Who is worse: Meg or Fiona?

[DarkDestr0yer61]

I am having a conversation with my friend about Radiant Dawn, and we are discussing who we think is worst. He thinks Meg is definitively worse.... I personally don't know which one I consider worse. They both have huge issues going against them in my opinion and I feel like they are about on the same levels of bad in their own way. I was curious to see what SF thinks and why.

[DarkDestr0yer61]

I am having a conversation with my friend about Radiant Dawn, and we are discussing who we think is worst. He thinks Meg is definitively worse.... I personally don't know which one I consider worse. They both have huge issues going against them in my opinion and I feel like they are about on the same levels of bad in their own way. I was curious to see what SF thinks and why.

 

Edit: SF DP glitch

Edited October 1, 2017 by DarkDestr0yer61

[Emperor Hardin]

Neither are good, but Meg is better if you put effort into her.

[Florete]

Meg is easier to use, but Fiona turns out better.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Quote

Meg is easier to use, but Fiona turns out better.

this

Fiona and Astrid are technically the best gold / silver knights in the game at the end but they have the worst start.

Fiona would be an amazing unit if she joined earlier (in the chapter where Meg joins) or had better base level and much higher bases.
Having lower base strength than base level is just sad.

[Hirotune]

Fiona is better, i always put effort into her. What i do is i make sure Laura has a bunch of heal staffs, and i just have her attack the boss over and over again on the one map where you free the Daein soldiers.

[DarkDestr0yer61]

6 hours ago, Byakuren Hijiri said:

Fiona and Astrid are technically the best gold / silver knights in the game at the end

How?

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Both have the best caps, high enough speed cap to double the auras.

[Shadow Mir]

Meg. She's an armor, for one, and second, whilst she might be easier to work with, she also doesn't pay off that well.

[Chconroy]

From my experience, Meg is the better unit. Fiona may have great growths, but she joins late in Part 1 and is only usable for two chapters. Bonus experience can help, but because it only raises three stats in this game, I don't find raising a unit with bonus experience to be very viable. I wanted to use her, her character left a good impression, but she wasn't worth the time.

Meg is better simply due to being useable in more Part 1 chapters and in my current playthrough, her speed let her double fairly reliably (as much if not more than Edward, somehow). Her defense is lacking for being a class that primarily tanks damage, but she proved reliable to me.

Though honestly I'd rather just use Gatrie and Oscar.

[Dunal]

Fiona is definitely worse. With equal use Fiona is only 'better' in the latter portions of Part 4 and by not that much surprisingly (move being the only main reason -- Meg actually has the better stats of the two overall aside from 4-F-5 assuming Fiona can actually reach 20/20/14... which is tougher than it sounds).

If you're using either of the two, you're probably giving them additional resources to make them 'work' in which Meg makes a lot more use out of them. Stat boosters / forges / BEXP on Meg can make her somewhat functional (on hard mode) even at base (defining functional as actually contributing to the objective of the map rather than just fishing for kills). Fiona struggles no matter what you give her and while Meg's move is bad... the maps themselves aren't doing Fiona any favours. And she flat out doesn't exist in 1-8 for whatever reason. 

If she did exist in 1-8 and had no in-door move penalty, then I'd put them about even, with maybe Fiona edging out. Meg would still be better combat-wise but at least Fiona would have the mobility/utility that Meg doesn't. And she'd have an extra map to 'fix' her combat earlier. Fact is, is that Fiona's class is often more of a hindrance than anything so in that regard, she's not much better off than Meg. And at least Meg has the option of equipping Celerity and/or boots and still climb ledges or move through swamp.

There's also weaponry to mention as well. Brave Sword and Killing Edge actually exist to aid Meg's combat much further. Sure, it's a degree of favouritism to give those to her... but Fiona simply doesn't the opportunity whatsoever to get a Killer/Brave which otherwise could have helped salvage her poor combat.

Edited October 1, 2017 by DLuna

[Dandy Druid]

Hmmm... this is hard. They're both pretty bad, but I ended up voting for Meg.

Meg has better defense, meanwhile Fiona has better mobility. At the start, if you let Fiona in on the charge, she'll get 2 shotted, and Meg's defense isn't that great either, so she'll most likely fall before other characters because she's slow and doesn't even properly fulfill her niche as an armor knight.

Meg has a better start time, but she really doesn't pay off either way. At least Fiona has the potential to be decent.

Personality-wise I like Meg more. Mainly because how can someone with an interesting backstory like Fiona be so boring? But Meg doesn't get that much of a spotlight anyways, so....

Meg is worse. Sorry my reasoning is all over the place.

[thejohnmatthews]

Meg has better availability which means she can chip in a bit more than Fiona. It's not like they can do anything stellar.

[leingodf8]

The game just fricking hates fiona. Terrible bases, low leveled, and the worst availability for her class in the game. Seriously it goes indoor level, indoor level, swamp level, followed by 2 levels where you basically have to sit back and play defense (although canto can be real useful on those at least). What even is the point of that damn horse. Meg on the other hand takes a little luck but generally can become decently competent with a little elbow grease. She's also one of the few SS sword users in the game that isn't a swordsmaster, which isn't much of a plus but I like to try to never use more than one of each class for pointless reasons. 

Still, like most people have pointed out, Fiona is quite a bit better come the final tower since she reaches that magic 34 speed. Personally I end up using her quite often, partially because I like her design and partially to spite the game designers utter contempt for her. 

[Florete]

I'm going to expound a bit since this seems to be pretty even.

I voted Meg as the worse of the two because the way I see it, if I'm going to use a bad unit (which these both are), I'm going to use the one that will feel more rewarding in the end. This is easily Fiona. Meg's class doesn't just hinder her movement, it hinders her stats; she'll ram her Spd and Lck caps but her Str growth is so low she'll continue to have trouble getting more even with bonus EXP, and since her tier 2 and 3 Spd caps are so low she has trouble doubling despite a ridiculously high growth. I never feel like training Meg pays off, even in normal mode.

Fiona, on the other hand, is harder to train up in the first place since her bases are ridiculously terrible and the maps she's available in have a tendency to work against her, but once she does manage to get up to par she actually performs quite well due to a more balanced cap and growth spread and the ability to actually move around. She still has a little trouble in the Str department but it's not quite as bad as it for Meg when utilizing bonus EXP. It takes a lot of effort, but I do feel like using Fiona pays off in the end.

[NinjaMonkey]

11 hours ago, DLuna said:

but Fiona simply doesn't the opportunity whatsoever to get a Killer/Brave which otherwise could have helped salvage her poor combat.

According to the main site, you can buy a Killer Lance in the shop in Chapter 3-12, which you could give to Fiona.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Their usefulness depends on the difficulty.
In easy and normal both are usable. Meg needs way less effort whilst Fiona has the better pay off.
In hard, however, Meg is semi-usable in 1-4 by blocking cats and ten speed tigers whilst Fiona is just a drag.
All in all Fiona is better overall except in hard mode which is just one of three difficulties.
Meg's "usefulness" in 1-4 is the reason why I ranked Meg > Fiona in my FE10 HM tierlist.

Edited October 2, 2017 by Byakuren Hijiri

[Dunal]

8 hours ago, Byakuren Hijiri said:

Their usefulness depends on the difficulty.
In easy and normal both are usable. Meg needs way less effort whilst Fiona has the better pay off.
In hard, however, Meg is semi-usable in 1-4 by blocking cats and ten speed tigers whilst Fiona is just a drag.
All in all Fiona is better overall except in hard mode which is just one of three difficulties.
Meg's "usefulness" in 1-4 is the reason why I ranked Meg > Fiona in my FE10 HM tierlist.

If anything, the increased EXP gain in normal means that Meg's stat lead will be even higher than in hard mode. So I would disagree that difficulty mode is a factor.

There's also more leeway in giving them additional resources on lower difficulties because you're able to sacrifice less towards other units -- and I feel that Meg benefits more from early resources than Fiona (such as giving a robe and/or shield). Having 4x more BEXP is also a factor. It allows Meg to reach a decent spot with relative ease, while say, a 20/1 Fiona is very weak with or without bonus EXP, assuming that's the level you're aiming for on 3-6 or so. 

Either way, the main factor here is Meg being rather serviceable in part 3, while Fiona isn't without abuse. Considering their part 3 maps are some of the more difficult maps in the game, I'd consider this a considerable win for Meg.

Fiona may be better during a couple later maps but I'd consider being stronger during the more difficult portions of the game to be more important. It's why Sothe is objectively one of the best units in the entire game. Or how Jeigans in FE generally are.

They're both pretty bad -- Meg being 'objectively good' during part 3 is still a stretch... but it's much more realistic than any kind of praise Fiona could receive in the first 3/4 of the game. 

[Shadow Mir]

22 hours ago, DLuna said:

There's also weaponry to mention as well. Brave Sword and Killing Edge actually exist to aid Meg's combat much further. Sure, it's a degree of favouritism to give those to her... but Fiona simply doesn't the opportunity whatsoever to get a Killer/Brave which otherwise could have helped salvage her poor combat.

Aside from what NM mentioned, I wouldn't want to be using a killer weapon in part 3, frankly, because an increased chance to open myself up to more attacks and potentially get killed for it is undesirable.

11 hours ago, Florete said:

I'm going to expound a bit since this seems to be pretty even.

I voted Meg as the worse of the two because the way I see it, if I'm going to use a bad unit (which these both are), I'm going to use the one that will feel more rewarding in the end. This is easily Fiona. Meg's class doesn't just hinder her movement, it hinders her stats; she'll ram her Spd and Lck caps but her Str growth is so low she'll continue to have trouble getting more even with bonus EXP, and since her tier 2 and 3 Spd caps are so low she has trouble doubling despite a ridiculously high growth. I never feel like training Meg pays off, even in normal mode.

Fiona, on the other hand, is harder to train up in the first place since her bases are ridiculously terrible and the maps she's available in have a tendency to work against her, but once she does manage to get up to par she actually performs quite well due to a more balanced cap and growth spread and the ability to actually move around. She still has a little trouble in the Str department but it's not quite as bad as it for Meg when utilizing bonus EXP. It takes a lot of effort, but I do feel like using Fiona pays off in the end.

I agree with pretty much all of this. For all the hard work it takes to make something of Meg, she just doesn't wind up much better than just "okay". And she doesn't really do anything that other armors couldn't do better.

[NinjaMonkey]

19 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Aside from what NM mentioned, I wouldn't want to be using a killer weapon in part 3, frankly, because an increased chance to open myself up to more attacks and potentially get killed for it is undesirable.

I guess if you supported Fiona with another Earth affinity unit, you could probably get away with it, seeing how broken the double Earth support is. Meg on the other hand...

[Dunal]

56 minutes ago, NinjaMonkey said:

I guess if you supported Fiona with another Earth affinity unit, you could probably get away with it, seeing how broken the double Earth support is. Meg on the other hand...

Keep in mind that only B support is possible for Fiona by 3-6 since she only had 2 maps beforehand. Then loses out on 13 base AVO due to lower SPD/LCK. All the while Meg is able to get an A earth in a timely manner. No matter what, Meg has the higher avoid here. Fiona gets 16 AVO out of her own earth affinity but loses out on that 13 AVO + 8 AVO from the A support. So Meg has 5 AVO more altogether (double B earth is +32 AVO, while a single A earth + stat difference is +37 AVO).

And in terms of durability, assuming both are 20/1, Meg is 5RKOed by the average cat with a robe. Fiona is 2RKOed with that same robe (due to having only 17 AS -- therefore doubled). Simply put, Fiona's stats are awful until tier 3, that much is obvious.

That's even if Fiona can reach 20/1 in two whole maps (6 levels per map while Meg needs 2.5 levels). It's a shame she doesn't get 1-8.

Admittedly though, the earth support does make Fiona rather strong lategame, since dodge tanking is the best thing to abuse where possible.

Edited October 2, 2017 by DLuna

[Dark Holy Elf]

7 hours ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

I agree with pretty much all of this. For all the hard work it takes to make something of Meg, she just doesn't wind up much better than just "okay". And she doesn't really do anything that other armors couldn't do better.

For what it's worth, Meg is the best armour in endgame, should you bring an armour to endgame (and have her levelled enough, obviously). There are two SS swords and only one of the other weapons, and she's the only one who can use swords (plus, Alondite is a great fit on someone who is so tanky). She also has the best Res by quite a bit, so she can mixed-tank well which matters given that only in E-2 is pure physical tanking more valuable. She's actually an outstanding choice to fight White Dragons on enemy phase, for instance, or a combination of red and white.

Is Fiona better in endgame? Maybe a bit. 3 move, Canto, and earth supports are cool, though Meg does win every single stat with the sole exception of speed (which is a small gap, though a potentially important one I'll grant) and is more likely to have an SS weapon available (and Fiona without one loses most of her value, as she lacks the strength for brave). So Fiona's win here isn't big by any means, while Meg is dramatically better in Part 1 and Part 3.

I've used both (how many others weighing in have?) and there's no question to me that Fiona requires dramatically more babying and is clearly inferior for a long time. Even with mass favouritism the first map where Fiona doesn't feel like garbage is 3-13, while Meg can start pulling her own weight almost immediately. Using Fiona feels like a challenge, using Meg doesn't. I have a hard time seeing how Meg isn't better than Fiona (and several other units besides, but that's another argument).

Edited October 3, 2017 by Dark Holy Elf

[Florete]

24 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

For what it's worth, Meg is the best armour in endgame, should you bring an armour to endgame (and have her levelled enough, obviously). There are two SS swords and only one of the other weapons, and she's the only one who can use swords (plus, Alondite is a great fit on someone who is so tanky). She also has the best Res by quite a bit, so she can mixed-tank well which matters given that only in E-2 is pure physical tanking more valuable. She's actually an outstanding choice to fight White Dragons on enemy phase, for instance, or a combination of red and white.

Is Fiona better in endgame? Maybe a bit. 3 move, Canto, and earth supports are cool, though Meg does win every single stat with the sole exception of speed (which is a small gap, though a potentially important one I'll grant) and is more likely to have an SS weapon available (and Fiona without one loses most of her value, as she lacks the strength for brave). So Fiona's win here isn't big by any means, while Meg is dramatically better in Part 1 and Part 3.

I've used both (how many others weighing in have?) and there's no question to me that Fiona requires dramatically more babying and is clearly inferior for a long time. Even with mass favouritism the first map where Fiona doesn't feel like garbage is 3-13, while Meg can start pulling her own weight almost immediately. Using Fiona feels like a challenge, using Meg doesn't. I have a hard time seeing how Meg isn't better than Fiona (and several other units besides, but that's another argument).

Hey, Fiona wins Skill by 1 and Luck by 5!

I've used both multiple times, on both normal and hard (and easy, but no one cares about that).

I really don't agree that Meg is dramatically better anywhere if only because Meg is never really a "good" unit at all. She's passable at her very best unless you give her some extreme pumping (and I'm talking like "20/1 by the time Fiona joins" pumping).

In normal mode I'd say Fiona should start holding her own by 3-12 given the favoritism required to use her at all, and as soon as she starts moving Meg is never catching up. Give Meg all the favoritism you want, she'll always be held back in one way or another.

Of course, the above is based on my personal standards, which are pretty different from the efficiency of old times. Under those standards, yes, Meg would probably be better because you can get some value out of her at a lower cost. And if that's how you want to judge units, okay.

[Shadow Mir]

54 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

For what it's worth, Meg is the best armour in endgame, should you bring an armour to endgame (and have her levelled enough, obviously). There are two SS swords and only one of the other weapons, and she's the only one who can use swords (plus, Alondite is a great fit on someone who is so tanky). She also has the best Res by quite a bit, so she can mixed-tank well which matters given that only in E-2 is pure physical tanking more valuable. She's actually an outstanding choice to fight White Dragons on enemy phase, for instance, or a combination of red and white.

Is Fiona better in endgame? Maybe a bit. 3 move, Canto, and earth supports are cool, though Meg does win every single stat with the sole exception of speed (which is a small gap, though a potentially important one I'll grant) and is more likely to have an SS weapon available (and Fiona without one loses most of her value, as she lacks the strength for brave). So Fiona's win here isn't big by any means, while Meg is dramatically better in Part 1 and Part 3.

I've used both (how many others weighing in have?) and there's no question to me that Fiona requires dramatically more babying and is clearly inferior for a long time. Even with mass favouritism the first map where Fiona doesn't feel like garbage is 3-13, while Meg can start pulling her own weight almost immediately. Using Fiona feels like a challenge, using Meg doesn't. I have a hard time seeing how Meg isn't better than Fiona (and several other units besides, but that's another argument).

But it ain't like her 32 speed cap is going to allow her to accomplish anything of note that the other armours couldn't do... And frankly, I'm not seeing how Meg is "dramatically better" at all, either, not without extreme favoritism at least, especially considering her being an armor, and all the problems that comes with, as well as essentially being sword-locked until third tier.

Edited October 3, 2017 by Levant Mir Celestia

[Dark Holy Elf]

If you don't see how she's dramatically better in Part 1 and Part 3, you're not trying very hard.

Meg, Level... let's say 11. 2 levels a map, a decent clip but hardly favouritism:

26 HP, 13 Str, 10 Skl, 13 Spd, 14 Luck, 13 Def, 9 Res

Fiona, base:

25 HP, 8 Str, 8 Skl, 10 Spd, 7 Luck, 8 Def, 6 Res

That's one hell of a stomping. And the crazy thing? Meg is only two levels higher! So that gap ain't closing any time soon. In fact, it gets worse, because Fiona goes and promptly misses 1-8 so Meg probably pads a level lead if anything.

You can say "being an armour sucks", but Fiona only has 1 more move than Meg in her first two maps, and then is severely restricted in her third. She has Canto which is nice. Meg, meanwhile, has access to better weapons (Killer in part 1, Brave in part 3). This is a massive gap and lasts right through Part 3. Being sword-locked isn't that big a deal in this game since swords actually get 1-2 range (and thanks to large leads in Str/Skl/Luck, Meg's Wind Edge is both more accurate and more damaging than Fiona's Javelin); being lance-locked is actually worse in the DB maps.

31 minutes ago, Florete said:

Hey, Fiona wins Skill by 1 and Luck by 5!

20/20/10 (to pick an arbitrary number for endgame) sees Meg ahead by around 2 points in both. Fiona only passes Meg in luck long after Meg has rammed her luck cap, and never passes her in skill, BExp shenanigans aside. But it's obviously not a big deal either way.