Panette is amazing on sigurd. Try paladin: is momentum + crit, try her

Lowen has never been good for me with level ups or usefulness having Kent and Sain.. he is definitely a D

Did you pass your exams?

As with all things, play how you want to play and don’t ruin the fun for others. Ltc? Cool. Drafts with bad units? Cool. Casual and easy mode? GTFO… I mean... cool.

Lol, am I playing the game wrong? 😂 My mages carry my units through the game, and even acts as evade tanks cause my cavaliers get hit so damn often

Then Seth becomes unusable for the rest of the game?

Thanks for uploading this gameplay, so much nostalgia :)

Average stats are more useful when you're trying to compare two similar units or to compare a unit to a prepromote (in theory, just read in a comment that the ones on seresnes are not accurate for that because they don't take the reroll on failed growth into account but let's ignore that for my point =p). Like "am I likely to get that unit to a point where it'll be better than that prepropromote if I train it? is a useful information to have. If the answer is "no" or "yes but barely" then might not be worth training it. And knowing what you can expect two similar units to turn out like is also useful to know where to invest. Now it's not very useful to know if the unit itself is good in a vacuum. It's more interesting to have the likelihood the unit will be "good enough" to do what you want it to do. Like, if a unit has 50% chance to turn out mediocre and 50% chance to turn out amazing because they reached the right speed threshold you might get better value on average but you might be better off going for the units that's "decent" 90% of the time and garbage the other 10%. Also why prepromotes are often great. Because they can reach like, 100% chance to be decent because they start out decent. They might be very unlikely to become amazing but you'll never end up investing in a unit that turns out to be unusuable. There's also the question "how easy is it to fix?". Like, if a unit will always be good if I give it a speedwing and only occasionnally if I don't then it's worth holding onto that speedwing, see how it turns out and give it to it if you get bad rolls but use it on another unit if that's unncessary.

I have a hard time understanding how Combo and Plus works but I stumbled upon a Deck that causes that to happen more often than not

I also want to say I don't like seize maps cause uh... they're rout map really. As in, because of the way the game works you have a major incentive to not actually go for the objective and just play it like a route map. But it feels really bad to be sitting there farming when you could win and those maps also are generally designed in a way that once you've breached the defenses there's not much challenge left. I really wish seize maps had a unique feature where they give bonus xp equal to the xp you'd have gotten from the remaining ennemies, so seizing early would actually be incentivized because you get the same amount of xp but you can spread it however you want and don't use items killing ennemies. Honestly sometimes I just wish they removed combat xp entirely and instead made xp work like FE7 merlinus. As in, deploy a unit, get a level (or at least a fixed amount of xp if you still want higher level units to level up slower). That would solve so many problem. No more grinding, no more juggernaut holding onto all the xp, and more importantly it would just be about solving the map the most efficient way possible rather than figure out how to spread your xp. Of course you can still have bonus objectives (and you could even have xp be a reward for some of them) to make the map more dynamic and add some risk/reward. But I always thought it's weird how much these game discourage you from reaching your objective efficiently, unless you're doing speedrun/LTC. Beating a map quickly should be a reward in itself not a challenge run. You shouldn't feel FoMo from playing well. One of the reason I really like path of radiance is because a lot of map give Bexp for being efficient, so while you can still optimize your kills you at least feel like you're being rewarded for beatig the objectives effectively, and the Bexp mechanic also let you worry less about using your powerful units to fight because you can easily boost a unit you want to train, you don't have to go through the process of doing stupid moves just to feed xp to a unit. It's absolutely not perfect but it should really have become the norm.

Try 1vs3 against hard bot, its hard on the start but get easier and way longer , took me around 4-5 hours to win, keep it up bro

Three Houses on Maddening - Chapter 13 (1st timeskip) is ATROCIOUS and almost impossible if you didn't level up all of the units from the actual House you choose. I just manage to finish because I ignored the chests and cheese the boss and used weaker units as decoy. (Casual mode, on classic mode this is just completely nonsense / unfun)

For me personally, I don’t usually play hard modes, the only hard mode I’ve ever done was for Three Houses. So for me personally and as someone who plays on normal, there’s a lot that would be different on my tier list, but one of the main ones would be that Lyn is generally S tier for me since she scales her speed and Dex so fast that she becomes the optimal dodge tank almost immediately, and her high skill means she can make up for lower strength with frequent crits, especially once she gets a hold of killer swords. She’s just everything I want in a fast unit, and by the time I get the first lord promotion, her stats always far exceed Eliwood, and I have other units that can tank as well as Hector, so Lyn ends up becoming the obvious choice for me. Another big one for me would be Nino. I can understand how on hard mode it might be more trouble than it’s worth trying to get her magic stat high enough within the space of 2 maps, especially when she joins so late and so underleveled. But for normal, on my first playthrough, I didn’t optimize her leveling, and didn’t even get to do her paralogue, yet she was outperforming Pent on the final map unless Pent grabs the Excalibur tome. And while yeah Athos exists for the final map, he can’t one round anything on that map, and most of the enemies have higher def than res, so she’s still super useful. Just the fact that I benched so many of the units I had been working with the whole game (like Sain, Isadora, Fiora, etc) but brought her along should tell you how much of an impact she had/has for me. I’d put her A tier personally, with her only real drawback (again for normal) being that she does join so late. I also really don’t understand the love for Sain and Kent. I’ve heard so much about how good they are as combat units, but maybe I just always have the worst luck, but they’ve always been mid at best for me. First playthrough I used Sain on every possible map and used him religiously for combat. By the final map, he only had 13 Spd, only 17 Str, 16 skl, 11 def, and 2 res. He couldn’t double anything, was being consistently doubled, couldn’t kill anything, and was constantly at risk of being one-tapped. Isadora was doing better, but even she got benched because she too had no bulk and couldn’t consistently kill. Sain and Kent have just always been utter disappointments for me. I would put them in B tier, and only because of the cav utility and because they are very good in the early game as mini-Jagens. I’d also like to add that both Rebecca and Louise would be bottom of B for me, with Wil being top of C. I think everyone underrates the value of bows, especially for this game, where enemy flier spawns are on most of the maps and can be extremely annoying. Not to mention the utility of ballistas that are littered everywhere in the late game-endgame. I put Rebecca and Louise above Wil because they consistently had much better Spd and skl, which let them make better use of killer bows and long bows.

When playing fire emblem games, I tend to look at tier lists, who's considered good and bad. I'll often try to make a bad unit or two good. And it's funny investing a lot of time in them for them to still be mid at best, and have to think "Should I keep going?"

I really hate their description of Spike because there is nothing unfair about it. Being able to exploit a game's mechanics is something everyone can do if they desire. Wanting to optimize isn't unfair: it's dedication. Reminds me of when I played competitive Melee and some of the other kids were complaining that I was cheating just because I was winning. I even offered to teach them the very simple tech, and they would just keep calling me a cheater. IMO, this is the mentality of a casual elitist, a thing we used to never talk about when this was written.

Valkyria Chronicles is fascinating case study here, as a tactical strategy series that seems all but immune to hoarding and overspending habits. You get slightly bigger rewards for going out of your way to kill all enemy officers and destroy all enemy tanks, but the biggest prize by far is how few turns you take to finish the level, which can more than DOUBLE your end-of-battle rewards with an elusive A-rank. Like with Dark Deity, hoarded resources mean slower level completion and fewer total resources, pushing players to spend everything ASAP to enable more resource acquisition. And the games are designed such that overspending can't handicap you later. Experience points are spent manually on levelling up whole classes (not individual units), while money is spent to unlock new weapons, armour, and tank upgrades (with each unlock getting mass produced for ALL units of the relevant class to use at no further cost). You also can't buy higher quality gear until you've unlocked the preceding versions, so no point saving up to 'skip' middling equipment since it's all a required investment for the good stuff anyway. The pressure to perform well on every level, the lack of individual purchases and the everlasting benefit of EVERY purchase (given that you need all five / six classes and often all available tanks to win consistently), all comes together in a system that always rewards aggressive spending with no counterintuitive incentive to save / hoard. And worst comes to worst, I can speak from experience when saying that you can beat these game even if you're taking terribly long to finish every level; while playing slow and safe makes things much harder, you'll never be outright soft-locked. For those who are somehow TRULY stuck, optional and endlessly repayable skirmishes are an option. Not every game can accommodate systems like Valkyria Chronicles, much less the unique combination involved, but this has allowed the series to almost entirely eliminate a bane of many other series in its genre and some notes can certainly be taken from this success.