Fire Emblem in the DL: a questionnaire

[Dark Holy Elf]

Fire Emblem is a series which has led to many different views and debates over those views over the years. Now, some eight or so years after the game first entered DL matches, I'm curious to see where people stand on some of these issues now.

This is an informal questionnaire. I'm doing this mostly for general interest, though also partly to help me with some decisions with the FE13 stat topic. If I could get as many people as possible to provide even short answers for the first two questions in particular, that would be of great help. Beyond that, share what you will.

Importanant disclaimer: One thing this thread is not for is attacking the views of others. Debating is okay as long as both participants are up for it, but otherwise, just let the interpretations of others be. I want everyone to be able to weigh in without being worried about someone jumping down their throat.

Anyway, the questions!

1. Counters

Do you see FE characters countering?

If yes, under what circumstances? (e.g. whenever they could counter in-game, or whenever they can counter and they themselves would not be countered in-game, etc.) How about against multitarget attacks or pure status?

2. Doubling (in the FE sense)

Do you see FE characters doubling and/or being doubled in the DL?

If yes, what do you check to decide if they double? The average of their own cast? The average of enemy stats? Is this modified by the target's speed? (or some other stat, such as evade)

If no, do you account for doubling in another way, e.g. by multiplying damage by the proportion of enemies the PC doubles in-game? (and a similar hack for durability)

3. Initiative and speed (in the non-FE sense)

When assigning (non-FE) speed to FE characters, are they all average speed, or do they vary? If the former, do you use some method of tiebreaks to decide how they deal with average speed opponents?

If yes to either of the previous questions, what to you use to determine speed/initiative? Their threat range? (move + attack range) Their FE speed stat? etc.

4. Other (optional)

Anything else you want to weigh in on is fine, such as:
-equal exp vs. fixed level
-evasion
-criticals
-switching between classes match-by-match (FE8 and FE13)
-laguz interpretations, especially for FE10
-excluding people from averages (dancers? FE9 laguz royals? FE10 laguz in general? Specific problem PCs such as Myrrh, Donnel, etc.?)

[Talaysen]

1. Counters

FE characters counter and are countered.

2. Doubling (in the FE sense)

I'm kind of split between two views here.

First: Convert FE speed to CTB, cap at 2x or 0.5x the opponent's speed.  Actual conversion is 2^((pAS-aAS)/4) .  [5 in FE13 obviously.]

Second: FE speed is average, doubles are checked against the attacker's and target's evade.

Second one is more true to in-game but I haven't quite grasped how to make it work.

3. Initiative and speed (in the non-FE sense)

Everyone be average.

-equal exp vs. fixed level

Fixed level.  For all that finite map FEs are the most likely to get an equal EXP scaling from me than anything else.

-evasion

I don't even know what the question is here.

-criticals

As above.

-switching between classes match-by-match (FE8 and FE13)

I allow it as usual.

-laguz interpretations, especially for FE10

They suck.  Sorry.  Sometimes people just get screwed in the DL.

-excluding people from averages (dancers? FE9 laguz royals? FE10 laguz in general? Specific problem PCs such as Myrrh, Donnel, etc.?)

Hell no.  Everyone into the averages.

[Cmdr_King]

1. Counters

Nope.  FE counters struck me as needlessly complicated, and eventually I settled on a line of reasoning that the counters we less inherent properties of the characters that should be reflected in the DL, but a property of the battle system that, translated fully in DL terms, raised so many questions that it just wasn't worth it to tackle at all.

2. Doubling (in the FE sense)

Measured against the cast average.  This tended to better reflect who was and wasn't really good at doubling than taking it against enemy averages, and had a less psychotic impact on averages to boot.  It's not perfect (Ike9 always doubling while Neph9 never does is indeed pretty weird) but usually keeps things interesting.

The logic here is that FE Speed isn't the same stat as TB/CT/etc speed.  It determines your ability to double your offense, not turn order.  There's probably some non-FE games with comperable stats, but damned if I can think of them.

3. Initiative and speed (in the non-FE sense)

As above, FE characters lack an initiative order stat, so they default to average.  Against other FE characters, or other similar cases (Disgaea for an easy example), threat range is a good tiebreak.

4. Other (optional)

Anything else you want to weigh in on is fine, such as:
-equal exp vs. fixed level:  I prefer fixed level, the numbers look more 'right' to me, but only because I really don't use prepromos or the like in-game.  I find both interesting and useful but generally vote on fixed level.
-evasion: if memory serves, all our stat topics take evade/accuracy against an average of typical endgame enemies, or sometimes a weight average which counts bosses more heavily.  I forget which it is, but both are reasonable to me and so I use evade as-listed in topics.
-criticals: No in average.  There's a good argument for averaging crits in the GBA titles, but a game like FE isn't really about the three turn to me so unless a character crits on average on turn one... which is probably a few considering my other views actually but anyway.
-switching between classes match-by-match (FE8 and FE13): I've never firmly decided on this one.  In part because I don't think any character hugely benefits from it in FE8 (either the two classes are basically equal, or one will have a landslide advantage in DL stats) and FE13 is new and I haven't thought too heavily about it beyond Robin interps so far.
-laguz interpretations, especially for FE10: Free access to Olivi Grass (same way I tend to accellerate limits for FFVII/VIII, they less boring), initiative transform for characters who can do so.
-excluding people from averages (dancers? FE9 laguz royals? FE10 laguz in general? Specific problem PCs such as Myrrh, Donnel, etc.?): Aside from characters who cannot actually attack, FE has large enough cast sizes to account for the extremes I think.  And even then, the character who can't attack are more because they're excluded from the DL anyway so why not reflect that.

[Random Consonant]

1. Yes, whenever they can counter.  Definitely not against MT, pure status... probably not.

2. Yes, PC average, checked against speed.  This is probably the one I'm most open to some change on, due to this largely having been a "well it made sense at the time" adoptation when I came here and it's something I largely gutcheck, but by and large I think it's something that should be preserved in some way.  That said I feel the arguments in favor of the so-called double rate method miss the point to me (for all that I have no actual problem with the interp and it does interest me on some level); it's not the PC attack stat compared to the PC defense average to get some damage number, it's the PC's ability to get extra attacks compared to the average PC's ability to get them, and in this sense it doesn't strike me as that different from oh say actual speed.  Seems more of a "how to account for this mechanic in the averages" issue which is fine but I think I'd sooner throw up my hands and do CTB conversions myself.

3. Average turn speed, movement/threat range as tiebreak, followed by speed stat in the case that doesn't work I guess.

4.
Equal EXP vs. fixed level: depends on the game to me, though I think I lean more towards the former these days (and definitely do for 10).
Evasion: FE evasion is very comprehensive as far as I'm concerned and covers everything save pure status (which checks RES) and ITE from other systems I consider sufficiently comprehensive.
Criticals: I take a fairly dim view of FE criticals and skill activation, >=67% threshold for turn 1 for me, generally speaking, same as status. 
Class switching: is more or less okay with me
Laguz: are mostly SOL as far as I'm concerned.  I guess in 10 they get olivi grass but that's not the greatest of help in a duel and doesn't incline me to account for their transformations into the average (sans damage of course, because wow) since they can still get shanked with that (I allow them to start at 15/30, to be clear).  Royals/halfshifters are the exception of course, they can't get shanked ingame.  Laguz stones are a no as far as I'm concerned.  FE9 Laguz get taken at whatever they start at, if they can start transformed, good for them, if not, well boo hoo.
Excluding People: General no to excluding people unless they literally can't fight
Weapon Triangle: Averaged in FE vs. FE, taken as normal otherwise when I can be bothered to remember it.

[SnowFire]

1. Counters

Yes, I allow counters whenever a character could counter normally (so they need a range 1-2 weapon if the incoming attack is "ranged").  If a FE character is slower than their opponent, they can walk into the battle with a counterattack appropriate weapon, then immediately switch to a different weapon on their turn, like in game.

There's some weirdness when figuring out what enemy attacks count as "ranged" - e.g. some games treat guns / bows / etc. exactly the same as swords and still inflicts back row penalties and the like - but I'd default to flavor unless there's very strong mechanical reason to think otherwise.

FE characters can't counter MT attacks or status attacks without reason to think otherwise.

2. Doubling (in the FE sense)

Yes, FE characters double and get doubled.  (Although certain weird enemy actions might be ineligible for a double even against slow FE characters - e.g. pure status, offensive item use, etc. that you can't double with in FE.)

To figure it out: look at the opposing character's speed.  (Or appropriate agility score if one exists that's comparable to AS, but that's rare.)  If that gets beaten by 3.5 points (4.5 points in FE:A) translated to the FE system, a double happens.  e.g. FEA lists a speed average of 30.1, 4.5/30.1 = 15%.  So a character with 115%+ speed will double an average speed FEA character because they're ~34.6 Speed translated to FEA stats.  A character with 80% average speed (like CT Marle) will get doubled by 95%+ FE:A characters (=28.6 Spd), etc.

Note that yes, this means that the higher the stats go, the narrower the doubling range is and the easier it is for a double to happen one way or the other.  It's a pretty subtle effect, though (checking, the FE:SS 20/12 topic gives an average AS of 20.42, and 3.5/20.42 = 17%, so it's not THAT different.)

3. Initiative and speed (in the non-FE sense)

All FE characters are average speed winning tiebreaks (you go first in game).  I'm fine with using threat range as an additional tiebreaker when needed, as well as incorporating threat range & movement when appropriate (e.g. a move-4 FE Knight vs. some kind of highly mobile healer in another SRPG.), but I can't claim much consistency here since it doesn't come up much outside CK's all-FE tournament.

4. Other (optional)

* Bosses get credit for terrain features they sit on if it's impossible to get them off in-game.  So Fort regen hype.  BUT -
* Non-moving bosses have last strike, and are totally mockable by characters who can back off.  e.g. healers who can just walk off, heal up, then walk back in range to damage them, assuming their damage keeps pace with the boss's regen, so doesn't help much vs. say Dheginsea.
* Bosses with a super long range attack get an initiative turn to use it with if they want.  (This may not always be optimal since they might give up a counter on turn 1, but not always.)
* In FE games with grinding, fixed level, with the occasional level bonus or penalty when appropriate (e.g. Robin's Veteran).  Also for FE:A, I think I prefer letting Tiki/Panne/Donnel/Olivia at 30/10 with Second Sealing to be properly equal-levely.  In games without grinding that are strictly limited XP without arena abuse - it's more complex, but basically I think equal-XP is a bit too harsh to characters whom, if used at all, ARE being parasitically fed XP to catch them up.  On the other hand, fixed level is unfair to characters who join at sufficiently high level that the topic seems to presume they're never used because they're already at / near / above the cap.  Then there are weird cases like the infamous Nino, FE:SD Elice, or FE:RD Tormod where, even throwing a bone for "but you'd try and catch them up if you wanted to seriously use them", they probably deserve SOME sort of level penalty because there's just so little time to do so.  Anyway, the point is, I'm mostly fine with fixed levels with a few choice level bonuses & penalties for the outliers like Elice, Nino, Renning, & Tibarn.  The really fancy approach, which I think is only feasible for FE:RD because of the vast amount of work already compiled by Elf & Random, would be to stick a floor on the level for the XP-screwed (use the X/X/10 numbers in the Meeple topic for the Dawn Brigade, say), but let any character who naturally gets a higher level than that in a 'fair' equal XP playthrough to use their Random equal-XP stats; it would basically be an unfair penalty to deny them that.  Instead the middling-level characters are annoyed by this interp (sorry Crimean Knights), as they get hit from both sides by the higher stat average than in either topic.
* I'm fine with allowing class switch by match, although it's normally something I'd be skeptical of.  Something that gives the FE cast more options is good, and in FE8's case, the pick is fairly late in the game anyway.  It's hard to pick a canonical choice, and unlike stat-averaging, the different skills make it really important to pick which class is used for a fight.  Allowing choice simplifies this.
* FE10 non-Royal laguz shouldn't be nommed because there is 0 agreement on how to take them.  (Well, nommed without a specific interp mandated.)  That said, my preference:  I am inclined to let FE10 laguz start transformed (if they want) with 15 meter.  This is mostly because while some maps it'd be nice to have a laguz attack turn 1, there are basically no maps where a sufficiently cowardly laguz running to the corner can ever possibly be attacked themselves turn 1, FE10 gives you some space.  So I'm not inclined to hold the fact that a hypothetical ninja turn 1 attack on laguz, while clearly fatal outside Low Light to most Laguz, against them because said ninjas don't really exist in-game; if the player is sending the laguz into combat, you know to transform them first.  That said, especially if not given Olivi Grass (unsure on that), the laguz cast is not particularly happy with this interp anyway, as they run out of gas *real* fast if they can't finish a kill now now now, but at least they can transform.  Laguz are held against transformed laguz in the averages, humans are held against Meeple's half-shifted laguz averages.

[MalcolmMasher]

1. I see FE counters as working in the DL, and I try for as close as seems reasonable to "whatever they could counter in-game". I generally don't see pure status or MT attacks as provoking FE counters.

2. I think that doubling / not doubling / being doubled is important and should be reflected in the DL, but that comparing PC speed to the PC speed average is the wrong way to go about it. (For the same reason that comparing PC attack to the PC defense average would be the wrong way to calculate average damage, basically.) So, I favor the "double rate" method.

Exception: In a FE vs FE matchup, I do not mind saying "Character X is two points above speed average, Character Y is three points below, so X doubles Y". Which I suppose is inconsistent on my part. Eh.

3. I see all FE characters as having average "rate of getting turns", with initiative dependent on their threat range.

4. If both equal EXP and fixed level stat topics are available, I'd rather use the former. If no such choice is available, no big deal.

I think I see FE evasion as something that is too much a part of the FE setup to be exported literally into inter-game conflicts. So, I favor the interpretation where we care less about Wallace having ~35 Avoid or about dodging Whatever% of endgame enemies, and more about Wallace having pretty terrible evasion by FE7 standards.

Criticals/skills... hm. I like the argument that a typical FE crit is overkill and should not be taken literally in the damage average; at the same time, FE13 enemies may be tanky enough that skills/crits should be taken literally there, at least with a Hard Mode DL default. Might have to vary by game on exactly how to interpret these.

For switching between classes, I would see it as analogous to switching between boss forms, where sadly I do not have a precedent to fall back on. I guess I'd say, characters pick one form per "season" once a distinction needs to be made, and they're stuck with it until the next tournament.

Laguz, well, no FE10 here. FE9 laguz I take as-is, no bones thrown. This kind of screws over laguz that aren't Lethe/Janaff[/Muarim], but frankly I don't have much respect for FE9 laguz anyway, so I am okay with them translating poorly.

I don't think characters should be in the averages unless they can fight. If they can fight, then sure; FE casts are certainly large enough to soak the odd Ballistician without undue deformation. But characters like FE6/7 Merlinus, or even FE11 Xane, I would prefer not to include.

Other things to weigh in on, hmm.

Weapon triangle: FE characters get to bring all the relevant damage/accuracy bonuses (or penalties) into play. So if Joshua is up against some lance guy, Josh effectively loses 1 Str/Def and 15 Hit/Avo. If he's up against some lance guy from FE9, then I'd probably average the systems out and call it 12.5 Hit/Avo instead.

Subtraction defense: FE has it, and it matters. Other systems might or might not. If both games are subtraction, I'd rather take the defense as appropriate to in-game. So... let's see. A physical attack that deals 40% to the average FE6 character (45.35 HP, 12.95 Def) will deal only ~29% to Fa (34.2 HP, 15+6.2 Def). But a physical attack that deals 95% to average will OHKO her.

If the non-FE game doesn't use subtraction defense, the FE characters just use the durability numbers they get against attacks that deal 40% to average. So, Fa would have 1.38x physical durability against Gau's Catscratch or whatnot.

Reclass: Since FE13 characters get their own individual class set, I think FE13 reclass should be DL legal. Exactly how to hash it out is of course a bigger issue. (I suppose the simplest way would be to allow characters to go 20/15->5; if 20/20 is OK, there should be more than enough EXP for that.)  FE11 reclass, however, is out.

[Twilkitri]

1. Counters

No, they don't counter. Outside of things like the FE9 counter skill.

2. Doubling

Yes, they can double. Outside of people who aren't likely to come up who don't have said ability.

Debatably, them existing in a fight shouldn't allow people who couldn't already double to double. For a wholly FE-based example, if Levin (45 AS, no pursuit) was up against Dorcas (12.2 AS), he shouldn't be able to double because he explicitly doesn't have the ability to. (Granted, he has a ~60% chance to do a continued (brave-style) attack anyway, but not a double.) Not sure where I really stand on this. It gets more murky out in the lands of everyone-can-do-it-sucks-to-be-slow-peoples anyway.

I don't have a hard rule on how doubling should be determined. Want to say it should be taken against relative to matched averages rather than involving the enemy stats at all. If the opponent's setting doesn't have a reaction-speed style stat then they're all assumed average. Unsure if I ever voted this way.

3. Initiative and speed

FE characters are all average turn-order speed. Threat range used in tiebreaks.

4. Other

Equal EXP vs Fixed Level - neither are perfect. Equal EXP is probably better, for all that as far as I understand it it doesn't cater for people considerably above/below the level average very well. That said I normally prefer Fixed Level because it's tidier ._.

Switching classes - I would allow characters to switch game forms between matches, let alone classes. If it ever mattered.

[Nephrite]

1. Yes, but only against other FE characters.
2. Yes, but I think I take AS as an average and then look at the relative speeds of the people they're fighting. This also means people can double them if they are faster.
3. Average speed, movement or attack range (whichever is higher) is used as a tiebreaker.
4. Will come back to this.

[superaielman]

1. Yes, same as I would for most SRPGs. Suppose you can argue that FE battles are like OB battles where it's just a set number of actions and the 'battle' ends, but eh. Doesn't ring true to me.

2.  Yes. Speed. The average of their own cast. Modified by target's speed.

3. Average speed, same as any other SRPG. Tiebreak is entirely gut.

4. Equal exp, definitely.

5. Evasion: Physical is physical, magical is magical. Status is a case by case basis thing. I don't let them resist flat status odds ala FFT Holy Sword, I would let them resist something like Magic Sword though.

6. Crits: Average it in if you use Killer Weapons, don't otherwise.

7. Don't allow class switching. I pick the best overall class for them in the DL and stick wtih it, with a note that I'd switch if there was an argument after the were ranked that one class was better than the other. I can't see that happening, considering how transparent FE mechanics are.

8. I try to not think about Laguz in the DL who aren't royals. I am seriously not inclined to allow consumable items like Laguz grass though.

9.  Exclude anyone who can't attack, such as dancers. 

[Reiska]

I think personally I see DL fights as similar to FE arena fights, and would thus apply their general mechanics as best as possible to the environment.  At least based on a quick test in Shadow Dragon, arena combats work by repeating player-phase attack until one side dies - in other words, the enemy never gets its own turn.  Now, obviously, taking this literally is a bad DL interp (it fucks over anyone who has options), so I can't take it 100%, but I can use it to guide my interpretations.

For the interested, the way I came across the testing result is as follows.  I sent L3 Navarre, with 12 spd, into the chapter 4 arena, and with savestates got a test on both a battle in which he doubled the enemy, and a battle in which he did not.  When he doubles the enemy, the sequence of actions is Navarre-enemy-Navarre-repeat.  Extrapolated over a long battle: (N-E-N)-(N-E-N)-(N-E-N)...  When he does not double the enemy, the sequence of actions is Navarre-enemy-repeat: (N-E)-(N-E)-(N-E)...  As such, it is clear that Navarre is always the one initiating a combat round at all times, and the enemy's interaction is limited to counterattacks.

Counters
In short: no.  I think FE characters should either get to counter (and be countered), or get to double (or be doubled), but not both, and I like them getting doubling/doubled more, because I think that comes closest to the arena-like conditions I see DL fights being while still allowing both combatants to actually have turns. 

If I were going to consider counters in FE vs. non-FE duels for some reason, I would consider anything that deals HP damage to be counterable (with considerations made for attack range); yes, this includes MT, I do not feel that MT attacks (which are nonexistent in Fire Emblem but moderately common in other games, including other SRPGs) should effectively be a "get out of being countered free" card.  I would also consider anyone fighting against the FE PC to counter according to FE rules.

But that all said, still, the only case I'd normally consider counters at all would be in duels between two FE characters, because I would consider such duels as if they were being fought in the FE arena, with all the mechanical considerations that entails.

Doubling
I basically agree with SnowFire's interpretation for doubling as written, except that I'd use a consistent standard of 4 points of speed difference regardless of the FE game involved in the duel.  (why 4? because more FE games use 4 than any other threshold.)  I'd also be a bit more lenient on what was allowed to double (IMO, basically anything that inflicts damage should be able to double), but if a non-FE PC gets to double an FE PC, they have to do the same thing twice; they can't, say, attack once and heal.  In short I view the non-FE PC that doubles an FE PC as still only getting one discrete 'turn' with the proviso that a damage-dealing action they take on that turn fires twice; if they take a non-damage dealing action, they don't get to act twice.  This probably disfavors fast characters with healing but poor damage, but whatever.

Initiative and speed
Agree with SnowFire's interpretation full stop here, in line with my arena interp.  For duels between two FE characters, I'd arbitrarily give initiative to the character with higher scaled AS.

Other considerations
On EXP interpretations: I generally favor equal EXP if it's available; characters with bad availability should have it count against them.  In the specific case of FE13, this includes Second Sealing to the same class they were before upon hitting level cap.  (More on this in a moment, though.)  SnowFire has valid concerns about the implications of equal EXP on projects; IMO, the best solution here is to attempt to apply whatever sort of EXP scaling the FE game involved has (if there is any) - most FE games will scale EXP gained by a higher level character downward, so account for that.  I also wouldn't take into account whether the PC can actually win combats in-game for an equal exp interp; one assumes that if the player were painstakingly going out of their way to make sure everyone gained EXP evenly, they'd also painstakingly go out of their way to set up situations where the underleveled PC could safely gain their fair share.  I could support selecting a level floor for the EXP-screwed, but their poor availability should still be taken into account somehow.
On evasion: I prefer taking FE characters' evasion as a relative quantity rather than an absolute.  (In other words, figure out the game's evasion average and extrapolate from there, like Malcolm said.)  As for applying it, evasion in FE applies to basically everything offensive, whether it be physical, magical, or status, and I see no reason to deviate from that, so all non-FE attacks should always check against FE evasion unless they are explicitly ITE.
On criticals: FE characters absolutely should get criticals if a duel goes long enough for them to have the chance reasonably, but I probably wouldn't consider them in averages.  Characters from games with no luck stat should have luck equal to the enemy average in whatever FE game the FE dueler came from.  Characters from games with a luck stat should use it (scaled to FE numbers in the same manner as speed was for doubling considerations). 
On branching promotions: I favor allowing class switch by match, definitely, for games where this matters (FE2, FE8, FE13).  The same extends to asset/flaw considerations for Chris (FE12) or Robin (FE13).  That said, this probably doesn't come up often, most of the time one or the other class is clearly superior for DL usage.
On laguz: I don't vote on FE10 and don't really use laguz in FE9, so no opinion.
On excluding people from averages: I would exclude people who either A) can never actually attack in-game (e.g. Ninian) or B) the character is explicitly excluded from nomination for some reason (as has been suggested for FE9 non-royal laguz due to interp issues).  Basically, if a PC has even a remote chance of ever being nominated into a duel, they should count towards the averages.
On FE11/12 reclassing: Definite no.  If FE12 ever gets a stat topic for some reason, Chris (Avatar/My Unit/whatever) should be taken as their default class (paladin). 

On FE13 reclassing... I would actually lean toward allowing it with an interpretation that goes more or less as follows:
- nobody reclasses before the end of chapter 16, so equal exp figures to that point are critically needed
- standard PCs reclass at the end of a chapter in which they reach 20/10 or 20/15, if at all.  if they reclass at 20/10 they should probably be figured to get a C weapon rank in any weapons their original class didn't have; if they reclass at 20/15, they should be figured to get a D rank in weapons their original class didn't have.  Unless we exclude brave weapons, there are probably not many PCs that actually want to reclass under this interpretation; this is fine, in my opinion.
- PCs who don't promote should be allowed to reclass once immediately at the end of chapter 16 provided they meet the minimum requirements for doing so (level 10), if they choose to do so, and should have stats calculated for each possibility accordingly (with them promoting at level 20 in their new class).  if they do not reclass immediately at the end of chapter 16, they cannot reclass until level 30, and then can only reclass to their original class again.  in any case, such PCs should probably be considered to have a B weapon rank in any of the weapons available to their base class and C in anything exclusive to their promoted class.  Exception: Tiki, since she joins later than chapter 16; if she wants to reclass out of manakete, she has to do it immediately on join before she gains any EXP, and she probably gets one less weapon rank (absolute) due to the time considerations (when I say 'absolute' here I mean one total, not one in each weapon).  that said, I'm pretty sure the only non-promoting PC who actually wants to reclass is Donnel, as the others likely want their stone bonuses.

Last but not least, on game forms: if someone actually figures out how SpotPass PC growths work, I would actually be amenable to considering FE13 forms of previous FE games' characters with FE13 equipment.  any such PC would be taken at 20/20 with no reclassing, and would be compared to FE13 averages (but not included in them).

[Jo'ou Ranbu]

1. Counters

Yes, and I see them countering in any circumstance where they -would- in-game. Likewise, a situation where characters cannot counter in-game (like multitarget attacks, or attacks that outrange the PCs) is a situation where they cannot counter in the DL. I really don't see what's so complicated about counters at all - feels like it's more of a difficulty in gauging the overall power of the mechanic in the DL. I also don't feel comfortable throwing them out, since counters are such an integral part of the gameflow with a pretty much universal translation (just about every game has -some- sort of counter mechanics, be them specific to PCs or universal).

2. Doubling (in the FE sense)

Yes, I see FE characters doubling and getting doubled, using the PC averages. I'd -like- to use enemy averages for this, but enemy averages historically have been a very poor measure stick for FE doubles, so the one approach I find balanced for the DL is against the cast itself. And, of course, doubles are modified by target speed to me, and I use exactly the same formula as NEB (which I forget offhand <_< >_>) for when doubles happen.

3. Initiative and speed (in the non-FE sense)

Average speed, threat range being a tiebreaker. In case threat range doesn't break the tie, and -only- then, I use Attack Speed as a Minerva vote. Ideally, though, this shouldn't be necessary.

4. Other (optional)

-equal exp vs. fixed level

Nowadays, I'm leaning closer and closer to equal XP. Fixed level leads to sorta dumb things in some cases (like Niime and FE6 Karel never getting any XP at all, for all the non-existant good it does Niime. Nino being egregiously inflated is another case) and equal XP provides a fairer interpretation to me.

-evasion

Fire Emblem evade is pretty much the most inclusive evasion stat I know of, and I'm inclined to give it that level of respect. In order to bypass FE evade for me, an attack has to explicitly bypass evade in its own game, and in cases where an attack type lacks an evasion stat or measure, it rams into FE evade flat and good. I'm not inclined to give credit to games for -lacking- mechanics (akin to considering ShF magic ITD, for instance. I'm not rewarding a cast for failing to have a fucking MDef stat). I used to give it credit for evading magical status using FE8 as a precedent, but this no longer applies -unless- the magical status rams into magical evade in-game (so, I'd see FF9 magical status being dodged, but not Persona 4 magical status, for instance).

-criticals

I have a dim view of crits in the DL as well. My kneejerk is to take >=71% odds for a crit to happen turn one, for instance, instead of the usual 66% threshold. Same applies to skills like Aether.

-switching between classes match-by-match (FE8 and FE13)

Pick and choosing classes in a match-per-match basis is absolutely unacceptable to me if that can't be done in-game. My definition for what class is used is solely by merit of which one is overall superior, so it does benefit the character as much as possible, but free formchoice is something I just don't do in general.

-laguz interpretations, especially for FE10

No FE10. FE9... really doesn't have much room. I'm more and more inclined to take a no-halfshift average unless the Laguz starts shifted, though.

-excluding people from averages (dancers? FE9 laguz royals? FE10 laguz in general? Specific problem PCs such as Myrrh, Donnel, etc.?)

Exclude people who can't attack, like Dancers. Everything else is fair game as long as it's interpretable/conceivably rankable.

[Luther Lansfeld]

1. Counters

Yep, I see FE characters countering and being countered. MT isn't countered as evidenced from FE10 and status isn't either. I will generally rate where I think a person is attacking from on an individual basis. People like Jacques, who clearly have long range weapons even beyond the normal range in Suikoden III, would be considered to have 3 range in FE terms for example.

2. Doubling (in the FE sense)

The speed of the character they are fighting vs. average?

3. Initiative and speed (in the non-FE sense)

Average with move as a tiebreak.

-equal exp vs. fixed level: equal EXP

-evasion: evasion is an important part of defense vs. things in FE, so it should be accounted for in some way

-criticals: same as status in the DL

-switching between classes match-by-match (FE8 and FE13): Just choose the optimal form and that is your form forever. No cheating the system, since you can't in game(okay you can in 13, but I will explain why I don't care about this...)

-laguz interpretations, especially for FE10: I allow Laguz Stones, they are equivalent to weapons in my view

-excluding people from averages (dancers? FE9 laguz royals? FE10 laguz in general? Specific problem PCs such as Myrrh, Donnel, etc.?): Nope.

I have decided that I allow one seal per character in order to limit Class Changing in FE13. You can have a Second Seal if you want, if you are Frederick/Anna/Libra/Donnel/Panne/Nowi/Tiki/Olivia you'll possibly take the option.

I also think the DL should count Outdoor Fighting. I always imagined it as an outdoor coliseum.

[Dark Holy Elf]

Counters:

I see FE characters countering where appropriate. Not vs. MT attacks (due to FE10 mostly) and not against pure status (due to staves, although Stone does exist as a counterexample).

I understand the arguments, but to me there's just no getting past the fact that a lot of FE is built around the idea of PCs countering, something they clearly do as the alternative is for a FE who tanks/counters 20 enemies in one round to be initiating 20 separate "attacks" which makes no sense. Also counters preserve the rightful inequality if 1-2 range > 1 range > 2 range.

Interpretations where both sides counter each other or FE characters only counter when they have a "range advantage" (so 1-2 range vs. 1 only or 2 only) are interesting to me, but ultimately both feel less reflective of in-game.


Doubling:

FE characters double or are doubled, comparing their speed to their casts average and modifying it based on the opponent's CTB speed or FE speed depending on which one they have. I'm still not 100% sure how I translate CTB speed to FE... I traditionally go with a view mc floated which is FE speed = Avg + 7*log2(CTB speed). However this is less swingy than I'd like.

Doubling threshold is 3.5 FE speed, or 4.5 FE speed for FE13, or 4 FE speed if FE13 fights someone from FE6-12.


Initiative:

Average speed, using threat range for tiebreaks. See most other people.


Other:

Equal exp usually preferable to fixed level, although the distinction is less significant in games such as FE6, FE8, and FE13 which have very normalising exp formulas (outside PCs who gain exp at different rates, like Colm) so sometimes it's easier just to use fixed level there.

I have low respect for FE criticals (and skill activations), they are akin to status to me and you need >67% probability to win with one. Criticals don't go in the damage average.

No switching classes for FE8, I'm on the fence for FE13 (it's actually possible to switch in-game) and will do so in a few cases at least until I figure out which build is better.

FE9 laguz are straightforward. FE10 laguz are weird. I don't nom them and don't like to see them nommed, but for now my views are Olivi Grass okay, Laguz Stones not okay... but am considering switching the latter. Nobody ever initiative-shanks a laguz royal before they transform, though (i.e. royals come into fights transformed effectively to me, since they can never be attacked untransformed in-game).

Everyone who is DL rankable in averages, yeah (so not GBA dancers, Xane, etc.). I'm more open than most to excluding problem PCs who are very swingy, but since I'm obviously in the minority I wouldn't exclude them from averages in stat topics I make and am far too lazy to make a separate average, so.

Bosses who start on terrain either (a) have that terrain until their first action if they move or (b) have it forever if they don't. Bosses who don't move are auto-last strike, but I don't let opponents prebuff or run away and heal against them.

When I remember the weapon triangle exists I take it at half the effectiveness it is in its home game, but I add the effects if it's FE vs. FE. So, for instance:
-Joshua vs. Fang: -7.5 hit/avo, -0.5 dmg/def
-Joshua vs. Ephraim: -15 hit/avo, -1 dmg/def
-Joshua vs. Oscar: -12.5 hit/avo, -1 dmg/def

Reavers banned, for all that they're pretty available/affordable in FE7-8, because it means FE characters always have the advantage and bleh to that.

No cameo forms of PCs (i.e. FE13), this is consistent with my thoughts on such things in other series.

[Pyro]

1. Counters

I allow FE characters to counter as if they had a 100% counter skill. This applies to things that fall within the envelope of what they would counter in-game (so no ranged counters for melee fighters, and no countering MT/pure status). This is a very, very big bone to the cast and I recognize it as such. I am extremely lenient in what I permit casts, and feel that if, say, Persona 4 PCs get their auto-revival then FE PCs can have counters. Ditto very good universal type status blockers and defend commands and such. I encourage everyone to be so lenient with all casts! Glory to PCs!

2. Doubling (in the FE sense)

I now believe that Dhyer's method of handling doubles is the most effective and fair. This method increase damage by your double rate, and reduces durability by the doubled rate against a collection of endgame foes. This prevents silly things happening at the cutoff point and allows you to get a better comparison to in-game sense. Also it makes sense to use enemy stats anyways since this is how we determine PC damage/status rates/accuracy... against enemy stats, not PC stats. So 3 things speak heavily in favor of it: true to in-game behavior, is fair to those who have good speed but not +4, and is consistent with how we do things elsewhere in the DL. That it 'distorts' the way doubles operate compared to a straight FE-FE fight is a pittance to pay for the benefits mentioned.

Other games are assumed to be "Average" FE speed. FE vs. FE can move the rates up or down accordingly. This interp makes having 'double' and 'doubled' rates very handy. Thanks for including them in FE13's topic!


3. Initiative and speed (in the non-FE sense)

Average speed with threat range tiebreak. Sounds fair.

4. -equal exp vs. fixed level
Equal Exp worries me a bit because you *will* tend to allocate kills smartly... i.e. to raise the power of your entire force. If a high-levelled unit would gain 8 exp but a low levelled one would gain 50, you would logically go with the one who gains 50 exp to improve the overall power of your force by getting stat gains faster. Divvying up kills evenly ignores this calculus, and is trying to be 'fair' to the PCs at the expense of how a logical/normal person plays the game.

So I'm not sure on this. But I definitely think that folks who join low and late should be penalized, since it probably isn't even a winning trade to sacrifice all those kills to pull them up from scratch.

5. evasion

Ever a source of bickering!

Fairest way to do this is to take cast average evade and compare a PC to it. If you have 75% evade and the average is 50%, you are 200% more durable than average due to evasion and hence have '50%' real evasion against an attack that has a 100% hit rate. 50% against a '0' or close to it is the exact same... 200% durability through evade so a 50% dodge rate. This treats evasion like any other durability stat. This interp makes having an average evade rate very handy. Including negatives is fine, so long as those negatives matter in some way (i.e. there are some bad-accuracy enemies who actually miss against it, and just flail helplessly against the dodgy types)

-criticals
I don't feel particular harshness towards criticals. I think Killer Averages are fairest when the Killers are indeed the best bet offensively. I can sort of see scaling them to a 67% chance requirement much like we do for status, but they should still have an average with this scaling in effect. Having a killer damage average is handy for this interp

-switching between classes match-by-match (FE8 and FE13)
Not really feeling this kind of gaming the system. They pick the overall best class.

-laguz interpretations, especially for FE10
They can start transformed at half gauge. Honestly an FE SRPG battle isn't like a single encounter in a TB game. I'm okay with assuming that the fight 'begins' halfway through a map or something so Royals start transformed and Laguz can start shifted.

-excluding people from averages (dancers? FE9 laguz royals? FE10 laguz in general? Specific problem PCs such as Myrrh, Donnel, etc.?)
Dancers aren't in averages. I include FE9/10 Laguz I guess but with the caveat mentioned above. I don't think people understand JUST HOW MUCH untransformed/halfshifted Laguz pull the averages down though. It's a lot, especially Speed.


Other stuff:

-Bosses have their terrain bonuses. I tend to scale them to 3-5 PCs whacking away at them, depending. Maybe more. Definitely feel that average damage should exceed the regen of the boss. Otherwise they are being scaled to a damage average that, well, won't beat them and is hence underlevelled.

- No came appearances sounds right.

- Weapon Triangle is preserved. I don't think I add the effectiveness together if it's FE vs. FE.

- I allow weapon swapping, but I do so for all games regardless.

[Yoshiken]

Counters: Allow them to counter, but not others to counter them. Only against ST attacks that deal damage.
Doubles: Nope.
Speed: Use in-game speed. It's how I make up for the lack of doubles, I guess.

[DjinnAndTonic]

I'm mostly with Pyro and Snow for interps, but I'll summarize. On phone so sorry for gross autocorrect typoes.

1. Counters
Agreeing with pyro on all counts:
I allow FE characters to counter as if they had a 100% counter skill. This applies to things that fall within the envelope of what they would counter in-game (so no ranged counters for melee fighters, and no countering MT/pure status).


2. Doubling
While I agree with pyros and dhyers concept, I don't feel like it reflects my universal views on other games, where preserving mechanics is more important than outcome. Doubling has to look like doubling, not like a damage multiplier. And if the mechanic for that doesn't translate to other games' stats, then it has to be compared to the games' endgame enemies' stats. Now, since this creates an entire cast of doubling whores, I'm willing to agree with Snow and Elf that using the cast average creates a more true to in game spread, so I usually use that view, though I'd prefer to use enemy averages if anyone else actually held that view.


3. Initiative and speed (in the non-FE sense)

Average speed with threat range tiebreak. Sounds fair.  /quote

4. -equal exp vs. fixed level
I waffle on this from game to game. Different leveling systems require different endgame assumptions. I prefer equal exp but there's a lot more assumptions to make there and equal level tends to work out similarly in most cases. I'd prolly just go with equal level for fe and give level bonuses and penalties for late joiners, forced units, and heightened exp rate units. But I'm not picky here.


5. evasion

Ever a source of bickering!

Cast evade vs average evade. Other games tend to have accuracy stats. Fe evade is awesome.

-criticals
See pyro:
I don't feel particular harshness towards criticals. I think Killer Averages are fairest when the Killers are indeed the best bet offensively. I can sort of see scaling them to a 67% chance requirement much like we do for status, but they should still have an average with this scaling in effect. Having a killer damage average is handy for this interp

-switching between classes match-by-match (FE8 and FE13)
In a tournament, they pick one for and stick with it, but they get formchoice for the first match or in any single match battles.

-laguz interpretations, especially for FE10
They start untransformed unless they start with a full gauge ingame or they are half shifters or royals. Olivi grass for everyone, they aren't any different from "consumable" normal fe weapons to me. Laguz stones for those who start with one I waffle on, but lean towards yes. Similar to how I allow dragon stones for manaketes or unique weapons with limited charges for those with a claim to them.

-excluding people from averages (dancers? FE9 laguz royals? FE10 laguz in general? Specific problem PCs such as Myrrh, Donnel, etc.?)
Dancers aren't in averages. I include FE9/10 Laguz half shifted sans royals as full shifted.


Other stuff:

-Bosses have their terrain bonuses. I tend to scale them to 3-5 PCs whacking away at them, depending. Maybe more. Definitely feel that average damage should exceed the regen of the boss. Otherwise they are being scaled to a damage average that, well, won't beat them and is hence underlevelled.

- I'm all for cameo appearances, though not in the averages unless a match is specifically using their cameo form.

- Weapon Triangle is preserved. I don't think I add the effectiveness together if it's FE vs. FE.

- I allow weapon swapping, but I do so for all games regardless.
[/quote]

[Dhyerwolf]

1. Counters

FE characters can counter when they have range supremacy against ST damage attacks (so a 1-2 range mage can counter 1 range only fighter and 2 range only archer). My problem with counters is not that every PC can counter; it's that every enemy can counter. Giving out counters universally is ignoring half the mechanic of in-game; however, PCs that can use range to effectively prevent the enemy from countering in the first place? That's pretty notable and advantage worth repeating. PCs that basically always trigger a counter now instead always getting an advantage from the system is odd. If they float in DL, it's due to some other stat that already has a DL reflection (durability of some sort)

2. Doubling (in the FE sense)

FE characters double and are doubled. This is determined by comparing them to a swath of in game enemies speed, because we don't compare PC to PC stats for anything similar. It's a big more difficult, although either way most will need a stat topic to remember correctly.

Comparing from PC to PC really is a huge warp in so many ways (having +4 above AS be this huge split that does not exist in game at all, making two AS's that really have little difference have a huge distinction, having characters that area not really in danger of being doubled much in game now facing it often in the DL). Not sure what the argument of comparing to enemies is less like in game or FE enemies traditionally give a bad range (I mean...the second part is true. FE enemies on average tend to be horrible because the game throws so many at you and permadeath. But it's still the in game range they are facing. If in game casts at endgame look like doubling whores, it's because they are!)

4. Other (optional)

Anything else you want to weigh in on is fine, such as:
-equal exp vs. fixed level- I mean...equal exp is really more "equal actions" taken that equal EXP I think? I guess we've been using the wrong terminology.

-evasion- Scaled against cast average is what I'm guessing this meant to ask (FE evade is awesome and gets many things). There are cases where evasion can go somewhat unscaled to me, but a pure stat based evasion is not one of them. And especially when you have cast averages of 50% plus in some cases. It's a measure of durability where being a bad evader (which is some FEs can still be evading 35% of the time) means you are on the low durability side of that curve. Take it another way...S1 Luc's defense cuts physicals by 117. We don't take durability measures without scaling them to other PCs.

-criticals- Halve the rates (putting them to higher activation level is also a way). A lot of time crits/skills are not as useful as the rates suggest (either good enemies are extra resistance or a majority of enemies don't need it)

-switching between classes match-by-match (FE8 and FE13)- No FE 13. Does anyone in FE 8 care?

-laguz interpretations, especially for FE10- Start with 15 on the gauge and Olivi Grass. If you are using them, they will be transformed before getting into trouble generally, but may have more mid-battle issues (barring some specific items). They have a few turns to attack to me pretty much, but hate healers

-excluding people from averages (dancers? FE9 laguz royals? FE10 laguz in general? Specific problem PCs such as Myrrh, Donnel, etc.?)- Dancers out. Anyone else is in. Half-shift for laguz (I agree that the no-shift effect on average is insane, and if I was viewing things that way, a PC that could not attack for 2 turns due to translation technicality is not someone I would think should be considered anyways. Not a balanced comparison).

[Dark Holy Elf]

-switching between classes match-by-match (FE8 and FE13)- No FE 13. Does anyone in FE 8 care?

If you take FE8 at fixed level then Swordmaster vs. Assassin is a point of caring (and has come up in the past), better stats vs. instant death option. A few mages would sometimes want certain damage types (L'Arachel most obviously, since it's a strict either/or). Generally speaking though, there isn't much caring.

I do rather like your thoughts about criticals/activations.

[Dhyerwolf]

Oh right, duh. Forgot about the equal level for who it does make a difference (Well, there is certainly a strong case for "Equal EXP").

[AndrewRogue]

1. Counters

No counters, unless granted by something extraordinary.

2. Doubling (in the FE sense)

FEers double, but are not doubled. To judge if they double... I dunno, create some sort of continuum of all character speeds and use that to determine a new average and judge from there. Or something.


3. Initiative and speed (in the non-FE senseAll average speed, tiebreaks by threat range.t them.

4. Other (optional)

-switching between classes match-by-match (FE8 and FE13)

Pick a form, stick to it.

-excluding people from averages (dancers? FE9 laguz royals? FE10 laguz in general? Specific problem PCs such as Myrrh, Donnel, etc.?)

Non-attackers, odd outliers (Myrrh) excluded.

[VySaika]

Counters: I see FE chars countering, but not being countered unless the opponent has a counter ability of thier own. It's a property of the dueler to me. They counter anything that's single target, and in their attack range. So FE chars with range 1 weapons don't counter even ST magic, since I assume the mage moves to FE range 2 before lobbing it, etc. FE Archers ONLY counter other ranged attacks, again I assume magic can be done at range 1-2, so the attacker will pick the more favorable range to dodge the counter.

Doubling: I allow FE chars to double opponents who are enough slower, but not to be doubled. Again, property of the dueler. For what metric I use for it...generally I eyeball it, I'll admit it's hardly exact. A char with high FE speed(see: Matthew) will double even average speed opponents, while slower ones need slower opponents, etc. I pretty much just look it up and make a judgement call based on the match, erring on the side of "not getting doubled" when I'm unsure.

Initiative: I take movement/attack range into account for 1st turn speed, but all FE chars are average CTB speed afterwards.

Other stuff: Nothing really to comment on here, though I do exclude anyone who can't fight from the averages.