Does anyone else hate archers?

#81WestbrickIIIPosted 1/26/2013 4:10:26 PM
tcaz2 posted...
Except in low turn count BS that doesn't deserve to even be considered because it is by FAR the most unfun way to play the series, archers are every bit as good as every other class in the series.


You're just being stubborn. Even on casual play, one-two range weapons and mages are infinitely better. You enjoy using archers? Good for you. I love using assassins. That doesn't mean I'll delude myself about their quality.

Rethalwolf posted...
I was simply providing a unit that, by your given standards (ahem, logic) would be bad. You never explicitly stated it had to be a combat unit, nor did you provide any points by which a non-combat unit would be compared. Therefore, according to you, dancers are bad.


Nowhere did I say that combat utility was the only kind of utility, and it's self-evident that dancers and staff users are absolutely broken. You're making really dumb assumptions in a failed attempt to be clever. Archers / snipers are the worst class in the game. Again, don't ever use the word "logic" again.

BMSirius posted...
This is a lot to read. I would like to hear what people have to say about AWAKENING Archers/Snipers. Has that been covered yet?


They're actually a little better on balance than they are in most games, assuming we're talking about Lunatic. Wyvern riders are a huge threat in the early game, and VIrion is a lifesaver. Of course, once he promotes, there's no reason to keep him a sniper, but still. Points for early-game utility.
---
The only thing more consistent than the Pats beating the Texans is my mother's regret she survived childbirth, knowing she spawned a welcher
#82MasterChef1121Posted 1/26/2013 4:10:48 PM
gotohades posted...
Nideouss posted...
Shinon. Nuff said.


This. The arguement shouldv'e ended after this post.


Shinon is a class in and of himself (i.e., "good sniper", often just shortened to "sniper"), and thus the discussion/argument on regular snipers (i.e., all the others) continues...
---
I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate.
And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it.
#83BlueSophiaPosted 1/26/2013 4:13:26 PM
And how to you respond to the argument that most experience and most kills come from the enemy turns, leaving mono bows less useful and weaker over the course of a playthrough?

Certainly if you were rushing your troops out like madmen so that they gang up on a single over-leveled unit. If you played it like a tactics game, then it should already be common knowledge that you should be planning out your unit's movements, not relying on pure power. Seriously, do you even play with lines or mock formations? Even if no choke points are present, you can still form combat lines through careful positioning.

Stats are neither here nor there, that a character to character thing. But at a base level attacking Res is better than attacking Def. Also early FEs had a fire spell that was more accurate than an iron bow. It had 2 less might, but attacked res. Add this to the other mentioned advantages and archers don't have much purpose not already done by mages as good/better, plus the other mage options.

Actually, yes they are, that is how effectiveness is dictated when you aren't relying on the weapon triangle for effectiveness. In the general sense, Snipers and Swordsmasters were far more effective against sages than Generals due to their stat distributions AND growths. The difference was striking because while both sides were fragile, the swordsmasters and Snipers often had more speed and HP with the gap between attack and defense edging out the sages while having higher critical chance rates. They didn't perform as well against heavy armor, but they certainly were far better mage killers than their heavier brethren.

There is also the unfortunate side defect that most mages have low consitution so that in time, their own tomes slowed them down and/or got less accurate which meant that the only spell that hit reliably was the most basic one. Sure they worked on the armored folks. But when you shoved a relatively strong sniper in the path of an enemy sage, that sage usually had damage in the range of 15-20, an accuracy of 20 and below with no chance of critical hit and it only gets more and more ridiculous the heavier the tome they had.

Yes but the fact that these weapons have 1-2 range makes up for this fact easily, as I showed early. These classes also promote into classes with more weapon type range. Even as first tier classes 1 range>2 range weapons.

They were still only a substitute. The only benefit they give is that they can defend themselves when they stand around in the middle of nowhere especially since they are downgrades compared to the weapons that they should be using instead. If you played them like experience hogs, sure, they did their job because the unit could use raw stats to bum rush the fort (and end up wasting experience that could have gone to someone that actually needed it). But in a more level game, those axes do not do their job especially when they are matched against a unit that has an advantage over it or can outright tank the damage.
---
The official Ardha of the SMT IV board.
So much sodium against the WiiU!
#84RethalwolfPosted 1/26/2013 4:19:12 PM(edited)
Sain_of_Caelin posted...
From: Rethalwolf | #078
Well of course shotty snipes is better, that doesn't make sniper useless. It's also still good. That's the point here.


That's all we're saying. Archers and snipers can be good, they have some good sides. But compared to other classes they are the worst. Not useless, just the least usable. I play with archers and snipers myself, but when people start acting like all classes are good and equal, that's just not true.


Well, no... all that says is the Warrior or other bow-and-melee user is better than the sniper. If you wanted to compare to other classes, you'd be better off using, say, less accurate or plasma weapons (if we're using Halo here) for magic, and.. well, your fists for dancers and healers.
Obviously the connections aren't all there, but really, a sniper is just as good as any support unit. It just performs a different role. I consider it prevention.

A healer is the opposite, and a dancer I don't even know where I would place. But snipers, when they can't kill an enemy (which they usually can), put an enemy in a position where next hit they'll probably die. Which makes your next unit to attack likely not take any damage to swoop in for the finish, thus immediately protecting that sniper (if you're smart about it).
Healers are good for allies you simply can't keep from dying, and dancers are good if you want to put yourself in a really precarious position in order to solve a problem more quickly.
Snipers are simply the most useful of the three. And they're typically more useful with a bow than any other bow user anyway (thus the sniper comparison), so there really are very few correlations to a shotty snipes unit.

Edit: oops, sorry, missed this:
WestbrickIII posted...

Rethalwolf posted...
I was simply providing a unit that, by your given standards (ahem, logic) would be bad. You never explicitly stated it had to be a combat unit, nor did you provide any points by which a non-combat unit would be compared. Therefore, according to you, dancers are bad.


Nowhere did I say that combat utility was the only kind of utility, and it's self-evident that dancers and staff users are absolutely broken. You're making really dumb assumptions in a failed attempt to be clever. Archers / snipers are the worst class in the game. Again, don't ever use the word "logic" again.


...
Logic. Get some.
---
"The point of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the enemy die for his."
#85misemanekPosted 1/26/2013 4:23:07 PM
WestbrickIII posted...

Terrible / mediocre archers:
Gordon, Thomas, Jeorge, Ryan, Asaello, Tania, Ronan, Wolt, Dorothy, Igrene, Rebecca, Wil, Louise, Innes, Rolf (FE9), Shinon (FE9)

Decent / good archers:
Paison, Leo, the Gaiden villagers, Jamka, Briggid, Faval, Neimi, Rolf (FE10), Shinon (FE10), Virion


you lost all credibility to me when you consider neimi good/decent and rebecca terrible/mediocre
---
GO ND! 12-0 :D
#86Sain_of_CaelinPosted 1/26/2013 4:23:58 PM
From: BlueSophia | #083
Certainly if you were rushing your troops out like madmen so that they gang up on a single over-leveled unit. If you played it like a tactics game, then it should already be common knowledge that you should be planning out your unit's movements, not relying on pure power. Seriously, do you even play with lines or mock formations? Even if no choke points are present, you can still form combat lines through careful positioning.


That did not address my question. I know it's an sRPG, we all know how to play tactically. There are still going to be plenty of times where you must be out of position or put yourself in a place where your archer will not get counter experience where many other classes would.

Actually, yes they are, that is how effectiveness is dictated when you aren't relying on the weapon triangle for effectiveness. In the general sense, Snipers and Swordsmasters were far more effective against sages than Generals due to their stat distributions AND growths. The difference was striking because while both sides were fragile, the swordsmasters and Snipers often had more speed and HP with the gap between attack and defense edging out the sages while having higher critical chance rates. They didn't perform as well against heavy armor, but they certainly were far better mage killers than their heavier brethren.


Growths are not dictated by class. Sure, generally units in this or that class have similar growths but that does not mean that archers/snipers should be judged by the units in their class. I would also argue that at least in the early and mid game faster units are worse mage killers as a OHK is preferable and often possible.

There is also the unfortunate side defect that most mages have low consitution so that in time, their own tomes slowed them down and/or got less accurate which meant that the only spell that hit reliably was the most basic one. Sure they worked on the armored folks. But when you shoved a relatively strong sniper in the path of an enemy sage, that sage usually had damage in the range of 15-20, an accuracy of 20 and below with no chance of critical hit and it only gets more and more ridiculous the heavier the tome they had.


What? An accuracy of 20 or below? That will not happen. Yeah, some of the higher spells can be heavy but considering speed is either overkill or never doubling it's not exactly going to make or break most magic units especially considering archers and snipers have similar (though easier) issues with their high level bows. As far as crits go, yeah they're nice, but bringing them up as a factor against mages is a nonstarter, they're so squishy you'll never need one to kill. And even if your point on archer being the far better mage killer (on your turn, not the enemies) worked there are far more physical units in FE were mages are far better at killing.

They were still only a substitute. The only benefit they give is that they can defend themselves when they stand around in the middle of nowhere especially since they are downgrades compared to the weapons that they should be using instead. If you played them like experience hogs, sure, they did their job because the unit could use raw stats to bum rush the fort (and end up wasting experience that could have gone to someone that actually needed it). But in a more level game, those axes do not do their job especially when they are matched against a unit that has an advantage over it or can outright tank the damage.


This last paragraph is a bit all over the place and mostly an amalgam of previously proven incorrect arguments.
---
http://www.backloggery.com/sainthegoo
https://www.youtube.com/user/VicariousBrian/videos?view=1&flow=grid
#87WestbrickIIIPosted 1/26/2013 4:30:55 PM
Rethalwolf posted...
...
Logic. Get some.


Making assumptions =/= "being logical." The fact that I have to spell this out should be proof enough, but here's something I posted earlier:

Except in very situational circumstances, there is no reason to use an archer over javelin / hand axe throwers and mages.

They're clearly being compared to other combat units, because they have no non-combat utility. Stop being dense.

misemanek posted...
you lost all credibility to me when you consider neimi good/decent and rebecca terrible/mediocre


Neimi can promote to Ranger. If we're going to restrict her promotion to Sniper, then yes, she's also terrible.
---
The only thing more consistent than the Pats beating the Texans is my mother's regret she survived childbirth, knowing she spawned a welcher
#88NubaruPosted 1/26/2013 4:59:30 PM
What are these things called "Archers"?
---
"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick a**... and I'm all out of bubblegum..." - Nada (Roddy Piper)
#89BlueSophiaPosted 1/26/2013 5:13:15 PM
That did not address my question. I know it's an sRPG, we all know how to play tactically. There are still going to be plenty of times where you must be out of position or put yourself in a place where your archer will not get counter experience where many other classes would.

If you actually think such an eventuality exists if you play well, then I don't know what game you are playing. If the unit or two that you need to breakoff should actually require an archer, I don't know what your strategy is supposed to be. If you are that worried about counter experience, just use your environment to build a wall and let the units come to you. For all the griping about this, there are more maps that have natural barriers than there are maps with just wide open space.

Growths are not dictated by class. Sure, generally units in this or that class have similar growths but that does not mean that archers/snipers should be judged by the units in their class. I would also argue that at least in the early and mid game faster units are worse mage killers as a OHK is preferable and often possible.

No, but characters in each class mostly have stats that match their chosen archetype (and if they do not, then most of the time, they just end up BAD). Unless you offset their growths with items, it is up to the random number god whether or not you end up with something that can perform outside of its given range without a large level gap. In the meantime, may I direct you to the general page where physical units in general in the first tier are nuked by magic? Only the Pegasus Knights are of any use at that point.

What? An accuracy of 20 or below? That will not happen. Yeah, some of the higher spells can be heavy but considering speed is either overkill or never doubling it's not exactly going to make or break most magic units especially considering archers and snipers have similar (though easier) issues with their high level bows. As far as crits go, yeah they're nice, but bringing them up as a factor against mages is a nonstarter, they're so squishy you'll never need one to kill. And even if your point on archer being the far better mage killer (on your turn, not the enemies) worked there are far more physical units in FE were mages are far better at killing.

And in turn a lot squishier. If you were to send a mage out to do the exact same thing you describe, it won't last much longer either. It may last longer in games where stat maxing is commonplace, but with the general distribution, they are not safe units, not by a longshot. At this point, the only division on which units they CAN kill is moot because the only trouble that Archers would have is against high defense units. Mages are ill matched against the entirety of all other mages.


This last paragraph is a bit all over the place and mostly an amalgam of previously proven incorrect arguments.

Then explain away. It's not like the argument is going to get any less biased as it is.
---
The official Ardha of the SMT IV board.
So much sodium against the WiiU!
#90WestbrickIIIPosted 1/26/2013 5:15:01 PM
BlueSophia posted...
If you are that worried about counter experience, just use your environment to build a wall and let the units come to you.


In other words, baby your archer so he doesn't fall behind thanks to his/her two-range lock. Fantastic. Clearly a great class.
---
The only thing more consistent than the Pats beating the Texans is my mother's regret she survived childbirth, knowing she spawned a welcher