What Makes a Unit Good in Fire Emblem?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 окт 2020
- What makes a unit good in Fire Emblem? Let's find out in this video!
Special thank you to Wet_Melon for the Marth walking animations!
If you like what I do and want to support the channel be sure to leave a like and subscribe!
✦ Subscribe » bit.ly/2dlYQda
✦ Twitch.tv: / jaeaik
✦ Twitter: / jaeaik
✦ Tumblr: / jaeaikplays
#JaeAIK #FireEmblemUnits #FireEmblem 
Игры
I answer the age old question that Fire Emblem fans have asked for years: "what makes a unit good in Fire Emblem?"
And let me know who your favorite unit/character is in Fire Emblem is!
I also have a new discord for anyone that wants to join :) discord.gg/8sGPuyBTVp
A good unit huh.
To put it in a generic defintion, it's a unit that consistently fulfills your demands in a map. For example: tanking damage, boss killing and so on...
I actually believe that regardless of the unit, if you have great strategic mind, you can make them great as well even if they have poor base stat. For Nino, she is a monster, like Est, but you will need great smart moves in order to level her up faster than others. But yeah, I would just like to say that any unit you have, will always become strong no matter what.
Edward the Myrmidon from Radiant Dawn is my favorite due to nostalgia. Radiant Dawn was my first Fire Emblem game and is by far my favorite in series (this is also why all of my runner-ups are from the Radiance series).
In Hector's game (which is my very first FE game) my guy Kent was my favorite in that game
Sacred Stones it was Joshua
Ike's games it's Shinon
Awakening it's Tharja
Alms game it was Kliff
Three Heroes it's Hubert ✊🏽
Sacred Stones, it's Lute, because she was the unit in the first Fire Emblem I played that took off and killed everything. We all have that unit.
Also, Knoll. He's such a fascinating unit. He comes in, you promote him instantly into Summoner, and the rest of the game just works.
Maybe also Moulder. Something about him just makes me smile. Especially with how buff Bishops are in FE8, and Moulder seeming like such a weird character visually by Fire Emblem standards.
Also Myrrh, 'cuz she's adorable.
FE 7, Lucius. In addition to being a total cutie pie, I like his high magic and staff use. Maybe also Oswin, 'cuz he's fun.
FE6, Wendy. She's awful, but I have a certain love for the almost universally awful female armors in Fire Emblem. Also Fa, 'cuz she's adorable.
FE 9: Ike. First lord in the series I really liked.
FE 10: Sothe. He's my favorite Jaegan in the series, and I wish more were like him. Early combat supremacy, with a clear utility role to fall into afterwards. Why more Jaegans aren't Thieves, Bishops, Valkyries, and the like is a mystery to me. Also Meg, because of my aforementioned love for awful female armor knights, but also because she exemplifies perfectly why FE 10 works so damn well, where even a unit like Meg is useful.
FE 11: honestly no idea, most of the units in this game kinda blend together. Ballasticians, maybe?
Awakening: any of the Manaketes, probably Nah if had to pick. They just feel really good to use in Awakening. No idea why. Maybe Virion, but that's entirely because he looks like Mid-Boss/King Krichevskoy.
3 Houses: Leonie. I don't remember exactly how it happened, but at some point, I mentally replaced her voice and personality with TF2's Demoman. She's also just a really reliable unit that's good at every stage of the game, and I like how ridiculously dependable she is.
Overall favorite depends heavily on my mood. Lute, Lucius, or Myrrh are probably the most common contenders.
Has a mount
Unless you are in Thracia or Berwick Saga. As Berwick Saga nerf mount by...A, their horses have hp and can die alongside how pricey it is to replace. B, None of them can one round people besides Arthur and one unit that appears super late. But Arthur has to risk his life in order to do so. C, Terrian: Some maps do not flavour mounted mobility or have enemies that just kill horses right off the bat.
fax no printer
i fucking loathe having to slog through big lategame maps with units with 5-6 movement so if x unit can use a mount or promote into a class that does, odds are i'll use them like natasha in my current sacred stones run.
Fiona exists so...
@@boredomkiller99 The Cain and Abel in Thracia 776 also exist alongside that Bow Cavalier that comes alongside them. In fact...we call them the E squad due how terrible they are.
Kai 676111 mounts in fe 5 are still really good, I would still consider them be superior in outdoor maps and they’re are a lot more outdoor maps than indoors. They still have much more move and they have super canto which is still really good. It also allows them to capture better since horses always have 20 con. This why guys like finn and fergus are still kinda busted, granted they have other things going for them than just a mount but the mount still benifits them. And its not like dismounting is a death wish or anything. Finn can still contribute with his leadership stars and his stats even in indoors will still be pretty good. He still can set up the nanna plus leif with kingmaker support to be basically invinsible
I think that talking about units being good or bad is, generally, best when framed as "will this character make the game easier for the player?" Whenever I make tier lists, I always try to frame it as a guide to help new players who may be struggling with the game or who may be intimidated by it. So much of unit viability is framed within efficiency or LTC that it becomes mostly meaningless to players looking for generally help (and, again, I think tier lists work best as guides to help players out who may be struggling).
Sometimes there is overlap: warp skipping Shadow Dragon and Three Houses is both the easiest and most efficient way to play those games, but other times, there isn't as much overlap. Raven is one of the best combat units in FE7 and really makes that game easier for most players, but he isn't rated very highly in many tier lists because he isn't very efficient to use.
I think that focusing on how much easier a unit makes the game is significantly more helpful to the vast majority of players, and so I think focusing on characters in that way can make unit discussion seem a lot less judgmental
Hey completely out of the blue but is there any we can contact each other?
@@jaeaik Yeah, definitely! What works best for you? Email?
@@ProfessorBopper do you happen to have a Twitter or discord that I can reach you at?
You see, based on my herculean standards on character worth and utility, the only viable way a unit's merit should be measured is how fast your mother calls you on the phone after using her credit card to gamble for a PNG of said character in Fire Emblem: Heroes
...so I'm assuming you broke the bank on Legendary Dimitri too eh?
Map design & game balance is really undervalued when determining viability. You can have great availability, great bases and great weapon levels in a vacuum, but it all won't matter if the game mechanics and enemy types are not conductive to that unit. Some games even scuttle entire movement or weapon types such as infantry in FE4 and magic units in FE10, purely due to balancing issues and map design.
4:32 POV: Nadgey
Damnit nadgey
Moral of the story:
Waifu is laifu. Sophia isn't that bad guys.
SpeedyHawk 40 hit pog, getting one rounded, also pog.
Sophia was literally the first character that came to my mind. The second was Seth, the Easy Mode
I brought Sophia to endgame in 5 different playthroughs and don't regret a thing. I knew she was a pain to grind up to speed, but she was my favorite Shaman so I promoted her and slapped Apocalypse on her. Also FE6 was the last GBA FE I got to play, so the idea of a female Shaman felt too special to waste and I wasn't digging Niime (or however it's spelled) that much. She felt like a tacked on extra that didn't need to join us in the first place and didn't feel powerful enough to make up for it.
Kurayamiblack I mean obviously its sensible to pick a hot girl over some grandma, I was just talking about sophia as a unit. Obviously you can make her good with a lot of dedication but I’m just talking about it in general
@@Kurayamiblack I guess if you want a combat unit niime ain’t great. The reason niime is good is for staves and stuff
This is a fantastic video Jae. It’s easily one of your most visually striking. I appreciate all the thoughtful flourishes you put into it and I can tell a lot of passion went into this one. This is a great subject that the fandom should explore more since tiering and rating units has become such a big subset of the community.
I actually have an outline developed for the same exact subject since I feel the rhetoric in which units are weighted these days is largely established as “accepted” even though there is still tons of room for scrutiny. In my opinion, a unit should be graded by how much “easier” they make the game by deploying them and similarly one should consider how much “harder” they make the game by not deploying them. Obviously, these terms are subjective measurements.
Unit viability is only a thing because you have limited deployment in a game with an expanded roster. It is therefore the aspects of each unit which differentiates themselves from others that makes them more “viable”. However there are only a few of these aspects that will be consistent in every play through- aspects of a unit that can be tangibly measured. These can be viewed as objective grades. The rest will differ depending on the player and their playthough (which is good because the individual experience is the point of this series) and should be seen as subjective. (ill *bold* the points i feel are objective.)
*Bases* - Starting stats this is obviously the most concrete aspect of a unit’s composition. This includes weapon rank bases. Which is why people who find sport in grading units like to fixate on this so much even though it is just a fraction of what makes a unit “viable”.
Growths - Growth Rates (yes, this include’s their weapon rank growths. Weapon ranks are a stat that grows by using that unit and is often modified by a hidden factor determinate on the individual unit themself. It’s a growth). Many people use 0% growth runs as a sort of gauge of unit viability. They say “if a unit is good in 0% growths then they are good in the regular game” but I find this to be an incredibly disingenuous statement for many different reasons. Especially when the rules of these runs are so loosely defined and vary from game to game. Viability is a contest between your units for deployment. Of course if you remove a huge aspect of the game, it will change the overall landscape of viability. It doesn’t reflect what units make the game “easier” in a normal game where units with great bases are competing against units with great growths.
*Perfs* - Any exclusive weapons or skills, this includes benefits provided by their class
*Supports* - any other units they provide an advantage to or get an advantage from. (This could be put under perfs but since its usefulness relies on deploying other units outside of the unit being graded, i feel like it should be its own thing.)
Availability - How long this unit is helping you for. People act as though this aspect that can be objectively measured. In theory it should be, but in many instances (like you’ve pointed out in your Marcia example) it is much more subjective than people like to admit. Ill be using Machua vs Shiva (FE5) as an example. A unit can come come along that fills the exact niche as one you already have and is objectively “better” in every aspect. Shiva joins only 4 chapters after Matchua. Their availability on paper is barely anything in the grand scheme of the game. However, in the chapters in which Machua is available and Shiva isn’t, are some of the most difficult chapters in the game and Machua’s contribution will be incredibly relevant during that time. Where as Shiva’s relevance is much less significant during his availability to the point where not using him at all isn't going to affect most people's experience of the game. Does that mean that Machua is a better unit than shiva? It’s completely subjective is my point, but it leads me to my last aspect of unit viability. if all of these previous aspects were bullet points, this next one would be a giant circle I draw around all of them.
*Map Design* - This includes enemy A.I., placement, and composition. A unit on can be amazing on paper and have excellent availability, but if their game doesn’t give them a chance to use their strengths, then it doesn’t really matter at all. Lyn in FE7 is a prime example along with FE11 Marth. In the same breath- a unit that looks pretty bad on paper, can be successful if the game presents scenarios that they are set up to easily excel and grow in (Dew FE4, Callion FE5, Ross FE8).
This was blurb was a little off the cusp but it got me inspired to reconsider my own reasoning because of your video. Thank you so much for continuing to inspire with your work. See you ‘round!
man that's a long comment ':I
@@mystergamer0750 long comment with some great points!
Wow this another extreeeeeme compliment!!
This MFer says "Perfs" instead of Prfs
The true S tier units are the ones the player is good enough to make kill the Fire Dragon at the end of FE7. Like Lucius. Lucius is in fact, an S tier unit. FACT.
I did an All Girls run of FE7 on EHM, and Lyn was the only one capable of killing the Fire Dragon thanks to her Sol Katti. Vaida probably could have pulled it off as well, but unfortunately, she didn't get brought into the map.
I killed it with Marcus. Marcus chads win again.
I feel like for every 10 people saying a unit is bad, 1 person is gonna say, “Watch me”, and make them a beast in their game. Preference and spite are a dangerous combination.
There is big dick energy in proving someone wrong by using Wendy in FE6 and having her deal the final blow against Zephiel.
@@jaeaik shout out to that one guy that beat idunn with Wendy and Sophia
What is a good fire emblem unit?
Answer: blue hair cavelare who has blue hair and is in fe4 and 5 and whos name begins with the letter F
i think your onto something here.
Is Lex for sure xD xD
He died on my playthrough
ferdinand von aegir?
I am ferdinand von aegir
My only issue is when people say a unit is worthless. This is not Pokemon. Pokemon like Unown are doomed to never be competitive unless you cheat. All Fire Emblem units are usable. It's about how much work you are willing to put in.
great! glad my video nailed it then
except wrys. dude basically just exists so he can hand his heal staff to lena
Choice Spec Unown gang says hi
Except Sophia.
Damn they did her dirty.
To oversimplify:
High bases
Long Version:
Units that can do the objective quickly while needing less investment. Because growths are random, needing less investment almost directly translates into more consistency most of the time as well. Most objective are just killing enemies, so its whatever units just have the beffiest stats to go toe to toe with enemies.
Things get more interesting with kill boss. Suddenly, high offense is more important then defense instead of the other way around, and things such as warp and high move with flight are key to be able to play as little of the map as possible. Even in these cases, the core principle of just having high base stats and not needing invest is still true, but things such as 1-2 range matter less while speed and str/mag/mov are even more emphasized then rout and defend maps.
Has a horse and that’s about it
Good video! I loved that you made the point about how unique your story is when you choose characters that are relatively ‘weaker’ because you like them! So many of my teams are like that!
Good units, bad units. That's only the selfish perception of tacticians. True skilled tacticians should try to win with their waifus
I loved watching the little Marth run across the screen. So cute!
thank you to wet_melon for making that animation for me!
It's a good video, but weapon ranks were forgotten about. Klein is a good archer because he can use every bow except a legendary bow at base.
I remember that in my 1st playthrough of FE16 I used Anna in almost the entire route of Silver Snow and she seemed quite useful with Yuri although I was really disappointed to learn that she does not have a Hero's Relic but I think she was a very good unit when i played it
to me: good growths, decent bases and good character development
All fair as long as your having fun :)
@@jaeaik agreed
By far the best video on this topic. Great job, Jae! The ending segment is especially valuable for the community to hear.
Appreciate it! Thanks for watching!
I myself recall starting my first FE run on Awakening hard and being told to restart after i had given a lot of EXP to Frederick in the first 3 maps, because of the ”jagen bad” meta discussions that were going around. Which looking back is obviously bit laughable. I think this video is creating a healthy discussion around this long perpetuated ”tier listing everything” community.
From what I've seen, people tend to have the line of thoughts in the video. I don't really see many "tier list is everything" people. I think you might be mistaking people who just talk about unit viability as those kinds of people. I've seen plenty of players say units who have a consensus of being not that good as great, when they grinded and/or babied said unit. I've also seen the opposite where people drop a unit and say they're bad just because they seemed bad to them, or more similarly to what you said with Frederick an "exp thief", when the consensus is they're good.
Yes, people can use whoever they want and play however they want, but it goes both ways. "Casual" players, for lack of a better word, say units are good or bad without hard evidence most of the time. "Elitists", for lack of a better word, are "no fun allowed". Again, I think most people think the way JAEIK does, and very few people actually are "tier list is everything" like you say it is.
Loved the video my dude! Of course you already know one of my favorite units. Besides her story I like training her up it gives a risk reward feeling during my runs of FE7.
It's on brand for me to say this, so use everyone BUT Nino :)
Thanks for watching bud haha.
This is an amazing video! Great editing and good points!
I've only played Three Houses (and have almost no experience with the rest of the franchise) and heard a point from a youtuber while watching his video that a bad unit can prove useful if you utilize their strong points to your advantage.
With this logic he argued that while Ignatz (for example) has terrible defense and very weak growths he found that his proficiency in ranged combat as a sniper made him a reliable unit in the early chapters of maddening mode due to not having to engage in combat up close and therefore not having to deal with his terrible defense.
It also adds to your points as well, Ignatz has below average base stats but is easily available and has a really good class (with Sniper and Bow Knight being his endgame classes and them being very broken and the fact that equiping a magic bow solves his difficulties against armored units). Add to this the fact that Three Houses ditched the weapon triagle and it just makes things easier.
Moral of the story, don't underestimate bad units, someone out there will prove you they're worth something.
Actually Klein has some things going for him. For one his hard mode bases are quite decent allowing him to contribute at base, he wields bows in FE6 which is great because phisical 1-2 range sucks and wyverns are extremely dangerous and lastly his A rank in bows lets him wield any bow besides the legendary one at base. This is important as you get the brave bow a chapter after Klein joins your army and unlike FE6 brave axe or lance, which are risky to use due to their weight and accuracy, the brave bow allows Klein to attack safely most of the time and deal great chip damage or even one round in some cases. Klein isn't an amazing unit and is outclassed by the likes of Sin, but saying that he has nothing going for him is underselling him quite a bit.
Oh yeah for sure. But for the sake of dramatization (and to have an excuse to talk about my favorite unit) there had to be a bit of dramatization to get my point across :)
great video dude. people in the community talk about this stuff a lot but this video not only explains it clearly, but does it in such little time. this will be such a practical video to share in discussion without asking too much of anyone.
Thank you! I sat down with like two other people to make sure we got the wording down to be as concise as possible so im glad that its showing! Thank you for watching, I appreciate it!
what an awesome video!! i especially liked the stylized, almost diagetic text elements you've put in here. watching it feels like i'm watching a labor of love and every ounce of passion you've put into this video has been communicated superbly.
also, wolt is the best unit in fire emblem ever don't @ me
Thank you! I put a lot of thought and def lost a lot of sleep grinding the editing out on this one. Just happy its well received:)
@@jaeaik no problem! while losing sleep on the editing grind is definitely something i can relate to (other YT'ers don't let me hear the end of it lmao) definitely try and get some rest dude! thanks again for the great vid
Not gonna lie, regardless of unit viability, my most recent runs on Fire Emblem games tend to be harem runs ( as in every used unit besides the main lord should be female beyond trading shit) as the case for Path of Radiance and New Mystery or a female units only run in games like Sacred Stones and Three Houses because I just find it amusing that I'm beating these grand battlefields with an army of cute anime girls. It's more fun and somewhat hilarious than only using the best base stat mounted units at all times for every playthrough.
There's definitely also something to be said about individual player strategy-styles, and choosing units based off of how well they compliment that strategy. For example, I'm the type of player who almost entirely focuses around getting the most amount of mileage out of enemy turns, and thus I'll often play with a very bait-heavy style to then swarm opposing units who can stand in closer ranger to the rest of the army. Because of this, I ended up using finding a large amount of utility of units like Rinkah, who is otherwise considered a lackluster unit in Birthright, specifically because of her good ability to tank hits. Other playstyles (which I'm guessing are more common than mine) will then value units with other stat/class focuses, depending on what helps them execute their optimal strategy.
Definitely reminds me of Cherche and Henry. They come so late in comparison but their potential is sick
Can't disagree;)
Also I do want to add that I think that base weapon ranks are also a huge indicator in unit viability. With Klain, for example, having a base A rank in bows allows him to use any bow until the endgame of FE6, and considering how both powerful silver bows and how he's realistically the only unit who has A rank bows by the mid game, it expedites his unit viability albeit a little bit.
Great video. I definitely think that growths need to be considered in relation to investment. A unit like Asbel in fe5 has good availability as he joins in chapter 4x and fills a unique role in your army being your first mage. Because he faces so little competition for the first couple of chapters he joins, he is a unit that you can invest in very easily and will utilize his stat gains and promotion gains very well.
If you look at a unit using the availability, bases and class criteria, dagdar from the same game who has almost perfect availability, good bases and a decent class would seem like a far superior choice than asbel who has a better class and about the same availability with worse bases. I think it ultimately comes down to how much investment a unit needs to become serviceable and the extent they can use said investment to benefit themselves.
Referring to my last example, Asbel can use the stats he gains from investing in him to become an amazing unit throughout the mid and late game whereas Dagdar will start to fall off by late game.
It really comes down to how well a unit can utilize their growths throughout the game compared to how a unit uses their bases throughout the game.
Great video, i always use units that are "good" but tha never stops me for using three or four units that are really trahs but i like them, and in the end, the magic of fire emblem is building your army however you like, keep up the amazing content!!
TheAdorableLemon thats usually my strategy too. I usually use mostly good units especially on higher difficulties but if there’s a unit that I really like but is kinda bad, you bet I’m still using them
Your style has evolved a lot. I love it dude
Thanks! Put a lot of thought into what my next step would be in pushing my style so im glad its paying off!
I mostly use the units I like based on their character, but sometimes I start liking a unit because they are fun to use in combat (because they are "good"). And then there is xX_L00t_Xx who is superior after all.
Great video
I did a dual run of sacred stones, I didnt use units from the other run in My army Ross and lute we're great, Joshua and natasha not that much. But it was fun
Well nice work you did a great just I just started to study graphism and I think you did a great job showing the information in a easy way and good looking way :)
Nice work am surprise you did a Fire emblem video tho but it make sence :).
Great job.
For my fav Unite it depend what are we rateing them on :D
Tho I won't lie Clive would be one super underated character he bassicly the 3 lord of Echoes and he got great avaibility, his basse aren't trash (tho not great it still not bad for sure), and yah sure late game he isn't too good because of is growth but he still a solide unite giveing support bonus to like 4 or 5 unite by himself and also haveing the Cav utility of going where he want.
he isn't the best but he super underated and probably my fav character in echoes (tho not parth of why I like him so much is because I think he is Underated so there that)
but it far form the only reason since I really like his personallity his ability to think his choice and fear he makeing a mistake and much more.
SORRY FOR THE BAD ENGLISH Great work JaeAIK
Unga bunga. Me have mount. Me have 20 javelins. Me S tier.
Im a big fan of unga bungaing my way through things sometimes
I really love this video... i love your opinion ♡
Personally, If I wanted to determine whether or not a unit is "good" I'd ask the following questions:
1. How much investment will they require? How far will their bases carry them, will their growths and support options be able to *keep* them viable?
2. In the absence of high bases, what is the *Payoff* for investment into this unit?
3. How much can they contribute? What can their class bring to the table and do they have the availability necessary to make that contribution?
I made Rolf a legitimately threatening sniper by PoR Endgame who kept racking up kills. Fliers could not handle the combination of this 12-year-old and a Brave Bow.
This brings me back to my first fe6 playthrough where I spent a lot of time using Dorothy. Had her rack up kills like nobodies business and she brought me to the end game.
@@jaeaik I love the different class types in Fire Emblem and how different growths lead to different outcomes. I’ve heard people try to give shit to Three Houses by claiming all the units are “samey” since you can make them whatever class you want, but they still have different stats, combat arts, and spells that make them unique and make certain units more viable for a class than others. Not every unit can learn Swift Strikes or Point-Blank Volley.
Compare that to Final Fantasy where every unit is pretty much interchangeable in gameplay. The only real difference is through the magic assigned to them, all of which are player-decided and not inherently unique to the characters. Sure, Limit Breaks are different, but that’s not something you can actively plan around since it requires taking lots of damage to activate them.
Awakening: Just have Henry and Lon'qu crit everything on the battlefield until you get child units.
Short answer: Everyone is good, just pick who you want and make some memories
yup! gotta use who you want to use!
Then there's me that in his first FE experience completed to full (Engage) has ditched every mounted unit that wasn't a flier. Only exception being Mauvier because I had one free slot in the final chapter and he seemed reliable for support.
I have no idea what reclass is due to me also doing it bad with Anna.
One of the main reasons I used Forde when I was a kid was because his hair looked cool to me and I liked Cavaliers. What I didn't expect was for me to get so attached to him in the long run, he isn't the best unit but I'll always remember the times I read his supports, he just left such a strong mark on me as a kid and to this day he's still one of my favorite SS characters. Even if he isn't great, I have not played SS without using him since.
Forde is great, I always liked great knight forde when I played ss. Never turned out to be "bad" for me haha.
Yeah, he can turn out pretty well, he's just surrounded by the likes of Seth and Franz so he gets pretty overshadowed in that aspect.
having only played fe3h, my standard measure for viability is if they can ohko a standard enemy unit only a few levels above the recommended level (aka i care about attack speed)
side note, i enjoy doing playthroughs not recruiting anyone and making my units viable instead of just using viable units. lemme tell you, it’s a challenge making lorenz any good.
I agree with this vid's message.
It's also why I generally rock Amelia as a General(my favourite class, sadly often saddled on characters with...decidedly meh bases), no matter what anyone says, because a smol girl piloting a hulking suit of armor is funny.. The other factor is who she's competing with: as a General, she really only competes with Gilliam, who is very tough and decent-ish on offense, but won't exactly double anything and risks being doubled. With Amelia, I get a fighting General to go with my tanking General. Meanwhile, as a horse-riding unit, she competes with, like, five other characters, one of whom's easily the best example of his class in all three GBA games, and she ultimately just feels a lot less impressive, standing out only in negative ways.
Great video mostly agree but i do have to say klien is actually pretty good on hard mode his bases are actually pretty good with 16 base strength and skill with A rank in bows that and decent 13 speed and decent growth in it makes him great at dealing with the scary wyvern that are everywhere in the game and good at weaking or just kill others enemies safely also another appeal to him is his growth rate are actually pretty decent which is very notable because most Prepromotes have terrible growths.
Generally speaking, I value reliability in a unit.
A lot of tier lists and such value either ideal unit performance or performance in highly controlled or theoretical environments, or else imagine that a unit's growth rates must always be average.
I like units that can defy bad luck, or make their own luck as much as possible.
I guess, to put it into more precise terms, I value units good in an ironman/ect scenario, where you can't just reset until things just work.
I get the metric of valuing play speed, but I value it a lot less than some. Movement is a valuable stat, a Paladin can be effective at many more places because their movement allows it than, say, an Armor Knight, but I don't think it's the be-all. Even if high move and Canto are pretty reliable ways to make your own luck.
Oh, or dragons. Any unit that gets the Seto Kaiba stamp of approval is an automatic S tier. Three houses is great entirely because everyone can be a wyvern rider.
Seth is my favorite mage
The struggles of copying and pasting assets at 5 in the morning
Favorite character is Rufure in Awakening, cuz first FE game I played. After watching this amazing vid I wanted to share my opinion. A unit is great because you choose his/her where you enjoy the game. Honestly any unit is at best or above average when you give them investment.
Just give em exp and attention and surely they will outwit a unit.
Just so a unit with higher level,stats, and growth wouldn't mean they're better theoretically. Besides we have personal preferences and opinion. It would only leave a bad taste if somebody tell you otherwise.
This comment left a big smile on my face. Thank you for your kind words :)
Great vid, earned a sub from me
I'd like to point out something... What makes an unit good or bad is how helpful it will be in the game, with stats being only the tip of the iceberg.
Take Erk or Vanessa. They aren't champions when it comes to stats but Erk exploits resistance, a stat that doesn't really exist in FE7, and Vanessa can ignore terrains and
A: kill the other enemeis quickly
B: carry the unit you want to use to kill said enemeis
C: carry Eirika/Ephraim and end the chapter faster.
A fairly recent example would be Tobin from Echoes. ""Low long term potential"" but as a mage he gets Excalibur at level 6, which is a mid/endgame spell. He becomes a Disc-One Nuke.
And the lastest examples are Cyril and Bernadetta from Three Houses. Their stats aren't really good, but the former gets one of the best combat arts almost as soon as you recruit him and gets great proficiences, you can quickly make him Brigand > Wyvern. The latter gets the best personal skill, which will make her good for frontile and chip damage in early game AND arguably the best combat art in the entire game which will oneshot things left and right. And yes I found out about said combat art before the many videos on RUclips so y'all can stop typing "YoU CoPIed Muh yoUTUberszsz"
And for the last point of the video I 100% agree. Using outclassed units like Hana is just like using outclassed Pokémon like Sceptile, nothing wrong with that as long you have fun with it.
The most important thing is the crit animation.
Some points are good, but may be oversimplified. For instances, good bases is generally more important than good growths, but under equal circumstances, if choosing between two units with equal bases/classes, the one with the best growths is on average, better, albeit only slightly so. For growths though, you need to look at average growths, and understand that they are less reliable. You can get poor luck. Your milleage will vary. Growths with good availability is often a good combo, unless you get similar results from another character down the line.
Furthermore, good support bonuses (Like Earth affinity in PoR) can actually make a fairly major difference.
Utility is also another point. A dancer will often have none of the three elements mentioned in the video, but their utility outweights all of these features above.
Agreed. But in order to get to a point I can't dwell on diving deep into the subject for too long. If I were to one day revisit the topic I would like to do so in a much more robust manner
@@jaeaik Sure! I would be interested in such a future video if you ever get around to it.
swordmaster dodge go brrr
I think it makes more sense to call this: What makes a unit *useful* in Fire Emblem.
Look. Your man wants views on this one since he spent a long 8 hour session grinding the editing out. I gotta get people to watch this somehow ;)
@@jaeaik fair point, this is a really good video and it would be a shame if no one watch it.
Before I watch the video I am gonna give what I believe makes a good unit. :D I think it'd be a nice thought exercise.
They serve a relevant niche that makes the game easier without than without them, and they work with the mechanics of the game they are in, and they have good availability.
For example, Rutger is a great character in fe6 because he can effectively 1rko in the early-mid game when most units are struggling to do, he might lack a mount but he is one of your very few reliable killing options so his utility as a killer far surpasses his lack of a mount when your team is weak.
Fliers in the GBA-Tellius era of games even if they are weak have great utility for rescue dropping and traversal through the environment.
In Genealogy, if a unit has a mount they are good just because they van tale advantages of what mounted units have. In that game.
In fe5, stave units are good because of how great stave utility is in that game.
In GBA-POR FE, (and most other fe games, but they're at their best in this era of fe) Paladins are great because they have solid combat, have access to accessible 1-2 range options, often have good combat stats because of bases, and have weapon triangle control.
By fitting the mechanics of the game that actively benefit your team, a unit is good. Having something unique that actively adds onto your toolkit is great. That's how I see what makes a unit good in fe. Time to watch the video!
This was a really neat video, I like it!
I'll asnwer this: Anyone who can hold their own on the battlefield and don't have to baby.
Let's also just point out that Dieck has all 3 from the start to endgame of Fe6, just saying.
Let me also say, that anyone who is a hot man in fire emblem is viable to me. It's kinda obvious by my name "HusbandoEmblem" yknow...
Why isn't this song in Fire Emblem Heroes for Aether Resort purchase? This is perfect menu music
A horse, a javelin, high accuracy, double attack, wings, high availability and big b... bases
For me it's a combination of growths and availability, with some nods to interesting/fun classes or character. Growths with little availability (zero to hero at the endgame, such as Nino) don't appeal to me the same as growths with availability. Same goes for availability without the growths, regardless of bases (with some exceptions, like Oswin). I'm fine with struggling a bit and babying a few units I really like in the early game and having them come out stronger than the "bases over growths" units in the mid and late game. I feel the domination over tough content is more valuable and rewarding than gliding through a few chapters easier early on. A few examples include Sain, Franz, Ross, Oscar and Boyd in PoR, and Kliff. And in Three Houses, Felix is my go to first recruit if not in Blue Lions, since his growths are enough to basically make him an extra Lord.
Basically, as long as you can make the unit snowball and dominate most of the game after a little early grinding, I'm really happy with the unit.
This is the argument I use for Donnel. Most of the FE community immediately throws him in F tier and don’t use him. But his availability is high and his stats snowball to an insane degree
I don’t know man, I’m pretty sure having fun in fire emblem is a pitfall.
smh we fire emblem fans stuck in a pit talking screaming and yelling about unit optimization lets gooo.
There are characters I love even if as units they're lackluster. (Sophia, Rebecca, etc.)
There are great units that I don't really care that much about their character. (Bernadetta etc.)
And there are characters that for me have both. (Marcus, Leonie...)
But you know what? I like using all of them and even the "bad" units I don't like have at least a little something to offer.
1:27 seth is so strong he can use magic
I could discuss what a good unit is or i could use the warp staff
At the end of the day a good unit is who the playier chooses shur objectivly marcus in fe 7 is great because of everything that was said but on the other side of the spectrum nino bad availability bad bad bases ok class but if you want you can feed her kills and make her good for you
Seths incredible 14 base Magic
Haha yeah.
Imo Lysithea falls under every requirement
She has good stats, female casters are good in 3H, her subject recruitment is suggested to get, and she looks cute, in both the 😳(war phase) and ☺️ (academy phase) types of cute.
Lysithea is also a well written character
I think Klein is a pretty bad example of a character who would only be used because a person liked his character lol. He’s in a solid class for FE6, has the best weapon ranks of any bow user, workable growths, and decent availability, at least coming before plenty of chapters where a strong sniper would be useful. Plus, hard mode bonuses woo.
Not the point of the video, but Klein is one of my favs lol.
I would change “high bases” to “good stats,” which would be roughly 80% bases and 20% growths. Because having good growths does matter, especially in more recent entries where no units come ready for endgame. Units like Seth and Old Marcus join at comparitively the same powerlevel relative to enemies, but Seth has growth rates which will carry him through the game, whereas Marcus will EVENTUALLY fall off.
Riding something
While a good general outline, there is a lot of depth lost here due to all the niche applications.
For games with Skills they can be a major point in a unit's favor - The jugdral games, the saga games and 3H provide a good example of this. Or for example utility in the form of staves or dancing or other things that vary from game to game.
Perhaps the map design just promotes using a certain unit more and another unit less?
In order to study the great mystery one must consider ALL it's aspects, not just the narrow, dogmatic view of the community.
I fully agree! But for, I think my point to shine, i needed to keep unit viability at the most basic level. Actual viability in fire emblem, I think, can't be summed up in 5 minutes as each of the fe games have differing opinions on what pushes characters to be good.
Question: Is the unit Hisame or Soleil?
If the answer is yes, then I likes em hehe
One of the few people who actually likes Hisame for a change, I see, and I approve. Hisame is the main read why I usually put up with Hinata at all, and I personally think he's underrated as a character. As for Soleil, in my current playthrough, I went ahead and turned her into a sorceress, just because I occasionally like to put some of the units I use in weird classes for the heck of it
Can fly
What about the elephant in the room? Growth rates. They usually dictate if a unit is viable in the long term. Sure, it's not as big of a factor as base stats due to randomness, but it's definitely a fourth pillar.
I respectfully disagree.
Est has great growths, but she comes in too late, requires a lot of babying, and in games where low turn counts matter for the overall ranking, Est will mostly be considered as a 'bad' unit (and mostly anyone in the Est archetype).
I think you're confusing Availability with Growth Rate, since Availability can dictate whether or not you stick with a unit if they turn out bad or good. Florina, Marcia, etc. are all phenomenal units with great growths but are only great because you can afford to baby them due to the long amount of time you can spend with them.
But at the end of the day it's really all about what kind of units you want to use anyways, so if you think Growth Rates are important then feel free to think whatever you want, thats pretty much the conclusion of this video anyways.
@@jaeaik I'm not confusing anything. A character can have great growth rates and availability at the same time (like Seth). Availability is just how long a unit can be used before the game ends. It has absolutely nothing to do with growth rates. Ests are a specific combination of low availability and high growths, but there are units that are low in both, or high in availability and low in growths (like Jagen).
The point I was trying to make is that growth rates are an important factor when it comes to judging how good a unit is. You'll have to agree that, when comparing two units, all else being equal, the one with higher growths is better. Yet you didn't mention this at all in your video. Growths are specially relevant in Awakening, where you can level up indefinitely and bases don't matter as much.
1:27 why does seth have MAG instead of STR?
its what happens when you copy and paste assets lol.
@@jaeaik ok that makes sense
DORCAS OP!
What's the name of the background music?
Fire emblem fates road taken
The only ones this doesn't apply to is Tormods group, it's not their fault, they got fucking shafted HARD in Radiant Dawn.
Honestly props to everyone that uses bad units and makes em good, its pretty fun when the underdog ends up good.
something about rooting for the underdog makes you feel good
Fire emblem three houses allows you to use whoever you'd like and make all of them pretty interesting characters........except anna
they have to commit a war crime
It still surprises me to see people who question someones favorites because they're just a bad unit. To a lot of people that matters little to nothing when it comes to favorites lol. What is tiring is to see that practically in any franchise
Mage killers obviously
Oswin good yes
He has WIN in his name for a reason, he stay winning.
In conclusion: Yes, Amelia is good in general
🤐🤐🤐
You didn't even mention growth rates a single time in this video.
A like has been given.
We don't mention growths in the holy church of fire emblem elitism.
What makes a unit good in FE games: A combination of different factors that can include support bonus, lore, synergy with other characters, class, and base stats
What makes a unit good in Heroes: How much money you can pour in and how much waifu bait is their design
What makes a unit good in Warriors: How much you have to press the A button before you win
What makes a unit good in Cipher: “Heart of the cards, guide me”
"What makes a unit good in FE?"
If the unit it's a mage he/she's already a god/goddess for me :3
The reason: 4:48 :3
Just gotta use what makes the game fun for you!
Klein in fe6 is actually a baller ass unit.
For an exhale from that game of a unit who looks good but has middling base stats is fir/ B route Gonzales.
Good ass vid tho
Just wanted to shill for one of my favorite fe characters in this video ;)
@@jaeaik I love him to.
He needs more love than he gets.
Easy: A unit is as good as a player makes him be. Some can be used as mid battle Convoys because they suck combat wise or be used as Backpacks because They give good Pair Up bonuses. Of course there are units that will undoubtedly be superior with better stats/Move/availability or downright usefulness but just because a Unit is superior does not mean every other unit is meaningless..
its like you commented this without finishing my video!
@@jaeaik Spoilers: I did. Sorry
They are a good character if they aren't a main character and won't make me lose when their glass canon stats inevitability lead to their downfall
unit has to be able to kill an enemy and or heal others
In a game that purely runs on numbers and strategy a unit's objective value is determined by their stats and utility.
It's nice that for example, Raven from FE7 is cool to some people as a character.
That doesn't make his combat performance any less bad or better than say Lowen's or any of the Cavaliers really.
All the Cavaliers are objectively a better unit due to having similar combat (1-2 Range vs Swordlocked Raven) and on top of that amazing utility with their movement and rescue dropping.
Lowen makes FE7 easier if you use him due to his tankiness and utility while Raven can really only do one thing; Kill one enemy (or several if there is no 1-2 range enemies)
It's also meaningless if say a Unit has 20 Strength and 4 move when a 12 Strength 7 Movement Unit can get the same job done.
Good enough stats are good enough, higher stats don't kill an enemy harder.
There is such a thing as an objectively good and bad unit however Fire Emblem in general is rather forgiving and tends to give you great units toward the end anyways so you're not softlocked (Pent, Harken, the Laguz Royals, some Fates characters I cannot remember)