perryigis lp fe7 What are the good characters?

[Harvey]

10 hours ago, athena_57 said:

EDIT: Also, why'd you say Lyn's one of the best characters? She's a swordlocked 1-range infantry unit, with meh damage output (yes, she crits a lot, but even then it's nothing special and pretty unreliable) and very bad survivability. Her personal weapons are somewhat redeeming features but still, there's no way she's among the best.

Because she's forced in the final chapter.

Sure you can avoid using her but if she's forced, atleast train her a bit so she can survive better.

 

[samthedigital]

It's also possible to avoid using her and have her avoid enemies when she has to be deployed. That's not very difficult either.

[Athena_57]

5 hours ago, Harvey said:

Because she's forced in the final chapter.

Sure you can avoid using her but if she's forced, atleast train her a bit so she can survive better.

 

She's forced in the final chapter, yes. But the final chapter has a lot of open space and it very easy to keep her out of combat. Heck, usually during that chapter you're keeping Nils and 1 or 2 staffbots out of range as well without any problem. If you really want to be careful you can feed her kils up to lvl 10, most of which has already been done in Lyn's mode and then promote and bench, but that's not really necessary. Just because she's forced in the final chapter doesn't mean you have to force yourself to use her the entire game...

Either way, naming her as one of the best characters is just nonsense.

[Harvey]

Ok, she's not best then.

But not using her causes you to lose one of the best prepromotes though.

[Athena_57]

10 minutes ago, Harvey said:

Ok, she's not best then.

But not using her causes you to lose one of the best prepromotes though.

I'm assuming you mean Geitz? Because first of all, if you lvl 10 her then bench it's still possible. But more importantly, I don't really want Geitz that badly. Sure, he's good, but not so good to be worth using Lyn (and Eliwood for that matter) a lot.

[Florete]

Lyn may not be one of the best, but she's perfectly usable, certainly not bad, if you go through Lyn mode first and get her an appropriate amount of levels. She's not the most beginner-friendly, though.

[De Geso]

The best unit in the game is Marcus. Then the fliers (even Farina is good), then the foot prepromotes (Pent, Hawkeye, Harken, guys like that). Vaida is with them because of availability.

Lowen, Sain, Kent are good (Lowen's the best of the three without Lyn mode behind them).

Just don't use the fighters or archers and you'll be fine.

Or Wallace. He's just the worst guy.

[PerIg0716]

On 10/26/2017 at 11:02 PM, YouSquiddinMe said:

The best unit in the game is Marcus. Then the fliers (even Farina is good), then the foot prepromotes (Pent, Hawkeye, Harken, guys like that). Vaida is with them because of availability.

Lowen, Sain, Kent are good (Lowen's the best of the three without Lyn mode behind them).

Just don't use the fighters or archers and you'll be fine.

Or Wallace. He's just the worst guy.

I highly agree that fighters and archers are terribly bad

I may have used Wallace a bit to much in Chapter 10

Sain is an offensive cavalier but not sure why Lowen is better I think Lowen joins early in ENM, EHM, HNM, and HHM

 

I say Harken is better than Karel because Harken starts with a Brave Sword and the perfect replacement if Raven wasn't trained properly

 

Pent is the replacement if Erk wasn't trained properly because he starts with A Rank on both anima and staves

 

Hawkeye is my replacement for Dart because I never use that inacturate pirate xD

 

I heard Farina is the Pegasus of Defence and Strength but lacks Skill so people prefer Fiora

 

Marcus, I'll never use him thats why I gave his weapons away. But I'll use Seth in my FE8 Let's Play because Tower of Valni exists hahaha

[PerIg0716]

On 10/23/2017 at 4:04 PM, Harvey said:

Ok, she's not best then.

But not using her causes you to lose one of the best prepromotes though.

Lyndis is bad I don't even know why I train her I think its because you need her on the final chapter which is full of enemies using epic weapons like Excalibur and Luce (Forblaze and Aurela is better I call them legendary)

[De Geso]

17 minutes ago, Perryigi said:

I highly agree that fighters and archers are terribly bad

I may have used Wallace a bit to much in Chapter 10

Sain is an offensive cavalier but not sure why Lowen is better I think Lowen joins early in ENM, EHM, HNM, and HHM

 

I say Harken is better than Karel because Harken starts with a Brave Sword and the perfect replacement if Raven wasn't trained properly

 

Pent is the replacement if Erk wasn't trained properly because he starts with A Rank on both anima and staves

 

Hawkeye is my replacement for Dart because I never use that inacturate pirate xD

 

I heard Farina is the Pegasus of Defence and Strength but lacks Skill so people prefer Fiora

 

Marcus, I'll never use him thats why I gave his weapons away. But I'll use Seth in my FE8 Let's Play because Tower of Valni exists hahaha

Lowen is better because his availability is better (unless you play Lyn mode). Harken is better than Karel, Pent is arguably better than Erk even if Erk is trained, Dart is garbage, all the fliers are good, and you are making the game much harder on yourself by benching Marcus. Not that FE7 is super hard outside of HHM, but it's nice to have him around. Don't worry about "stealing exp" - that's a non-issue and is almost never relevant. Use Marcus, he's the man.

Speaking of non-issues, don't worry about training Lyn and the non-main lord just because they're in the final chapter. Just keep them out of enemy range.

Edited October 30, 2017 by YouSquiddinMe

[Florete]

3 hours ago, YouSquiddinMe said:

Lowen is better because his availability is better (unless you play Lyn mode).

Kent and Sain join ~6 maps into a 20+ chapter campaign. Lowen's availability over them is meaningless.

[De Geso]

7 hours ago, Florete said:

Kent and Sain join ~6 maps into a 20+ chapter campaign. Lowen's availability over them is meaningless.

6 chapters of being your second best unit is a pretty big deal (you can make an argument for Oswin or Hector being better but the point remains the same). That's 6 chapters to grow and raise weapon ranks that he has over those two. Hell, he can potentially even promote the chapter after they join, and the chapter in which they join doesn't give them much to do - killing 2 mercs and a brigand between the two of them. Availability, no matter how small the difference, matters.

Edited October 30, 2017 by YouSquiddinMe

[Florete]

7 hours ago, YouSquiddinMe said:

6 chapters of being your second best unit is a pretty big deal (you can make an argument for Oswin or Hector being better but the point remains the same). That's 6 chapters to grow and raise weapon ranks that he has over those two. Hell, he can potentially even promote the chapter after they join, and the chapter in which they join doesn't give them much to do - killing 2 mercs and a brigand between the two of them. Availability, no matter how small the difference, matters.

I disagree. Availability is overvalued. Especially when you yourself will say:

17 hours ago, YouSquiddinMe said:

Lowen is better because his availability is better (unless you play Lyn mode). Harken is better than Karel, Pent is arguably better than Erk even if Erk is trained, Dart is garbage, all the fliers are good, and you are making the game much harder on yourself by benching Marcus. Not that FE7 is super hard outside of HHM, but it's nice to have him around. Don't worry about "stealing exp" - that's a non-issue and is almost never relevant. Use Marcus, he's the man.

Speaking of non-issues, don't worry about training Lyn and the non-main lord just because they're in the final chapter. Just keep them out of enemy range.

Kent/Sain and Lowen share 75%+ of the game but Lowen is better because of availability. Erk is around for 10+ chapters more than Pent but Pent is still better?

Availability should not hold so much weight. Kent and Sain are better than Lowen, if not immediately, then very fast. A few chapters where they're not around (and he's not exactly stellar there anyway) doesn't make a difference.

Frankly speaking, I do agree that Pent is better than Erk.

[Athena_57]

56 minutes ago, Florete said:

Kent/Sain and Lowen share 75%+ of the game but Lowen is better because of availability. Erk is around for 10+ chapters more than Pent but Pent is still better?

Availability should not hold so much weight. Kent and Sain are better than Lowen, if not immediately, then very fast. A few chapters where they're not around (and he's not exactly stellar there anyway) doesn't make a difference.

It's not just availability in and of itself, in the case of the cavs it also means more chapters of growth with similar base level, whereas Pent has a massive base level lead over Erk, thus making the availability a less important issue. So this comparison is completely irrelevant.

Edited October 30, 2017 by athena_57
unjustified==>irrelevant

[Interdimensional Observer]

On 10/22/2017 at 10:10 AM, Levant Mir Celestia said:

And you do realize having to tether two units together to build support is hella inconvenient? Especially when the bonuses are rather underwhelming.

 

These aren't what I'd call underwhelming exactly:

 Fire: Attack + 0.5, Accuracy + 2.5, Avoid + 2.5, Critical + 2.5
 Thunder: Defence +0.5, Avoid + 2.5, Critical + 2.5, Critical Evade + 2.5
 Wind: Attack + 0.5, Accuracy + 2.5, Critical + 2.5, Critical Evade + 2.5
 Ice: Defence + 0.5, Accuracy + 2.5, Avoid + 2.5, Critical Evade + 2.5
 Dark: Accuracy + 2.5, Avoid + 2.5, Critical + 2.5, Critical Evade +2.5
 Light: Attack + 0.5, Defence + 0.5, Accuracy + 2.5, Critical + 2.5
 Anima: Attack + 0.5, Defence + 0.5, Avoid + 2.5, Critical Evade + 2.5

Assuming two characters share a particular boost (Attack, Avoid, etc.) you can get +3 or +15 at an A. Those aren't Tellius EarthxEarth broken, but still rather good. 

[Florete]

25 minutes ago, athena_57 said:

It's not just availability in and of itself, in the case of the cavs it also means more chapters of growth with similar base level, whereas Pent has a massive base level lead over Erk, thus making the availability a less important issue. So this comparison is completely irrelevant.

Nothing you've said makes the comparison irrelevant. Availability is about doing stuff when the other unit isn't around. If Lowen's availability is what allows him to level enough to ultimately be better than Kent and Sain, then he's just better, partially as a result of availability but not because of it. But if anyone is going to say availability is the reason he's better - him helping out in those maps prior to their existence outweighs what happens later - Erk has to be better than Pent under the same logic.

To clarify: I think Pent is better than Erk, but there's a logical inconsistency here. I don't think Lowen is better than Kent or Sain, for availability or any other reason.

[Athena_57]

2 minutes ago, Florete said:

Nothing you've said makes the comparison irrelevant. Availability is about doing stuff when the other unit isn't around. If Lowen's availability is what allows him to level enough to ultimately be better than Kent and Sain, then he's just better, partially as a result of availability but not because of it. But if anyone is going to say availability is the reason he's better - him helping out in those maps prior to their existence outweighs what happens later - Erk has to be better than Pent under the same logic.

To clarify: I think Pent is better than Erk, but there's a logical inconsistency here. I don't think Lowen is better than Kent or Sain, for availability or any other reason.

I do believe availability gives Erk an edge over Pent. However, I also believe Pent's level lead gives him an even larger edge over Erk. I am not neglecting Erk's availability, I think it's still important, just not as important as the massive level+base stat lead.

So yes, availability and everything that comes with it is a massive pluspoint for Lowen compared to Kent's and Sain's useful, but not as important somewhat better stats.

Availibility means not just being around to do stuff, it's being around to do stuff AND gather exp and whatnot. C'mon, would you honestly argue that if Kent and Sain joined 6 chapters later (==> dragon's gate) they're just as good? No, they're not. And some minor growth increases do not make up for such a availability difference.

[Shadow Mir]

23 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

These aren't what I'd call underwhelming exactly:

 Fire: Attack + 0.5, Accuracy + 2.5, Avoid + 2.5, Critical + 2.5
 Thunder: Defence +0.5, Avoid + 2.5, Critical + 2.5, Critical Evade + 2.5
 Wind: Attack + 0.5, Accuracy + 2.5, Critical + 2.5, Critical Evade + 2.5
 Ice: Defence + 0.5, Accuracy + 2.5, Avoid + 2.5, Critical Evade + 2.5
 Dark: Accuracy + 2.5, Avoid + 2.5, Critical + 2.5, Critical Evade +2.5
 Light: Attack + 0.5, Defence + 0.5, Accuracy + 2.5, Critical + 2.5
 Anima: Attack + 0.5, Defence + 0.5, Avoid + 2.5, Critical Evade + 2.5

Assuming two characters share a particular boost (Attack, Avoid, etc.) you can get +3 or +15 at an A. Those aren't Tellius EarthxEarth broken, but still rather good. 

Maybe not, but frankly, considering that I have to tether the supporters together for dozens of turns just to get ONE of, let alone the 5 supports that a unit can get... I kinda think underwhelming fits.

[Florete]

37 minutes ago, athena_57 said:

I do believe availability gives Erk an edge over Pent. However, I also believe Pent's level lead gives him an even larger edge over Erk. I am not neglecting Erk's availability, I think it's still important, just not as important as the massive level+base stat lead.

So yes, availability and everything that comes with it is a massive pluspoint for Lowen compared to Kent's and Sain's useful, but not as important somewhat better stats.

Availibility means not just being around to do stuff, it's being around to do stuff AND gather exp and whatnot. C'mon, would you honestly argue that if Kent and Sain joined 6 chapters later (==> dragon's gate) they're just as good? No, they're not. And some minor growth increases do not make up for such a availability difference.

How is 6 maps "a massive pluspoint" for Lowen when Kent and Sain are equal or better for 75% of the game? This makes no sense. For the grand majority of their usage, Kent and Sain will be better.

If Kent and Sain joined 6 chapters later with levels and stats that would normally be expected of them at that time, I would still say they're better because they'll still perform better quickly if not immediately. This is the same reason I say Pent is better than Erk; Erk is good, but Pent comes and is just better. "Gather exp and whatnot" doesn't mean anything. Availability should not be given so much weight.

Lowen has 6 maps of availability over Kent and Sain, who will otherwise be better than him. Lowen wins, because availability. Erk has more than 10 maps of availability over Pent, who will otherwise be better than him. Pent wins, because...wait, why? This is the question your posts are giving me.

[ping]

22 minutes ago, Florete said:

Lowen has 6 maps of availability over Kent and Sain, who will otherwise be better than him. Lowen wins, because availability. Erk has more than 10 maps of availability over Pent, who will otherwise be better than him. Pent wins, because...wait, why? This is the question your posts are giving me.

I don't feel qualified to give an educated answer to the Lowen vs. Sain/Kent, but athena specifically said that pure availability is not the only relevant factor. How valuable is Lowen when Sain and Kent aren't around? How about Erk pre-Pent? How big is the performance gap between Lowen and the other cavs when they do join, compared to (a trained) Erk and Pent? Again, I'm not familiar enough with FE7, especially when it comes to HHM, to weigh these factors properly, but I would assume that Pent's warping is a bigger advantage over Erk than Kent's and Sain's superior offensive stats in the long (or medium) run over Lowen

1 hour ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Maybe not, but frankly, considering that I have to tether the supporters together for dozens of turns just to get ONE of, let alone the 5 supports that a unit can get... I kinda think underwhelming fits.

Eh, pressing "next turn" like 40 times at the end of the chapter probably won't make your thumbs fall off. I agree that the support growth mechanism in the GBA games is dumb, but unless you're playing for ranking or low turn counts, it's merely a few minutes of brainless button-pressing. Unlike arena abuse, it's even completely risk-free, and fortunately, FE7 got rid of the silly support-points-per-map restriction FE6 has.

Edited October 30, 2017 by ping

[De Geso]

13 minutes ago, Florete said:

How is 6 maps "a massive pluspoint" for Lowen when Kent and Sain are equal or better for 75% of the game? This makes no sense. For the grand majority of their usage, Kent and Sain will be better.

If Kent and Sain joined 6 chapters later with levels and stats that would normally be expected of them at that time, I would still say they're better because they'll still perform better quickly if not immediately. This is the same reason I say Pent is better than Erk; Erk is good, but Pent comes and is just better. "Gather exp and whatnot" doesn't mean anything. Availability should not be given so much weight.

Lowen has 6 maps of availability over Kent and Sain, who will otherwise be better than him. Lowen wins, because availability. Erk has more than 10 maps of availability over Pent, who will otherwise be better than him. Pent wins, because...wait, why? This is the question your posts are giving me.

Point one: They aren't better from the moment they join if Lowen has been used. He'll likely have higher stats in many important areas, which means even if they all joined at the exact same chapter Lowen would be better than the christmas cavs.

2: If Kent and Sain joined 6 chapters later with their "expected stats" and Lowen still joined at chapter 11 or 12 (depending on eliwood or hector's story) they would still be worse than Lowen because once again his stats would be comparable if not better than theirs, due to the amount of time he's been in the party and has been able to kill things, not to mention having 12 chapters of utility use over the other two.

Pent is better than Erk because in spite of Erk's greater availability, Pent will often have better stats and will absolutely have better weapon ranks than Erk, especially staff rank.

Besides that, you have to look at overall unit contribution to determine which unit is better: all Erk does, because he's fairly frail and joins especially frail, is kill a unit on player phase. Pent joins and can take on swarms of enemies immediately.

Lowen, on the other hand, doesn't suffer from Erk's "only useful on pp" problem because he can tank decently on ep from the get-go, so he doesn't have this disadvantage over the later-joining units. Not only that, but Sain and Kent can't really tank like Lowen when they join, again unless they've been LM trained but most playthroughs won't use Lyn mode.

I'm not saying that Sain and Kent are bad, by the way - they're very strong units (any unit that can be a Paladin is strong in GBA). I just think Lowen is able to make greater contributions over an entire playthrough than Sain and Kent, due in part to the fact that he can simply do things that they can't for a quarter of the game - they can't do anything at all in chapters they aren't present in.

If you train Sain and Kent, sure, they'll probably have higher stats than Lowen. But Lowen makes up for it by having 5 chapters on them to grow and otherwise contribute to clears. On the other hand, a trained Erk's stats may be lower than Pent's, his weapon ranks are lower than Pent's, and his overall contribution is probably lower than Pent's will be. (Pent does more per turn than Erk does, basically).

Sorry for the long-winded post. Availability is important.

[Athena_57]

19 minutes ago, Florete said:

How is 6 maps "a massive pluspoint" for Lowen when Kent and Sain are equal or better for 75% of the game? This makes no sense. For the grand majority of their usage, Kent and Sain will be better.

If Kent and Sain joined 6 chapters later with levels and stats that would normally be expected of them at that time, I would still say they're better because they'll still perform better quickly if not immediately.

Yes, that would be a good argument, if they joined 6 chapters after Lowen with 6 chapters worth of stats more, they would be better. The problem is, Kent and Sain don't join with 6 chapters worth of levels and stats above Lowen.

Character HP STR SKL SPD LCK DEF RES CON
Lowen       23  7      5      7       3     7      0      10
Sain           22   9      5      7       5     7     0        9      Total lead: 2 STR, 2 LCK, Total behind: -1HP, -1CON
Kent           23  8      7      8       4     6      1        9      Total lead: 1 STR 2 SKI 1 SPD 1 RES Total behind:-1 LCK -1 DEF -1CON

Even if we ignore the stats where Lowen leads, does 2 STR and 2 LCK or 1 STR, 2 SKI, 1 SPD and 1 RES seem like 6 chapters worth of growth to you? No. If their stats were appropriate for say a lvl 8 character, which is below average, you would be right. But as is, they have a lot of catching up to do before they're on par with Lowen.

25 minutes ago, Florete said:

Lowen has 6 maps of availability over Kent and Sain, who will otherwise be better than him. Lowen wins, because availability. Erk has more than 10 maps of availability over Pent, who will otherwise be better than him. Pent wins, because...wait, why? This is the question your posts are giving me.

Because his base stats are WAY higher than Erk's, whereas Kent's and Sain's are only marginaly better.

[Jedi]

12 minutes ago, YouSquiddinMe said:

Point one: They aren't better from the moment they join if Lowen has been used. He'll likely have higher stats in many important areas, which means even if they all joined at the exact same chapter Lowen would be better than the christmas cavs.

2: If Kent and Sain joined 6 chapters later with their "expected stats" and Lowen still joined at chapter 11 or 12 (depending on eliwood or hector's story) they would still be worse than Lowen because once again his stats would be comparable if not better than theirs, due to the amount of time he's been in the party and has been able to kill things, not to mention having 12 chapters of utility use over the other two.

Pent is better than Erk because in spite of Erk's greater availability, Pent will often have better stats and will absolutely have better weapon ranks than Erk, especially staff rank.

Besides that, you have to look at overall unit contribution to determine which unit is better: all Erk does, because he's fairly frail and joins especially frail, is kill a unit on player phase. Pent joins and can take on swarms of enemies immediately.

Lowen, on the other hand, doesn't suffer from Erk's "only useful on pp" problem because he can tank decently on ep from the get-go, so he doesn't have this disadvantage over the later-joining units. Not only that, but Sain and Kent can't really tank like Lowen when they join, again unless they've been LM trained but most playthroughs won't use Lyn mode.

I'm not saying that Sain and Kent are bad, by the way - they're very strong units (any unit that can be a Paladin is strong in GBA). I just think Lowen is able to make greater contributions over an entire playthrough than Sain and Kent, due in part to the fact that he can simply do things that they can't for a quarter of the game - they can't do anything at all in chapters they aren't present in.

If you train Sain and Kent, sure, they'll probably have higher stats than Lowen. But Lowen makes up for it by having 5 chapters on them to grow and otherwise contribute to clears. On the other hand, a trained Erk's stats may be lower than Pent's, his weapon ranks are lower than Pent's, and his overall contribution is probably lower than Pent's will be. (Pent does more per turn than Erk does, basically).

Sorry for the long-winded post. Availability is important.

Erk can honestly reach high stave rank fairly easily thanks to how easy it is to gain stave rank in FE7 with how spammable torch is among other things. Not to mention the constant defend maps before Pent's existence which even if you're playing LTC will allow him to be pretty much on par with Pent also, he's around 2/3rds of the game that Pent isn't, you're severely overestimating FE7's enemies as well considering most of them have really pathetic stats.  

For reference, Nino can get to warp by end game due to how easy it is to get stave rank and she's not even good.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Jedi

[De Geso]

1 minute ago, Jedi said:

Erk can honestly reach high stave rank fairly easily thanks to how easy it is to gain stave rank in FE7 thanks to spammable torch is among other things. Not to mention the constant defend maps before Pent's existence which even if you're playing LTC will allow him to be pretty much on par with Pent also, he's around 2/3rds of the game that Pent isn't, you're severely overestimating FE7's enemies as well considering most of them have really pathetic stats.  

The stats are only really bad in the mid to late game. For the first few chapters the enemies are fairly competent. Not as much so as FE6's, but they're alright.

Fair point on the staff rank, but you still won't have him up to A or B rank by the time Pent joins without early promoting him and major spam in a reasonably fast playthrough, and by that point yes, he'll probably be better than Pent but only if he's seriously babied.

[Jedi]

Just now, YouSquiddinMe said:

The stats are only really bad in the mid to late game. For the first few chapters the enemies are fairly competent. Not as much so as FE6's, but they're alright.

Fair point on the staff rank, but you still won't have him up to A or B rank by the time Pent joins without early promoting him and major spam in a reasonably fast playthrough, and by that point yes, he'll probably be better than Pent but only if he's seriously babied.

They're still really easy to deal with as you have Marcus.