So...let's talk tiers.

[Rodykitty]

I would rather take the path that doesn't ignore the in-game consequences, while still avoiding favortism.

[Dat Nick]

No because about 80% of the people who play FE don't even give a damn about tiers to care about Harken > Karel and play whoever the hell they want anyway.

Do you REALLY think it takes a tier player to see how Harken getting HM boosts and supports while Karel gets neither makes Harken better at total first glance? Never mind that his growth rates are way better [Osnap 30% def/25% res]

That's not hurting the team at all!

Yes, it is, because it means I don't get a unit who's so damn good he's almost capable of soloing chapters by himself [scratch that, he probably CAN solo one or two chapters], meaning my team is nowhere near as good as it could have been.

This is a double standard and you fucking know it.

No, I don't fucking know it, because Harken outclasses Karel so badly it's not funny, and giving up a below average unit like Karel is hardly much of a loss. If Merric blocked out Est, would we send Merric down to high tier?

No, you get loads of Funds throughout the game. 351K worth of Funds throughout the game, probably 250K under realistic conditions. Which leaves you with 170K to spend before you lose your S rank. I'll go into specifics on how it's 351K once I find the post, but I'll wait to see if you ask first.

Rly. If this statement was true, Dart/Farina would be somewhere not in bottom tier.

And...people don't know the exact reqiurements?

Around 310 total turns (missing only Chapter 19xx) is good enough for 5 stars (for Hector Hard mode).

Edited December 21, 2008 by Berserkah2DaBladah

[Lord Raven]

Do you REALLY think it takes a tier player to see how Harken getting HM boosts and supports while Karel gets neither makes Harken better at total first glance? Never mind that his growth rates are way better [Osnap 30% def/25% res]

What if the person likes Karel better than Harken? What if the person got raped by some guy who looked like Harken and is afraid to get Harken because of that? What if, oh my God, they just HATE Harken?

Your assumption that Harken will ALWAYS be used over Karel is a false assumption. I love Harken but I rush the chapters and end up getting Karel every playthrough. I don't think I'm the only one who does this either.

Yes, it is, because it means I don't get a unit who's so damn good he's almost capable of soloing chapters by himself [scratch that, he probably CAN solo one or two chapters], meaning my team is nowhere near as good as it could have been.

Technically if you solo a chapter with Harken you're completely hurting EXP rank because Level 10s don't get much EXP.

You can't hurt the team if it's only affecting one unit. You're almost making it sound as if the bottom/low/mid tiers exist only to suck the high tier's dicks.

No, I don't fucking know it, because Harken outclasses Karel so badly it's not funny, and giving up a below average unit like Karel is hardly much of a loss.

You said so yourself that this doesn't apply much to Geitz or Wallace. Why only apply it to Harken and Karel? That's another double standard. It's also like crapping on Kent/Lowen for blocking out the Knight's Crest for Sain/Oswin.

Rly. If this statement was true, Dart/Farina would be somewhere not in bottom tier.

Using Dart allows you 110K funds to use. Using Farina only allows you 110K to use. It allows too much less flexibility and you need to cut down on promotions and high cost weapons to use if you want to compensate for it.

And really? They have too many other shortcomings for the 50K to matter in the first place.

Edited December 21, 2008 by Nathan Graves

[dondon151]

To me, them both being penalized makes more sense than ignoring the whole issue, since this is something that will actually happen in a playthrough based on a player's decision.

This is like penalizing one unit for not letting one other unit a spot on the map. It's pointless because the penalty is the same for all units. Harken vs. Karel does not establish their positions on the tier list relative to other characters; it only establishes their poistions on the tier list relative to each other (and Karel is already lower than Harken). The only factor that changes their positions on the tier list relative to other characters is their actual overall performance.

[Don Draper]

BB didn't somebody on gamefaqs already tell you why your using flawed logic in the FE5 Tier List, Sety vs. Cyas (This was way back, and you lost the mini debate in the tier topic).

[Dat Nick]

Yes, bring up my failures from previously, why don't you? If you'll recall, I conceded on Cyas vs Sety. I learn from my failures. I once thought using Ryan in Book 2 was a good idea. I once thought using GORDIN in book 1 was a good idea. I'm pretty damn sure you thought Nino was a good unit at one time. So sorry we all can't be perfect in every second of our career.

Cyas blocking out Sety is still kind of an issue, but even so he's way better than most other units you can get [ie your team is way better with Cyas and Robert than it is with Sety and Ronan]

What if the person likes Karel better than Harken?

Why would anybody value 2 points of speed over getting owned in everything else?

And again, this is going right over your fucking head, as always. Pick Karel if you want. He's still the inferior choice.

Your assumption that Harken will ALWAYS be used over Karel is a false assumption.

Wow, are you a fucking idiot or what? I never said this. I did say that Harken was a better choice, and thus, is more likley to be picked over Karel. Seriously, I'm getting sick of saying this over. And over. And over. This assumption never existed, so it can't be false. That thing I told you about reading other people's arguments before you argue against them? Do it. Seriously.

Technically if you solo a chapter with Harken you're completely hurting EXP rank because Level 10s don't get much EXP.

...you realize i wasn't actually suggesting that, just stating that he's damn well capable of it, right?

You can't hurt the team if it's only affecting one unit.

One unit is PART OF THE TEAM.

You're almost making it sound as if the bottom/low/mid tiers exist only to suck the high tier's dicks.

I'm not saying they do, because they don't. They don't screw around in the higher tier's buisness, at all. You can use all of the higher ranked characters and still have room for several lower ranked since 15 units is honestly excessive space [i never even hit double digits]

You said so yourself that this doesn't apply much to Geitz or Wallace. Why only apply it to Harken and Karel?

Because nobody really cares about losing Wallace OR Geitz, since both of them suck. Nobody really cares about losing Alan or Samson. Nobody really cares about the royals because they're all on about the same scale of win.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Berserkah2DaBladah

[dondon151]

Sety is better than Cyas on a ranked run.

[Dat Nick]

Thank you, Captain obvious?

[dondon151]

You seemed to be implying otherwise ?_?

[Lord Raven]

Why would anybody value 2 points of speed over getting owned in everything else?

And again, this is going right over your fucking head, as always. Pick Karel if you want. He's still the inferior choice.

Missing the point aren't we! It's supposed to contradict your statement where a player is supposedly more likely to pick Harken over Karel - but everyone has their preferences so you can't even say that is true. I think Karel is a badass (and Harken too), so I'd occasionally go for the guy who killed an army and raped their corpses.

Wow, are you a fucking idiot or what? I never said this. I did say that Harken was a better choice, and thus, is more likley to be picked over Karel. Seriously, I'm getting sick of saying this over. And over. And over. This assumption never existed, so it can't be false. That thing I told you about reading other people's arguments before you argue against them? Do it. Seriously.

This is an assumption until you can prove it as fact. Ask everyone who has ever played FE7 as to whether or not they got Harken more or Karel more on their playthroughs and ask them the reason why they got Karel or Harken. Is it because he's better? Probably is because people play their favorites (and it's factually true), but whatever the reason may be you still cannot pass off higher tier = more likely to be used as fact until you have the statistics to back your assertion up.

One unit is PART OF THE TEAM.

But not the entire team. And he's not hurting what doesn't exist.

I'm not saying they do, because they don't. They don't screw around in the higher tier's buisness, at all. You can use all of the higher ranked characters and still have room for several lower ranked since 15 units is honestly excessive space [i never even hit double digits]

And this is still not mattering when it comes to determining Karel's worth. Harken doesn't exist in a

Because nobody really cares about losing Wallace OR Geitz, since both of them suck. Nobody really cares about losing Alan or Samson. Nobody really cares about the royals because they're all on about the same scale of win.

A huge double standard. If you're going to penalize Karel for blocking out Harken, you should penalize Harken for the same regardless of the quality just for consistency, and avoiding hypocrisy.

"No one cares about the other units that require you to choose" is further adding to how much of a hypocrite anyone using this argument is, because regardless of whether or not they're a bottom tier or top tier should be irrelevant if they're blocking someone out; penalize both or neither, but don't be a hypocrite.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Nathan Graves

[Dat Nick]

You seemed to be implying otherwise ?_?

What? How is saying Sety>Cyas even trying to imply Cyas is superior?

I never said Cyas is really worth picking over Sety, but even WITHOUT Sety's win, Cyas isn't damaging the team as much as fail like Ronan, Marty, and Tanya.

Missing the point aren't we! It's supposed to contradict your statement where a player is supposedly more likely to pick Harken over Karel - but everyone has their preferences so you can't even say that is true.

Nobody is going to prefer 2 speed over all of Harken's other leads.

Ask everyone who has ever played FE7 as to whether or not they got Harken more or Karel more on their playthroughs and ask them the reason why they got Karel or Harken. Is it because he's better? Probably is because people play their favorites (and it's factually true)

Tiers assume rankings only, so you're not going to sell this "play favorites" garbage. And even if you want to, nobody's buying. This is NOT the casual play tier list, so, fail. Gameplay. Mechanics. Only. Thank you, come again!

But not the entire team. And he's not hurting what doesn't exist.

No, but he's PREVENTING something far superior to him from existing.

A huge double standard. If you're going to penalize Karel for blocking out Harken, you should penalize Harken for the same regardless of the quality just for consistency, and avoiding hypocrisy.

Why? Nobody gives a **** about losing Karel, he has, say, about the same prepromote utility, maybe more, than Getiz/Wallace. It's barely even a price to pay for what Harken offers. You never answered my earlier question. Should Merric go to high if he blocks out Est? Of course not, because nobody CARES that he blocks out Est. If we're not playing HHM? Then sure, it probably matters a little more. Oh, and if you actually think Merric blocking out Est means we move him down at all, then I'm fucking done with you.

And this is still not mattering when it comes to determining Karel's worth.

But it DOES matter when determining the TEAM's worth.

"No one cares about the other units that require you to choose" is further adding to how much of a hypocrite anyone using this argument is, because regardless of whether or not they're a bottom tier or top tier should be irrelevant if they're blocking someone out; penalize both or neither, but don't be a hypocrite.

Unless there's a signficant gap between the two units, why does it matter at all? You're really going to try and tell me that some fanboy is going to be heartbroken on losing Alan or Samson.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Berserkah2DaBladah

[Lord Raven]

Nobody is going to prefer 2 speed over all of Harken's other leads.

Alright, the entire point is going over your head. The person likes Swordmasters, whatever.

Tiers assume rankings only, so you're not going to sell this "play favorites" garbage. And even if you want to, nobody's buying. This is NOT the casual play tier list, so, fail. Gameplay. Mechanics. Only. Thank you, come again!

You're preaching gameplay mechanics, then you say "well a player is more likely to use Harken" which is NOT gameplay mechanics, but the mind of the player. Make up your mind!

And frankly? Anyone who plays favorites trumps your point that "high tier = more use," because if they favor Karel they're more likely to play him than Harken. Same argument goes for Harken. Simply put, your point is untrue until you can compile the entire list of people who have played FE7 and checked what they have and have not played and do all that AP Statistics shit on it to figure out where they truly should go, assuming that higher tier = more often played is correct. Because unless you're fucking omnipotent (which we all are far from), you cannot say that high tier characters are played more often than low tier characters.

No, but he's PREVENTING something far superior to him from existing.

And what effect does this have on his battle abilities? None!

Why? Nobody gives a **** about losing Karel, he has, say, about the same prepromote utility, maybe more, than Getiz/Wallace. It's barely even a price to pay for what Harken offers. You never answered my earlier question. Should Merric go to high if he blocks out Est?

Merric should not be penalized, and if Est blocked Merric out then she should not be penalized either. Because this has no bearing on Merric's performance, that of which is being judged by a tier list in the first place. Performance has nothing to do with who you're blocking out, and if you're judging as such the tier list becomes biased.

Of course not, because nobody CARES that he blocks out Est. If we're not playing HHM? Then sure, it probably matters a little more. Oh, and if you actually think Merric blocking out Est means we move him down at all, then I'm fucking done with you.

His blocking out Est is irrelevant point to his own performance. If his performance is poor (which it is not), then sure he sucks. But blocking out Est still has nothing to do with it.

If Est blocks out Merric, then that doesn't do anything to her tier list ranking. The main reason being that it still has no effect to her performance.

But it DOES matter when determining the TEAM's worth.

But absolutely not Karel's worth!

Unless there's a signficant gap between the two units, why does it matter at all?

To keep tier list rankings consistent and unbiased, something that you don't seem to be able to grasp.

someone's getting a bit angry lol chill out, it's just a video game.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Nathan Graves

[Dat Nick]

Alright, the entire point is going over your head. The person likes Swordmasters, whatever.

Tier players are not biased towards a paritcular class. We are NOT using this for casual play. Stop acting like it. For gameplay reasons, Karel is more likely to be left behind.

You're preaching gameplay mechanics, then you say "well a player is more likely to use Harken" which is NOT gameplay mechanics, but the mind of the player.

The mind of a player is going to take gameplay mechanics into account, and as such, will be more likely to use Harken.

And frankly? Anyone who plays favorites

You mean the people who shouldn't be playing a rank run?

Simply put, your point is untrue until you can compile the entire list of people who have played FE7

The entire list of people who have played FE7 have either done so once, have not attemped rank play, or didn't even bother finishing it. The rest attempted a rank. A good portion fall into the three groups, so shut the fuck up with this logic, it's a crockpot of shit.

And what effect does this have on his battle abilities? None!

And what affect does this have on the team's overall ability? SOME! Why is this so fucking hard to understand?! We are judging units BASED ON A TEAM OVERALL, NOT FUCKING INDIVIDUALITY!

Performance has nothing to do with who you're blocking out, and if you're judging as such the tier list becomes biased.

The team's OVERALL PERFORMANCE, which is what IS relevant, DOES have something to do with it, and if you're judging as otherwise, you're the biased one. I don't see what's so biased about knocking Karel for a flaw he has.

But absolutely not Karel's worth!

BUT ABSOLUTELY THE TEAM'S WORTH!

To keep tier list rankings consistent and unbiased, something that you don't seem to be able to grasp.

AGAIN, it doesn't really matter at all unless there's a significant gap between the two. Adam and Samson are on equal fail. Geitz and Wallace are equal meh. The royals are equal win. Nobody cares that they shut each other out, because they're more or less offering the exact same thing. It's called "common sense", not bias. In the case of Karel and Harken, I can have 7 or 2. In the case of the royals, I can have 9, 9, or 9. Unless there's any real gap between the units, then there's no reason why it should matter at all.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Berserkah2DaBladah

[Lord Raven]

Tier players are not biased towards a paritcular class. We are NOT using this for casual play. Stop acting like it. For gameplay reasons, Karel is more likely to be left behind.

And yet you still can't find everyone and evaluate whether or not they've attempted HHM ranked.

The mind of a player is going to take gameplay mechanics into account, and as such, will be more likely to use Harken.

The mind of a player takes it into account, yet is not the gameplay mechanic itself.

The entire list of people who have played FE7 have either done so once, have not attemped rank play, or didn't even bother finishing it. The rest attempted a rank. A good portion fall into the three groups, so shut the fuck up with this logic, it's a crockpot of shit.

Hostile much? Jeez, I just want to talk about FE.

People aren't allowed to play favorites on ranked runs either? What a crappy kind of thinking this seems to be.

And what affect does this have on the team's overall ability? SOME! Why is this so fucking hard to understand?! We are judging units BASED ON A TEAM OVERALL, NOT FUCKING INDIVIDUALITY!

As far as I'm aware tiers judge units based upon their individual strengths, not that they'll be by themselves of course. But Harken's not coming doesn't affect the team much because he wasn't even there in the first place. You can't affect something until you're there.

The team's OVERALL PERFORMANCE, which is what IS relevant, DOES have something to do with it, and if you're judging as otherwise, you're the biased one. I don't see what's so biased about knocking Karel for a flaw he has.

His main "flaw" that knocks him down, as far as I'm aware (and that of which we're arguing about), is also the target of bias. And you can't seem to admit this.

Picking Karel over Harken is also bias, but that's up to the player who they pick. However, penalizing one because you can't get the other? The penalty is bias unless it applies to everyone, or no one. No in betweens.

Adam and Samson are on equal fail.

So?

Geitz and Wallace are equal meh.

So?

The royals are equal win. Nobody cares that they shut each other out, because they're more or less offering the exact same thing.

So?

It doesn't matter what the circumstances are. It's the principle. And in order to prevent from being a hypocrite, you must abide to a principle in every individual case; you cannot suddenly decide "oh shit, well you see they're COMPLETELY different in terms of quality so we HAVE to automatically penalize the one that isn't as good just because of that."

It's called "common sense"

Is that what you kids are calling it these days?

In the case of Karel and Harken, I can have 7 or 2. In the case of the royals, I can have 9, 9, or 9. Unless there's any real gap between the units, then there's no reason why it should matter at all.

Out of interest, if you had a spare 50 bucks and wanted a hard drive and you found a 1000 GB for 50 bucks and a 600 GB for 30 bucks, which of those two are good? Both are in fact good (well, the GB/cost ratio is exactly the same), but you'd obviously go for the 1000 GB right? The 600 GB is still good and it is not affected by the 1000 GB's superior quality at all, but it's still good.

Same applies to Harken vs Karel. Karel is inherently average though, and Harken is quite good. But Karel blocking out Harken should not determine whether or not Karel is a good unit, and it should be factor for every single case it is applied to or a completely null factor. It encourages hypocrisy, which a tier list should not be judged by.

take a deep breath and relax... seriously.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Nathan Graves

[dondon151]

Cyas blocking out Sety is still kind of an issue, but even so he's way better than most other units you can get [ie your team is way better with Cyas and Robert than it is with Sety and Ronan]

How is this statement not vague and confusing?

Geitz and Wallace are equal meh.

Geitz is quite a bit better than Wallace. And even so, Geitz vs. Wallace can't be compared to Harken vs. Karel because the former choice entails map differences that have an effect on tactics and EXP.

[Mekkah]

Wow, are you a fucking idiot or what?

It's remarks like this that keep me from really seriously responding to this thread anymore. It's those things that make people think every debater is an asshole.

[Tamara]

Wow. Videogames are serious business.

@ Karel/Harken thing: I'm sure the players who actually care about tiers know about how one units affects the availability of the other. Tiers rank the usefulness of characters regardless of class, but tiers say very little about what makes a good team. That's up to the player to find out and that is were part of the strategy comes from.

@ Est bashing: I can understand the reasoning behind her low rank (her availability does indeed suck), but the girl has nice growths rates and good base stats, which makes it easy to train her in the arena. She has potential, unlike the characters that are usually dead last.

[Dr. Tarrasque]

Arenas are not used in tier list debates. Est comes late and by the time you get her, you should already have a team with much better units. Leveling Est without the arena is possible but she's leeching lategame EXP that's best used on your current team.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Levin

[Mekkah]

The reason Est sucks is roughly the same as the reason Nino sucks. Low availability, and far below par for more than half the time you actually have her.

[Tamara]

I remember when Exp availability from arena's was taken into account. Those were the days Nino was viewed as a good units based on her stats. Her low starting level made her an excellent candidate for the Afa's Drops, according to the experts. It's kind of funny to see she is now seen als useless :)

If standards have shifted that much, then by all means, trash Est.

[Mekkah]

Just a note, Nino has a grand total of 5 arena turns available and competes with 2379832 characters for it, and due to the way arena works, everyone gains roughly the same EXP from them. If anything, arena possibilities make Nino even worse.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Mekkah

[Dr. Tarrasque]

I remember when Exp availability from arena's was taken into account. Those were the days Nino was viewed as a good units based on her stats. Her low starting level made her an excellent candidate for the Afa's Drops, according to the experts. It's kind of funny to see she is now seen als useless :)

If standards have shifted that much, then by all means, trash Est.

Yeah the standards have shifted. I remember when SPD and SKL were considered as probably the most important stats and Axes were disliked since they have "low accuracy".

As for the whole Karel Vs Harken thing I think it depends on how you look at tier lists... it's a bit hard to explain but I'll just give a try.

If the tier list is basically just ranking a character's individual performance in a ranked/non-AA playthrough, the fact that Karel blocks Harken shouldn't be used when ranking Karel on the tier list because you're ranking their individual performance and blocking out a character shouldn't play a role in individual performance.

If the tier list is basically just ranking a character's overall usefulness/contributions to your army, then yes, that fact should be used against Karel because in order to get Karel you have to ditch some1 who can contribute more for your army in terms of rankings.

Harken has better attack and his speed is often good enough to double so he's helping Combat better than Karel is.

Harken has better durability so he's also helping the Survival rank better than Karel.

Brave Sword is worth more than the Wo Dao and it helps more in combat as well. If you're not using either of them, Harken is better to recruit just for this.

Not sure if I explained that well enough =\

Edited December 22, 2008 by Levin

[Tamara]

Well, Nino's assumed greatness was based on her OMFG stat growths (and supports? I don't remember) and since people thought there was enough room to train her, she was highly recommended to anyone willing to take his sweet time. If an arena (other than the one she can use 10 times at most) had been available te her, I'm sure she would have been ranked even higher back then.

In any case, tiers will never be completely objective. Part of a units usefulness will always depend on the player's style.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Tamara

[Mekkah]

(and supports? I don't remember)

prolly back then there were a lot of jaffar/canas fanboys back then as well, so yeah, she'd have stupidly "good" supports

[Dat Nick]

And yet you still can't find everyone and evaluate whether or not they've attempted HHM ranked.

I'm done debunking this statement.

People aren't allowed to play favorites on ranked runs either?

You're not going to see anybody using Isadora because she's hot.

You can't affect something until you're there.

And Karel is the REASON Harken can't be there, so he's preventing something good from existing.

So?

So nobody cares about losing the other because he's still a fail unit. You still haven't countered the logic that it actually matters UNLESS THERE IS A NOTABLE GAP BETWEEN THE TWO.

Geitz is quite a bit better than Wallace. And even so, Geitz vs. Wallace can't be compared to Harken vs. Karel because the former choice entails map differences that have an effect on tactics and EXP.

Rly now. Between a crappy attacker and a crappy wall, I'll take the wall, thanks. I'm pretty sure HM Geitz is actually worse than in NM, since he only gets +1 spd, while most of, if not all enemies get at least +2. Just because Geitz is the best warrior in the game certainly doesn't make him any good, unless for some reason he's actually doubling stuff

So?

So nobody really cares about sacrificing a poor attacker for a poor wall or a poor wall for a poor attacker, especially when either one is going to the garbage heap in a few chapters.

The 600 GB is still good and it is not affected by the 1000 GB's superior quality at all, but it's still good.

But it means I can't get the 1000 GB, which could have done me a lot more good for the exact same price.

but the girl has nice growths rates and good base stats, which makes it easy to train her in the arena. She has potential, unlike the characters that are usually dead last.

Her stats are the other half of why she is where she is. Barely beating 20 Minerva at 20/10=lol

It's those things that make people think every debater is an asshole.

I yam what I yam.