AW/FE by Web

AWBW/FEBW Forum
It is currently Mon Jul 28, 2014 9:33 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


CO Tiers discussion

This is where you can talk Advance Wars or Fire Emblem strategy

Moderator: Forum Mods

Postby Mcluvin » Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:11 pm

Heck, if two-base no airport maps were common, Jess would kick ass (thinks of Bloxx).
User avatar
Mcluvin
Tank
Tank
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:00 am
Location: losing to BMB...again

Postby Sothis » Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:23 pm

Hellraider wrote:@Sothis: Differences between COs in that tier area are marginal and map-dependant, so a lot of top players simply go after the trend (which is Eagle/Rachel) to stay on the safe side. Also, they don't always have to be right. There was a time when everybody picked Kindle, and now she is a pretty average tier 2 CO. And in the GT we let people pick Nell, and they (including me) still chose Rachel/Adder/Max/Eagle over her.


The map-dependent point was exactly how I ended my previous post. There's no truly "correct" tier list because it's different on many maps.

I suppose we could use fewer tiers if that's what's bugging everyone. Then we wouldn't have to make these small distinctions. Each tier would be COs that are close enough in power that map choice usually makes the biggest difference. For instance:

Broken: Colin, Kanbei, Sensei, Hachi, Grit, Javier2T+
Tier 1: Javier1T, Von Bolt, Sturm, Sami, Nell
Tier 2: Sasha, Sonja(fog), Kindle, Eagle, Rachel
Tier 3: Lash, Grimm, Hawke, Andy
Tier 4: Adder, Max, Drake, Olaf, Jake, Koal, Javier0T
Tier 5: Jess, Flak, Jugger, Sonja (no fog)

Personally I prefer the 7-tier system simply because it gives more options for ban lists. Then again serious competition needs bans based on each map, so it doesn't really matter. The bottom line is that a general tier list is merely academic. There is no practical answer unless you account for each map.

P.S. I think you're nuts if you choose Rachel, Eagle, Adder, or Max over Nell. Maybe for fun, sure. Eagle is pretty close I guess, if you're good at creating a US-ben style standoff. :D
No one, not even you, can know your true potential if you are not harshly tested.
User avatar
Sothis
Md. Tank
Md. Tank
 
Posts: 1100
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:47 pm

Postby Ultra Storm » Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:45 pm

Hellraider wrote:@US: I wouldn't say that Rachel/Eagle are universally more useful. Lets take the 10 S-ranks for example. On 7 maps (Atlas, Ancient Prophecy, Caustic Finale, North Star, LKML, Shangri-La and Rainy) Lash is the clearly better choice while it is debatable on the others.
You know as well as I that the choice of S-ranked maps is arbitrary. I have never really understood why North Star is S-ranked, not to mention the dreadful LKML.

I played as Lash on Caustic Finale and I felt underwhelmed at her powers despite the map favouring her. Rachel or Eagle would have been just as useful, if not more in the long run. I wouldn't place my money on Shangri-La either due to the high funds and vehicles involved, as long as you don't let Lash completely occupy the mountains. It's relatively easy to defend on Rainy, so COs with good SCOPs are useful but the contested cities on the sides clearly make Lash useful as well. Atlas seems true.

Hellraider wrote:Then, lets take the Colosseum maps. Apart from the maps which are S-ranked, Lash would have also fared better on Hot in Here and Dark Insignia, while it is still debatable on the other maps.
Of course, one might say that this only reflects the current taste in maps, but a tier list will always do that. If 2 bases per side were standard, Sami would probably rot somewhere around tier 3 and Andy would be kickass. Maps with very light terrain are rare anyway, so Lash will mostly stay an at least decent choice.
Hot in Here is very exceptional in terrain. On Dark Insignia I think I'd currently take Eagle as you rarely seem to actually attack from cities.

Sothis wrote:Personally I prefer the 7-tier system simply because it gives more options for ban lists. Then again serious competition needs bans based on each map, so it doesn't really matter. The bottom line is that a general tier list is merely academic. There is no practical answer unless you account for each map.
You could allow banning any COs they please, except perhaps the broken 5 and Sturm which could always be banned. And if both sides agree, there shouldn't be a problem at least.
Image
Your notion of ”right” is what was imprinted in you since you were young.
User avatar
Ultra Storm
CO
CO
 
Posts: 3615
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 3:55 pm
Location: Transcendence

Postby EchelonThree » Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:50 am

Been looking at some recent games, and I'm getting the hunch that Sturm1T beats Javier1T...
Kamuscha wrote:
nerd-boy wrote:Damn straight.
how is it straight if its been derailed? xD


Zovea on Rocket Armor
Zovea wrote:rocket armor isnt that much stronger than art armor anyways
User avatar
EchelonThree
Rocket
Rocket
 
Posts: 1528
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:29 am
Location: Singapore

Postby Ultra Storm » Thu Mar 11, 2010 7:02 am

EchelonThree wrote:Been looking at some recent games, and I'm getting the hunch that Sturm1T beats Javier1T...
Sturm rarely loses to any of the tier 1 COs, with VB without towers probably being the biggest problem. This is because Sturm can generally wall the opponent and wait for meteors. Together with the best capture routes and terrain abuse altogether making him an automatic ban on many maps, he might not be far from broken.
Image
Your notion of ”right” is what was imprinted in you since you were young.
User avatar
Ultra Storm
CO
CO
 
Posts: 3615
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 3:55 pm
Location: Transcendence

Postby psycho guy » Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:56 pm

i love spamming recons with no consequence on sturm mirror matches

free damage everywhere
Image
User avatar
psycho guy
CO
CO
 
Posts: 2586
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 7:23 pm

Postby Completeduck » Thu Mar 11, 2010 7:30 pm

psycho guy wrote:i love spamming recons with no consequence on sturm mirror matches
free damage everywhere


I wonder where you used that? -_-
I WANNA BE THE GUY!
Completeduck
Anti-Air
Anti-Air
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 1:09 pm
Location: Corneria

Postby Hellraider » Sun Jul 04, 2010 4:01 pm

Moved Hawke to Tier 2 and Grimm back to Tier 3.
User avatar
Hellraider
Rocket
Rocket
 
Posts: 1635
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:39 am

Postby excrimophalus 1 » Mon Jul 05, 2010 12:55 am

Hellraider wrote:Moved Hawke to Tier 2 and Grimm back to Tier 3.


I agree with moving hawke up to tier 2. He seems to have become more poplular recently. I have been experimenting with him in the colosseum and pro-classic, and have had a hawke-eagle matchup, along with a hawke-andy matchup, and i felt like hawke was the superior choice in both games.

The more i play with him, the more i realize that his exceptional reliability is a big bonus. Not only with the d2d, but his powers are about as reliable as powers get.

I have found that black storm is under rated and may be better than lightning strike, which was kind of the case in my colosseum game in month 2 against rpm. If nothing else, it can at least keep up with lighting strike. Especially if hawke gets it first, it has enough power to significantly hamper eagles scop. Black storm also has a very lingering effect.

Aslo interesting:
In the Colosseum month 2 on winding absolution,
Hawke:7
Eagle:6
Adder:2
Andy:3
Rachel:2
In division one, three out of four picked hawke.

In round 4 of the proclassic on forsaken isle:
Hawke:7
Olaf:1
Andy:0
The below statement is true.v

^ The above statement is false.
excrimophalus 1
Anti-Air
Anti-Air
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:34 pm

Previous

Return to Strategy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group