Rate the Unit, Day 19: Raven

[Bluedoom]

I'll give Raven a 9. I'm biased toward him and I dont reall like Sain anyways, so yeah. Same score as Marcus.

He has good combat, actually, the best combat. Its awesome because actually speaking the non-fail mounted units you can use all the time are Marcus and Kent/Sain, and Lowen. Florina's weak, and Fiora and Farina come too late( Farina's more usable though, but costs money.) To top it of, Vaida's pretty mediocre and Heath comes late too. Oh yes, Isadora is just frail. Really. >.<Ferrying and stuff are ok, but Marcus and the early Cavs are the ones who can hack through the foes while ferrying- the rest aren't really killing because they either come late, have shaky str or shaky spd. Raven being the best foot combat unit's pretty good then, though he'll always be second string to Marcus and fellow Paladins(bar Isadora).

When I mean best combat I mean offensively and defensively(bar hector, but he has movt issues). he's much more durable than what Lyn will ever be, beats the crap out of the archers and fighters, more powerul than Guy, less RNG screwed than Eliwood, more movt than hector and Oswin, and basically beats the shit out of all other characters that appear after Fiora.

[Raven]

OK, so you send Raven up north to solo the lower-leveled pirates. He gets just over a level this way while Florina 4 turns the map.

In a 3 turn map (that ends on player phase), how many enemies is Raven going to kill? Shamans hit him really hard and mercs just actually hit him; Raven also has trouble doubling enemy mercs, particularly if he tries to use a Steel Sword, and his damage output suffers because of it. Let's say that he gets to approximately 7.50 here.

This would be great for Raven if it weren't for the fact that the easiest way to get to Uhai is on that small island. I'm actually fairly sure that it's possible to 3 turn clear this map by going over the small island. So Raven is just forced to move southwards, where he can grab 2 cavalier kills and maybe engage some peg knights. Let's say that he gets to approximately 8.50 here.

They also don't give him that much EXP. If he goes into this map at 8.50, he won't reach level 10 by the end of the map even if he kills all 7 peg knights.

Chapter 20 is really the Marcus show, but Raven can reach level 10 here easily enough. Judging from the rate of EXP gain in previous maps, Raven doesn't get much from chapters 21 and 22, since they are 3 and 4 turns, respectively (chapter 22 may even be 3 turns). You'd probably want him promoted for chapter 23, because he actually matters there. If you hold off promotion until then, an estimation of 12/1 is probably reasonable.

I did most of this in my 0% growths run, and I'm pretty sure that most of the strategies were near-optimal for Raven's EXP gain.

Kent and Sain are not Marcus, but they are worth a lot. Erk can do some interesting things of questionable value, but he can do them nonetheless. Then there's middle-of-the-road crap like Bartre and Dorcas who at least have enough earlygame offense to 2RKO enemies, and then the real icing on the fecal cake like Wil and Rebecca, who are absolutely worthless. But OK, let's just say that Raven is the best early-joining unmounted unit in the game - he's first of a group of losers, so to speak, and that's not really that good.

This is such an exceedingly minor advantage that I don't think balances out a movement advantage and full weapon triangle access.

All you're doing is justifying your score by stating your own methods of completing chapters in an turn-efficient run. You may be right in terms of how you play, but not many people play that way - especially in ranked runs. For example, why only 4-turn 17x when there is so much EXP available for Raven if you wait until turn 8/9 to finish, since 5* can be achieved in 10 turns or less? It works both ways here.

[Lord Raven]

Arguments about two completely different standards of play don't work.

[Raven]

I'm more than willing to agree to disagree. Donny ranks units based on turn-efficient runs while I rank them based on ranked runs. Simples.

[dondon151]

All you're doing is justifying your score by stating your own methods of completing chapters in an turn-efficient run.

If you didn't notice, I was also responding to KoT's argument. It also conveniently highlights Raven's extreme weaknesses in certain areas that do not exist in a more relaxed playstyle (but his advantages there are irrelevant because so many others can do what he does).

[Raven]

Okay.

That's me done anyway.

[Florete]

Older post, but Christ, two pages worth of shit while I slept so I'm getting this from the root.

Unpromoted Raven is basically Guy with slightly more str. And everyone thinks that Guy is pretty bad.

People think Guy is bad because of his mediocre Str (mostly in his growth) and Sword lock even promoted. Before promotion he's not so bad.

Offensively, even 8/0 Lyn @ Mani Katti ties parameters with 5/0 Raven @ Iron Sword, but she has all that crit from her weapon in addition to effective damage against a couple of enemy types. And everyone hates Lyn.

Everyone hates Lyn for her durability. Just about everyone agreed she has good offense.

Raven is definitely not amazing before promotion, but to say he's terrible is really pushing the LTC envelope. By the time he hits 10/0 he should be able to hold his own fairly well.

[OrangeCrush980]

Raven's always been a bit overrated IMO. Sure he's great, but stuff like sword-lock pre-promotion, no mount, mediocre support list, and shaky defense is more than enough to drag him down from godhood.

9/10

[deranger]

10/10 If he were mounted or could two range initially the game would just be no fun. (OP /= higher rating what)

[Raven]

Raven-8.47

[Mekkah]

Guy also has like 2 less con than Raven before promotion, js.

Raven is obviously not doing all that much for the most efficient playstyles, but if you're being a tad slower and you like someone that kills stuff, Raven is awesome. Raven already starts ORKOing some enemy types at base level, which is more than a lot of people can say.

I'd say 6/10 for efficiency and 8.5/10 for, well, less efficiency.

[Junkhead]

I give Raven an 8.8. He doesn't rock a horse, but he's still amazing.

[Tangerine]

Everyone's good in S-ranking and he's pretty much the best unit you've got there. In Efficiency? Not at all. Assuming Sain is LHM'd or not, he's still behind simply because of his lack of mount. dondon made use of him in 0% growths though, but complained about his lack of strength often times.

Nobody argues S-ranking anymore because it's basically "shuffle around units until your ranks are fulfilled."

@ bold. Uhh, that's not true. Being forced to rotate units doesn't mean "everyone is good", it means you often have to use less-than-efficient units for the sake of achieving a goal more comfortably. Weaker units having a legitimate opportunity for use in ranked doesn't make them any less a burden. A ranked list does not change that much from an efficiency list. That is the reason people don't discuss ranked here (apart from many not actually having the patience to complete an S rank run). They may have different parameters, but for the most part the best characters are still the best characters no matter what your rules are (*Matthew, Nino, Farina and Florina are the most notable differences between the two playstyles). You're arguing the same points, just with a few other options to take into account. Ranked DOES benefit certain units who contribute in other ways, but it doesn't make bad or mediocre units good. It can make good units great and great units amazing, however.

Consider this: the main goal of LTCing is an extreme version of one the goals of a ranked run; finishing chapters quickly. The main differences being you don't have to care about EXP or gold in unranked and you're given a specific turn count to beat in ranked. These are the only three ranks that actually matter. Though for the most part Funds doesn't either, and Combat might matter if you actually think every unit is good in ranked (). In other words, LTC rewards a unit for a singular contribution whereas ranked rewards units for several.

* Depending on who you ask, that is. Some people feel he shouldn't be given credit for the Silver Card. In that case he'd probably not be much higher than he is on efficiency.

Oh and 7.5.

edit: Actually, Guy may see some significant use in ranked compared to efficiency as well, now that I think about it. Funny considering the basis of this discussion!

Edited January 11, 2012 by Tangerine

[Lord Raven]

It can make good units great and great units amazing, however.

False. Marcus receives notably less use because you can't plow through the game with him and he doesn't benefit from EXP rank on his side- characters like Nino get a boost, and characters like Raven enjoy the fact that you're not bumrushing the hell out of everything. Mounted becomes much less useful because tactics takes around 100+ more turns than a standard efficiency playthrough. No matter how much a liability Nino and people are, they arguably help you S-rank a lot better than characters like Harken, Geitz, and Hawkeye for instance. Just about everyone is useful and because you need to keep rotating that a ranked tier list doesn't apply- there is obviously inequality of quality (just because they're all different) but it's not directly measurable in any way. Edited January 11, 2012 by Mercenary Raven

[Tangerine]

False. Marcus receives notably less use because you can't plow through the game with him and he doesn't benefit from EXP rank on his side- characters like Nino get a boost, and characters like Raven enjoy the fact that you're not bumrushing the hell out of everything. Mounted becomes much less useful because tactics takes around 100+ more turns than a standard efficiency playthrough. No matter how much a liability Nino and people are, they arguably help you S-rank a lot better than characters like Harken, Geitz, and Hawkeye for instance. Just about everyone is useful and because you need to keep rotating that a ranked tier list doesn't apply- there is obviously inequality of quality (just because they're all different) but it's not directly measurable in any way.

Marcus' use is not reduced by much in ranked compared to efficiency. Marcus should not be ranked below anyone but Matthew, the healers and possibly Ninian/Nils in ranked (in my experience, anyway). An early game ranked run may even look basically the same as efficiency for some players, as early game LTCing can be extremely beneficial in ranked. You just don't want to be using Marcus much later.

Yes, like I said, some characters can benefit from a ranked playthrough in ways they can't in efficiency. But that does not make them good. Generally, the most rewarded characters are ones who can already do something well in efficiency and then fulfill an additional need in ranked. Nino is better in ranked than efficiency, but she still sucks. "Useful" does not = good. Nino has a use in ranked. That use does not make her good.

Edited January 11, 2012 by Tangerine

[Lord Raven]

Yes it does. How does it even make sense that having a use does not necessarily make you good? If you do a great job of boosting EXP rank (Nino for example) then you are contributing to the goals of the playthrough- to S rank the mode. There is a larger turn limit which means less emphasis is placed on mounted units (ie Sain/Kent/Lowen aren't as good as they used to be because you aren't playing efficiently) and therefore in order to S-rank a bunch of weaker units will have to be used and due to their use, they contribute greatly to the run. This also penalizes characters that while they are great in efficiency they aren't *as* good in these sorts of runs because of the cycling around. They'll be lucky to see action sometimes, in fact.

The constant cycling is what makes ranked runs hard to debate or judge units through, partially becuase you aren't sticking with units throughout the game and the other part is that every single unit is useful in a way that can't even necessarily have value. Efficiency and Ranked are two completely different standards, and while being good in Efficiency is a symptom of being just fine in ranked, they do not contribute as much in Ranked as they do in efficiency.

EDIT: This argument is self-demonstrating, because of the blurry line between "useful" and "quality."

Edited January 11, 2012 by Mercenary Raven

[Tangerine]

Yes it does. How does it even make sense that having a use does not necessarily make you good? If you do a great job of boosting EXP rank (Nino for example) then you are contributing to the goals of the playthrough- to S rank the mode. There is a larger turn limit which means less emphasis is placed on mounted units (ie Sain/Kent/Lowen aren't as good as they used to be because you aren't playing efficiently) and therefore in order to S-rank a bunch of weaker units will have to be used and due to their use, they contribute greatly to the run. This also penalizes characters that while they are great in efficiency they aren't *as* good in these sorts of runs because of the cycling around. They'll be lucky to see action sometimes, in fact.

The constant cycling is what makes ranked runs hard to debate or judge units through, partially becuase you aren't sticking with units throughout the game and the other part is that every single unit is useful in a way that can't even necessarily have value. Efficiency and Ranked are two completely different standards, and while being good in Efficiency is a symptom of being just fine in ranked, they do not contribute as much in Ranked as they do in efficiency.

EDIT: This argument is self-demonstrating, because of the blurry line between "useful" and "quality."

@bold. Err, what? So every character with a use should be considered good on a tier list? We should just have "good" and "bad" tiers for LTCing and just a "good" tier for ranked? Actually, we might need a "bad" tier for ranked to put Renault in, otherwise the legitimacy of the list would be completely compromised. Because of Renault.

"How much does this unit contribute when in play?" is the question you should be asking yourself and posing to others when discussing a characters' placement in a tier list. Otherwise we'd be discussing who belongs in "gets used tier" and "doesn't get used tier". Hopefully that clears things up entirely.

Edited January 11, 2012 by Tangerine

[Lord Raven]

That's obviously not the point I was making- nothing about a "good tier" just about units being higher up in tiers (as a result of being good).

"How much does this unit contribute when in play?" is the question you should be asking yourself and posing to others when discussing a characters' placement in a tier list.

Yes, and there are different ways to contribute in an S-rank than an Efficiency playthrough than an efficiency playthrough, hence the tier list changes around. Edited January 11, 2012 by Mercenary Raven

[Tangerine]

That's obviously not the point I was making- nothing about a "good tier" just about units being higher up in tiers (as a result of being good).

Yes, and there are different ways to contribute in an S-rank than an Efficiency playthrough than an efficiency playthrough, hence the tier list changes around.

That is what you were saying, though. That Nino should be considered good because she has a use. The fact remains that Nino's contributions are minuscule; that makes her a bad character. Most characters contribute to multiple ranks (including Marcus, who contributes greatly to EXP indirectly), Nino can only contribute to one. Being able to contribute isn't unique, but contributing significantly is certainly rare.

The tiers for ranked and unranked are different, but not very. I listed the most significant differences already. I suppose Sain is another one, but I don't like the Cavs' placement on our ranked list anyway. Like I said, "good" characters can be made "great" based on new contribution possibilities (Erk above prepromos in ranked, below prepromos in unranked). But bad characters cannot be redeemed. The middle ranks see the most change, the best and worst units are still the best and worst.

Edited January 11, 2012 by Tangerine

[Harvey]

I don't get the complaints about the lack of mounted horse. Its not like his move is screwed up or anything and he's under hero class so how can you expect him to have a mounted unit? I think its a bit unfair to lower the score because of him not being a mounted unit.

Anyways, Raven is amazing. His character design is awesome, the dude has great skill meaning he won't miss that often and he's obviously better than Guy.

My only issue is that he won't critical attack as often as Guy and he is very hard to get recruited(Ok its not that hard but since it requires him not killing the soldiers, it might as well be that hard.)

9/10

[Integrity]

dood