a combat unit. The objective is to rout in one turn, and you can only attack 5 out of 30 enemies on PP, so the rest needs to be cleared out on EP. There's only one way to place your units that makes all 25 other enemies suicide. The clear would definitely be EP-based, no matter the amount of positioning needed. How much positioning you need to do on PP only shows how complex it is.

As for 4-E-2, yeah it's neither PP nor EP-based. It's basically only kill the BK, which is easily done in 1-3 turns (although arguably, the swarm of enemies is recommendably held back on EP so you can kill Levail on the same PP as you finish BK off, if you want the wishblade).

Edited December 3, 2015 by Gradivus.

[Augestein]

It's more that I interpreted your statements as "PP is more important than EP", which I think isn't true. Fair enough if some of my examples are inaccurate, but what you're defining as clearly EP-focused only applies for "wholly EP-focused". A map can be clearly largely EP based even if PP actions play a noticeable role. I just think many of RD's lategame maps (which are mainly the topic of this thread, it's true that much of the earlygame relies on PP action) count as such since EPs take up roughly 80-90% of the combat.

This is something that's always bothered me. PP is just as important as EP, if not more. Sure EP has you kill more enemies on average, but PP is where you set your characters up to not die on EP and progress through the map. I think people largely understate this key component of PP and EP. Assuming there are no ambush spawns or anything, you should generally know how an EP is going to happen.

Even in your hypothetical example you display why PP is more important. You'd have to know how to attack the enemies and be in a position to 1) Not die on EP so you can keep countering the other enemies to death. 2) Take out enemies that can avoid dying from counterattacks 3) Be in a position so all of the enemies die on your counter attacks. 4) Move the dancer out of enemy range so they don't attack it and cause you to fail the map.

PP is always more important than EP. EP is just where most of the aftermath of your PP positioning is shown, of which good positioning generally causes you to have more successful EP assuming the map isn't a complete cluster****.

Edited December 4, 2015 by Augestein