Ranking each game by class: Armour Knights

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

5 hours ago, Quell said:

I attempted to clear Sacred Stones with Gilliam, and honestly? It was quite easy, I breezed through it in two day, completing the run on the weekend after my last message. On the other hand I also tried doing a knight solo of Conquest, and well, it's impossible, chapter 10 is unwinnable so you never even get to play much with Benny. So yes, by my definition Gilliam is a much better knight than Effie or Benny.

This feels like a "when everyone is super, no one will be" phenomen. Judged on this metric, it's not just Armor Knights who are better in Sacred Stones than in Fates, but also Cavaliers, Myrmidons, Mercenaries, Fighters, Mages, and Fliers. Pretty much any unit can, with enough attention and investment, solo the game. This makes individuals "stronger" within their game, but also "less vital" - I don't "need" to use Gilliam in the way that I "need" to use Effie. It comes down to Fates being a harder game than Sacred Stones.

3 minutes ago, Use the Falchion said:

Granted, Ike makes nearly everyone a beast, but the +5 Def for Great Aether goes a long way when it comes to tanking through Chain Attacks and regular attacks. 

Wouldn't Jade rather have Corrin for this purpose? That way, she can negate Chain Attacks entirely. It's not like she's taking less damage from them, even with Ike attached...

[Shadow Mir]

8 hours ago, Quell said:

So anyway I noticed that a big reason why we're disagreeing on who are the best knights comes down to our personal definition of usefulness. For me it's how "good" they're compared to the game, as in how well they can contribute to completing the main story, but I noticed that for most of you is how good they're in the army, if they have a niche or an utility compared to other units. Both definitions seems interchangeable at first but in reality that's far from the truth, because a bad unit can still be able to stand and solo a game even under harsher circumstances while units that have a niche will still struggle if the game is mostly rigged against them. In other words, Gilliam, for example, can easly clear FE8 without too much trouble but a knights solo of Cq is impossible already on Hard, yet while Gilliam is useless in a LTC or Speedrun the Effie, Benny and knight!Corrin can be great in a raise them all! challenge. Which bring me to the reason why I'm so late:

I attempted to clear Sacred Stones with Gilliam, and honestly? It was quite easy, I breezed through it in two day, completing the run on the weekend after my last message. On the other hand I also tried doing a knight solo of Conquest, and well, it's impossible, chapter 10 is unwinnable so you never even get to play much with Benny. So yes, by my definition Gilliam is a much better knight than Effie or Benny.

You're missing the point. By this logic, any - and pretty much every - class is better in Sacred Stones. You might as well be arguing about how difficult the games are instead.

8 hours ago, Quell said:

Fates is definitely one of the games where it's the easiest to dodgetank, even besides gimmicky builds and skills and while most weapons are accurate the base mechanics are simply made to work well in tandem with it. Again still, jaggernauting is discouraged heavily by the map and enemy design but, for example, dual guard is made for dodgetanking: if you're attacked by 4 enemies with ~60%hit and you get three rounded you just need to dodge one to survive since you'll guard the other one, for a chance of death that's 12%, which is high but a surprising standard for even FE6 (where dodgetanking is at times a necessity). And again all of this without factoring eventual skills and supports that can help making that CoD 0%. But knights are too slow to take advantage of this, they have too low avoid and the small movement will at times leave them surrounded by enemies that they have no chance to beat.

That's funny. A lot of the time I can rely on dodgetanking in Fates, it's with a breaker skill, which don't come until near the end of the game for pretty much everyone, OR with something like Hana or Ryoma using a Sunrise Katana against green weapons, which they have WTA over. Those are very specific - and selective - situations. By the way, if you're using pair up, higher supports don't make THAT much of a difference compared to Awakening, where units got various boosts according to the support levels of nearby allies and their pair up partner, if any. 

8 hours ago, Quell said:

Walls crumble easy, it's just that big damage sponges like Fighters and 'serkers works better as walls in this game than Knight do. Effie, for example, has shaky HP base and growth, I would much more prefer her to be in a class that can use her strength well and can give her some HP for survivability, so yeah Effie is just much better as a Fighter. Not her best class, I give you that, but as a Fighter she gets so many more tools, especially as a Berserker, as while a general!Effie gets a patch at level 5 at the same time 'zerkers get Rally Strength, definitely a much more coveted skill. You're right in thinking that overspecialization cripples Fighters but I don't understand how can you not see how that fucks armors even more in a game where again walling is heavily discouraged. And yes, in a big part that's due to the low movement, you can patch it up with smart use of pair-ups but if you lament that doing so for Fighters is wasting two units turns I don't see it being better or even different for Knights.

This is ass-backwards logic, man. Fighters and Berserkers have very little going for them besides strength, so what possesses you to think they can wall much of anything when they take massive damage from ANYTHING??? Also, Berserkers getting Rally Strength doesn't help much when they'd rather be receiving it than giving it. I agree that low movement is a problem for knights, but that's trivial compared to lacking in damn near everything. And I ask again, how does this game discourage walling?

On Effie: Fighter doesn't even help her durability, as it makes her lose 4 defense. Compared to General, Berserker loses 7 defense for a measly 2 HP. Yeah, no. She's not "much better as a Fighter". She is more like "an easily killed glass cannon that takes massive damage from everything".

2 hours ago, Use the Falchion said:

*Granted, Ike makes nearly everyone a beast, but the +5 Def for Great Aether goes a long way when it comes to tanking through Chain Attacks and regular attacks. 

Bold: Unfortunately, Chain attacks do fixed damage anyway; only Pair Up from Corrin can negate them. I know this because I saw someone learn this lesson the hard way... by getting Louis killed by the enemy using chain attacks. Oh, and his attackers did zero damage otherwise.

Edited August 1, 2023 by Shadow Mir

[Use the Falchion]

3 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Wouldn't Jade rather have Corrin for this purpose? That way, she can negate Chain Attacks entirely. It's not like she's taking less damage from them, even with Ike attached...

 

3 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:

Bold: Unfortunately, Chain attacks do fixed damage anyway; only Pair Up from Corrin can negate them. I know this because I saw someone learn this lesson the hard way... by getting Louis killed by the enemy using chain attacks. Oh, and his attackers did zero damage otherwise.

I'm aware. My point was rather that Jade doesn't have to worry about damage outside of the Chain Attacks because her Def is too high, particularly with the +5 boost on top of the other boost. You can endure the chip damage (so long as your HP is high enough, you have Tiki's Divine Blessing, or there are a reasonable amount of enemies) and then heal with Great Aether and it's easier to do when you have a bulky Knight of a unit. 

[Quell]

On 8/1/2023 at 4:56 PM, Dark Holy Elf said:

That's fair, of course, but by your definition, pretty much every class is better in FE8 than they are in Conquest, just because the former is a significantly easier game. At that point it feels more like you're ranking game difficulty than how useful armour knights are in the game.

A similar argument could probably put Heath or Cormag above RD Haar or Camilla in a wyvern ranking, yet very few people would actually consider the former two to be better units than the latter two.

On 8/1/2023 at 7:05 PM, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

This feels like a "when everyone is super, no one will be" phenomen. Judged on this metric, it's not just Armor Knights who are better in Sacred Stones than in Fates, but also Cavaliers, Myrmidons, Mercenaries, Fighters, Mages, and Fliers. Pretty much any unit can, with enough attention and investment, solo the game. This makes individuals "stronger" within their game, but also "less vital" - I don't "need" to use Gilliam in the way that I "need" to use Effie. It comes down to Fates being a harder game than Sacred Stones.

 

On 8/1/2023 at 7:24 PM, Shadow Mir said:

You're missing the point. By this logic, any - and pretty much every - class is better in Sacred Stones. You might as well be arguing about how difficult the games are instead.

Yes and no. Let me explain:

First thing first, as I mentioned before I do think that units and classes in an easier game are better, simply because they measure better against the challenges of that game. And in part you do too, as an unit that can solo a game will for sure have some utility no matter what.

Second, Sacred Stones on hard is an easy game, yes, but not as trivial as to be soloed by all units, while on the other hand Conquest, and Fates in general, might be harder games but not that incredibly much harder. Famously wyvern and ninja!Corrin can solo Conquest (with the latter being practically the reason speedruns of the game are somewhat consistent), and I remember seeing people claiming of clearing with mage, samurai and mercenary Corrin too. On the other hand Cormag might be great but as a matter of fact he doesn't start with enough bulk to solo the game (though I'll admit I didn't experiment that much). Joshua too, despite coming early he will never have enough bulk and so even dodgetanking will eventually fail him. So yes I do think that wyvern and myrm are better in Fates, where Camilla and Ryoma can solo two games.

Third and last, I do take into account how units still measure up against their game, like Cormag won't be able to solo the game at first but with a little investment he can easily do it too. What I'm looking at is at how easily an unit or class can help finish the game exclusively by itself not taking into account the rest, Gilliam defenses trivialize most maps in FE8 and that's a good metric by me because it's objective. Not that I don't see merit in your reasoning, if we're talking on who to field I would also agree there're much better units in FE8, but so happens in Conquest, and deciding who to deploy can change quite a lot depending even on personal preferences.

On 8/1/2023 at 7:24 PM, Shadow Mir said:

This is ass-backwards logic, man. Fighters and Berserkers have very little going for them besides strength, so what possesses you to think they can wall much of anything when they take massive damage from ANYTHING??? Also, Berserkers getting Rally Strength doesn't help much when they'd rather be receiving it than giving it. I agree that low movement is a problem for knights, but that's trivial compared to lacking in damn near everything. And I ask again, how does this game discourage walling?

Again, the Fighter tree excels in HP and Strength, being practically and arguably the "best class" in both. Rally Strength is usually considered one of the best rallies together with Speed and Defense, not getting much use out of it doesn't make it bad having it in the first place. I'll give you that being damage sponges is bad if the other thing you excel in is killing stuff, especially thanks to a natural high crit rate that make suffering from success a real problem (thank god for bronze weapons), and that effectively knights are also one of the few class lines that has HPs to speak of, but again being able to soak damage is better than being able to tank them, because the game heavily HEAVILY discourage tanking. How? By having multiple debuffing skill aimed at lowering defense stats that shows up even early on, even worse there're multiple and quite common skills that deals flat damage, either percentage or true, completely ignoring defenses, and still on skills there are multiple true damage staking skills that can add a surprising amount of punch to any attack, effective weapons are strong and relatively common, some game mechanics like tag teams can rack up damage quite easily, maps rarely having defensive terrain or choke points to exploit, enemies having high offensive stats, said enemies coming in groups with an AI usually programmed to gang up on you, sometimes even in a good mix of magical and physical units, pretty much anyone that isn't in the fighter tree not having an HP bar to speak of, an entire weapon type dedicated to debuffing, in particular the defense stats, with the arguably best class in the game being the best user of said weapon type. This is just talking macro about it, and I could also go on but I would keep derailing the thread.

On 8/1/2023 at 7:24 PM, Shadow Mir said:

On Effie: Fighter doesn't even help her durability, as it makes her lose 4 defense. Compared to General, Berserker loses 7 defense for a measly 2 HP. Yeah, no. She's not "much better as a Fighter". She is more like "an easily killed glass cannon that takes massive damage from everything".

Being extra fair at lvl 5 promoted 15

Hp St Mg Sk Sp Lk Def Res

36  28  0  18  19  14  14  7 Berserker 

33  26  0  16  11  19  23  10 General

I see somewhat your point, 3 HP is a lot in Conquest but 9 Def and especially 5 Luck are an heavy penalty. She's definitely an easily killed glass cannon that takes massive damage from everything, especially in general, didn't realize she couldn't surpass the 23 benchmark for at least being useful in den of betrayal. I know she's at the theoretical 31 but at that point she would be better in an actively defensive class line like wyvern lord if I had to invest so much into her. I always reclassed her after my first playthrough so I didn't remember her being this bad in her base class.

Still I would ask you to stop trying to derail the thread, ignoring multiple times things I already clearly stated to the point I had to reread my messages again to see if I was that stupid or if did actually already said that, we're already far off topic so can we please drop it? Especially after I even posted numbers and actively tried my hand at the games to prove my points? I'm not trying to offend you in any way, I'm open to get my mind changed like you just did by making me notice Effie is a terrible wall, if you can show me a full armor team cleaning the floor I'll be the first one to give it you that Fates knights are better, but until than if you keep the snark up without adding anything to back it up or that is even more off topic I'll rightfully ignore it.

 

Edited August 2, 2023 by Quell

[Dark Holy Elf]

40 minutes ago, Quell said:

Second, Sacred Stones on hard is an easy game, yes, but not as trivial as to be soloed by all units, while on the other hand Conquest, and Fates in general, might be harder games but not that incredibly much harder. Famously wyvern and ninja!Corrin can solo Conquest (with the latter being practically the reason speedruns of the game are somewhat consistent), and I remember seeing people claiming of clearing with mage, samurai and mercenary Corrin too. On the other hand Cormag might be great but as a matter of fact he doesn't start with enough bulk to solo the game (though I'll admit I didn't experiment that much). Joshua too, despite coming early he will never have enough bulk and so even dodgetanking will eventually fail him. So yes I do think that wyvern and myrm are better in Fates, where Camilla and Ryoma can solo two games.

I've soloed the game with Colm and it was not terribly difficult. I imagine Joshua should be able to solo the game as well, though his lower luck does mean his dodging wouldn't be as reliable, so it would be a bit harder than Colm. Cormag's an odd case, since usually "solos" don't begin until you get the unit; if you recruit Cormag at the end of Chapter 10 Eph (a chapter whose victory condition is "survive", so requires no further combat) you should be able to grind him up in optional fights as much as you like before going on with the game, although it's fair if you want to consider "more grinding = harder solo" of course.

Of course some games just aren't soloable. RD makes solos literally impossible because of endgame boss regeneration (at least on Normal or above); RD Haar has no chance of soloing his game. But any ranking which places every (or almost every) Sacred Stones character above RD Haar is one I would personally not take very seriously.

[samthedigital]

1 hour ago, Quell said:

What I'm looking at is at how easily an unit or class can help finish the game exclusively by itself not taking into account the rest, Gilliam defenses trivialize most maps in FE8 and that's a good metric by me because it's objective.

It might be an objective way to rank units, but utility units like dancers can't solo maps, so they wouldn't do very well in this kind of tiering system. It's also not a good metric in the sense that it's limited in scope and naturally won't be applicable to many different situations. To be sure you're not wrong for ranking units this way if that's what you want to do.

1 hour ago, Quell said:

Second, Sacred Stones on hard is an easy game, yes, but not as trivial as to be soloed by all units, while on the other hand Conquest, and Fates in general, might be harder games but not that incredibly much harder. Famously wyvern and ninja!Corrin can solo Conquest (with the latter being practically the reason speedruns of the game are somewhat consistent), and I remember seeing people claiming of clearing with mage, samurai and mercenary Corrin too.

People speedrun Fire Emblem games on the easiest difficulty (good speedruns also tend not to be very consistent outside of games that can be RNG manipulated), and while it's closer to a solo than most other kinds of playthroughs they still sometimes use multiple combat units when it's the faster option.

2 hours ago, Quell said:

First thing first, as I mentioned before I do think that units and classes in an easier game are better, simply because they measure better against the challenges of that game. And in part you do too, as an unit that can solo a game will for sure have some utility no matter what.

They point they're making is that while they might be better relative to units in other games they still might perform badly relative to units in their own games. If we use Gilliam as an example he doesn't have a lot of utility in a speedrun, draft race, LTC, etc. I could list a multitude of Armour Knights that can't solo their respective games that still have more utility in those kinds of playthroughs.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

5 hours ago, Quell said:

First thing first, as I mentioned before I do think that units and classes in an easier game are better, simply because they measure better against the challenges of that game. And in part you do too, as an unit that can solo a game will for sure have some utility no matter what.

No, not necessarily. Again: if a bunch of units are capable of soloing the game, then the value of soloing the game is proportionally quite low. What Gilliam is doing may be good, in a vacuum, but it's not something I couldn't get out of Franz, or Garcia, or Joshua, or Ephraim, or Saleh.

5 hours ago, Quell said:

Famously wyvern and ninja!Corrin can solo Conquest (with the latter being practically the reason speedruns of the game are somewhat consistent), and I remember seeing people claiming of clearing with mage, samurai and mercenary Corrin too.

Corrin is also routinely considered one of the best units in all three routes of Fates. That's not because "soloing the game makes a unit great", but because "not many units can solo the game, but Corrin can, so they're great". It's all a question of relative advantage and utility.

5 hours ago, Quell said:

What I'm looking at is at how easily an unit or class can help finish the game exclusively by itself not taking into account the rest,

I don't agree with this metric. If a unit can save me a couple turns, or enable a more secure strategy, by helping out other units on the map, then I put higher value on that then showing up and participating without saving turns. If it's a choice between "Seth, Saleh, and Gilliam" or "Seth, Saleh, and Tethys", then I'm almost always taking the latter. Even though Tethys can't solo herself, she can do more to assist Seth and Saleh in getting a quick clear, than what Gilliam can pull off.

For the record, not saying your metric is "wrong", per se. Just that, since we're coming at it from two different angles, we're of course gonna end with different final judgements. I do think "solo-ability" would be a neat way to rank units, but only within their respective games (not between different games in the series).

[sinfonic18]

Man it sucks that Armor Knights aren't well looked upon (the class admittedly deserves the bad reputation). These guys are easily some of my favorite units to use in the series. I play slow though, and I suck at FE. 

The only game I would really say Knights are above average units is Engage. 

[Shadow Mir]

On 8/2/2023 at 5:04 PM, Quell said:

Yes and no. Let me explain:

First thing first, as I mentioned before I do think that units and classes in an easier game are better, simply because they measure better against the challenges of that game. And in part you do too, as an unit that can solo a game will for sure have some utility no matter what.

Second, Sacred Stones on hard is an easy game, yes, but not as trivial as to be soloed by all units, while on the other hand Conquest, and Fates in general, might be harder games but not that incredibly much harder. Famously wyvern and ninja!Corrin can solo Conquest (with the latter being practically the reason speedruns of the game are somewhat consistent), and I remember seeing people claiming of clearing with mage, samurai and mercenary Corrin too. On the other hand Cormag might be great but as a matter of fact he doesn't start with enough bulk to solo the game (though I'll admit I didn't experiment that much). Joshua too, despite coming early he will never have enough bulk and so even dodgetanking will eventually fail him. So yes I do think that wyvern and myrm are better in Fates, where Camilla and Ryoma can solo two games.

Third and last, I do take into account how units still measure up against their game, like Cormag won't be able to solo the game at first but with a little investment he can easily do it too. What I'm looking at is at how easily an unit or class can help finish the game exclusively by itself not taking into account the rest, Gilliam defenses trivialize most maps in FE8 and that's a good metric by me because it's objective. Not that I don't see merit in your reasoning, if we're talking on who to field I would also agree there're much better units in FE8, but so happens in Conquest, and deciding who to deploy can change quite a lot depending even on personal preferences.

I'm not seeing it. By this logic, I'd have to accept Gilliam as better than Oswin, which is a VERY tough sell because Oswin actually starts good, unlike Gilliam. Honestly, I'd say that Gilliam is only better than Meg, as well as Holy War and Binding Blade's armors... which is an extremely low bar to clear.

Italicized: How in the seven hells is Corrin soloing chapter 10? Because I ain't seeing it. Enemies come from 4 directions, and Corrin can only be in one place, and then there's the sky knights who ignore combat to beeline the objective. Hell, I don't think even goddamn Camilla can solo it. Oh, and I have seen people lose Ryoma, which is another point for "Fates is not a good game for dodgetanking". 

Underlined: That's subjective, not objective. Second, that ignores way too much for that to be an acceptable metric. Like, for example, how good is this unit starting out? Which is another problem for Gilliam; compared to Oswin, he has worse bases across the board except for resistance. Also, as stated earlier, some games are flat out unsoloable, like Radiant Dawn for example.

On 8/2/2023 at 5:04 PM, Quell said:

Again, the Fighter tree excels in HP and Strength, being practically and arguably the "best class" in both. Rally Strength is usually considered one of the best rallies together with Speed and Defense, not getting much use out of it doesn't make it bad having it in the first place. I'll give you that being damage sponges is bad if the other thing you excel in is killing stuff, especially thanks to a natural high crit rate that make suffering from success a real problem (thank god for bronze weapons), and that effectively knights are also one of the few class lines that has HPs to speak of, but again being able to soak damage is better than being able to tank them, because the game heavily HEAVILY discourage tanking. How? By having multiple debuffing skill aimed at lowering defense stats that shows up even early on, even worse there're multiple and quite common skills that deals flat damage, either percentage or true, completely ignoring defenses, and still on skills there are multiple true damage staking skills that can add a surprising amount of punch to any attack, effective weapons are strong and relatively common, some game mechanics like tag teams can rack up damage quite easily, maps rarely having defensive terrain or choke points to exploit, enemies having high offensive stats, said enemies coming in groups with an AI usually programmed to gang up on you, sometimes even in a good mix of magical and physical units, pretty much anyone that isn't in the fighter tree not having an HP bar to speak of, an entire weapon type dedicated to debuffing, in particular the defense stats, with the arguably best class in the game being the best user of said weapon type. This is just talking macro about it, and I could also go on but I would keep derailing the thread.

Last I checked, Knight has the same growth in both, and similar or better bases in both as well. Berserker's edge in both relative to General is very marginal. Also, debuffs  don't discriminate; it ain't like a fighter suffers less from debuffs than a knight. If anything, a defense debuff would be WORSE for a fighter or berserker because they have much lower defense to begin with. They're not even good at soaking damage either; look at Charlotte. She has massive HP, yes, BUT... Poison Strike and Grisly Wound still make that HP pool disappear in a hurry, as does any attack in general, really, because her defenses are garbage. It was true in damn near every other Fire Emblem game and Fates does jackshit to change that (in fact, Awakening exploits that by giving Warriors Counter; tellingly, it was useless for the player, and so good for the enemy, it got nerfed in Fates). Also, effective weapons are not nearly as common as you are trying to make it sound, unless they're bows. More to the point, I don't see the need for a berserker when other units and classes can hit hard as well without being made of glass.

On 8/2/2023 at 5:04 PM, Quell said:

Being extra fair at lvl 5 promoted 15

Hp St Mg Sk Sp Lk Def Res

36  28  0  18  19  14  14  7 Berserker 

33  26  0  16  11  19  23  10 General

I see somewhat your point, 3 HP is a lot in Conquest but 9 Def and especially 5 Luck are an heavy penalty. She's definitely an easily killed glass cannon that takes massive damage from everything, especially in general, didn't realize she couldn't surpass the 23 benchmark for at least being useful in den of betrayal. I know she's at the theoretical 31 but at that point she would be better in an actively defensive class line like wyvern lord if I had to invest so much into her. I always reclassed her after my first playthrough so I didn't remember her being this bad in her base class.

Still I would ask you to stop trying to derail the thread, ignoring multiple times things I already clearly stated to the point I had to reread my messages again to see if I was that stupid or if did actually already said that, we're already far off topic so can we please drop it? Especially after I even posted numbers and actively tried my hand at the games to prove my points? I'm not trying to offend you in any way, I'm open to get my mind changed like you just did by making me notice Effie is a terrible wall, if you can show me a full armor team cleaning the floor I'll be the first one to give it you that Fates knights are better, but until than if you keep the snark up without adding anything to back it up or that is even more off topic I'll rightfully ignore it.

That only proves my point; 3 HP and 2 strength is not a lot to gain for giving up 9 defense. Anyhow, I didn't bring out the numbers because Effie doesn't have Fighter innately; she must get it from a Partner Seal... by which point she'd have gotten some levels as a Knight, which would complicate things. Speaking of not backing stuff up, you yourself said Fates was one of the best games for dodgetanking despite posts saying to the contrary... and you didn't bother to back it up!

Bold: Unfortunately, a full armor team isn't really possible, because only 4 characters in Fates have Knight access before Partner/Friendship seal shenanigans... and one of those is Birthright exclusive due to a technicality. Or maybe it is, but I'd have to go completely out of my way to set it up, with one of those being a child unit, and one of the ones that you do NOT want to wait to play their paralogue at that. Either way, I don't see the need to agree to an outlandish demand like that; I don't need to challenge someone to clear the game with archers only to know that archers are better in Fates than they are in most other games.

On 8/1/2023 at 3:48 PM, Use the Falchion said:

I'm aware. My point was rather that Jade doesn't have to worry about damage outside of the Chain Attacks because her Def is too high, particularly with the +5 boost on top of the other boost. You can endure the chip damage (so long as your HP is high enough, you have Tiki's Divine Blessing, or there are a reasonable amount of enemies) and then heal with Great Aether and it's easier to do when you have a bulky Knight of a unit. 

Personally, I find Great Aether to be one of, if not the worst Engage attack in the game. The whole "wait a turn" business makes it very unwieldy (and nigh useless if you get smashed out of position). And on Maddening, enemies won't take the bait if they attack for zero.

On 8/1/2023 at 12:01 PM, Use the Falchion said:

Sacred Stones due to Gilliam and Amelia (who while bad is still pretty usable IMO)

I'm not sure I'd agree; Gilliam is not that good, and Amelia is better as a Cavalier.

Edited August 7, 2023 by Shadow Mir