• Post New Message
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Fate / Grand Order
  3. Chaldea Welcome Brochure - New Masters, come here!

User Info: x Shadow

x Shadow
7 months ago#41
MrSmokestack posted...
Siegfried has better long term value than Heracles. He also has much better short term value considering you don't need to spend 6 months getting him to Bond 10 first.


I'm not seeing it. How does "AOE buster dragon nuker that's exceeded in most common farming situations by various low rarities" better than "best anchor in the game"? FYI Heracles works fine as a frontliner. On my old NA account I used him exactly as such throughout much of the storyline, and continued using him as an agnostic nuker after I got a scope.

This to me just seems like a large divide between aims and personal opinions, and the arguments here are really failing to convince me that Siegfried is a better pick.
"I raised that boy"
https://youtu.be/EfiSTYBfYvk?t=173
(edited 7 months ago)

User Info: x Shadow

x Shadow
7 months ago#42
And really I wouldn't even care about this normally but it's been bugging me because this is going to be a guide that newer players see and instead of presenting a balanced viewpoint as to what Herc does lategame, what he'll struggle with early game, etc... you're just like "yeah he sucks pick Siegfried" essentially....
"I raised that boy"
https://youtu.be/EfiSTYBfYvk?t=173

User Info: Zilong17

Zilong17
7 months ago#43
If you're using a taunter anyway.....


No one said he isn't. I'm advocating that Siegfried is better due to having better NP gen, more Arts cards and being able to NP more often due to that as well as his NP gen buffs and Merlin synergy. I'm not "zeroing in" on a fight that I wasn't even the one to bring up, I'm following the conversation and responding to statements about that fight in the first place, you have somehow transposed "Siegfred > Boobtoria therefore always > Herc," when that was never the topic, or even close to it.

This entire paragraph has no relevance. Why are we even mentioning an NP3 Siegfried in passing? If you're just specifically excluding a saber support for this one specific fight that you like to fight a certain way, for no reason, I'm really trying hard to understand what your actual point is. One dragon lancer fight doesn't make a character you're stuck with better.


You stated it wasn't unfeasible to build Siegfried up to the point he could one-shot Artoria. I knew the number for an unbuffed NP3 Siegfried so I stated it as a point of comparison. If that's the performance of an NP3 Siegfried with zero support, I imagine an NP1 Siegfried with their strengthenings and proper support would do just fine (I've seen a sub-optimal Siegfried hit for 525k on Boobtoria as a second point of comparison).

Because it was one of your initial points of comparison in your opening post.


There is no reference to Camelot at all (story quality aside) before post 19, let alone my opening.

You seem to be specifically guiding players to the playstyle that you like. There seems to be a distinct divide between pragmatism and whatever this advice is.


I literally advocated that players consider Parvati over Sieg and encouraged double Skadi, a play style I distinctly dislike and have stated repeatedly I do not employ. If I were encouraging players to play "my way" I'd say to use Emiya and I wouldn't acknowledge Parvati exists.

On what? They're not going to be eyes bloodshot, staring at their NP bar and noticing that they're gaining 4 instead of 3% NP. Nor do they encounter dragons till a bit later anyway.


Dragons are literally in the second chapter of the game.

Herc eases people in better, and teaches them the value of taunters, if anything, while Siegfried teaches another aspect of gameplay. He's not superior because his kit is slightly more complex. I wouldn't call him a min-maxed starter choice by far. What you should be teaching is that low rarity units (supposing the player in question wants to be self sufficient) eclipse most of these anyway.


If only there was a section about the low rarity units and how over a dozen of them are too good for the guide to go into and that players should check out the detailed reviews on these units.....

Who is "everyone"? We're talking about a fresh player. They're looking at your guide. Why are you assuming their mental state? Frankly, objectively Herc still is a top tier unit. He does what he does better than anyone else


By that logic Medea Lily is top tier due to her excessive overhealing because no one party heals as well as she does. Herc is the best anchor, but an anchor unit isn't inherently good to have, and he isn't even necessarily the best anchor now that QSH exists anyway. Further, the gimmick that makes Herc high tier isn't even available for a player for 6-8 months. By the time they have that gimmick, it is not nearly as useful or clutch as it would have been in the past IMO, and the guide is written that way. If you take umbrage with that, feel free to write your tutorial, and let the board decide which they like.
"I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength in futility and vanity; yet my vindication is with the LORD, and my reward is with my God." Isa 49:4
(edited 7 months ago)

User Info: x Shadow

x Shadow
7 months ago#44
Zilong17 posted...
No one said he isn't. I'm advocating that Siegfried is better due to having better NP gen, more Arts cards and being able to NP more often due to that as well as his NP gen buffs and Merlin synergy. I'm not "zeroing in" on a fight that I wasn't even the one to bring up, I'm following the conversation and responding to statements about that fight in the first place, you have somehow transposed "Siegfred > Boobtoria therefore always > Herc," when that was never the topic, or even close to it.


Actually you're right, sorry. That wasn't part of your opening post, that was a followup post by you. It just seemed like some big reason as to why you picked one over the other so that's why I'm zeroing in on it either way. That being said I'm not sure how your first sentence here does anything but points out playstyle differences between them. They're both buster units, and Herc has a lot more attack to work with for killing things faster. He just requires more protection doing it. That doesn't make Siegfried better.

Zilong17 posted...
You stated it wasn't unfeasible to build Siegfried up to the point he could one-shot Artoria.


Like I said I misinterpreted where this post was so I'm going to stop talking about Camelot in general, it seems pointless. Oneshotting Lartoria is cool (though I still doubt it'll happen) but not something you pick a starter for.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMgpJWgM5FQ

Zilong17 posted...
Dragons are literally in the second chapter of the game.


And are you picking a starter just for those dragons? They're not in the first chapter.

Zilong17 posted...
If only there was a section about the low rarity units and how over a dozen of them are too good for the guide to go into and that players should check out the detailed reviews on these units.....


The problem is that starter choices should be made with these lower rarity units in mind in the first place, which is kind of my point. The only one that can anchor is Cu, but he can't anchor like Herc can. There are plenty of units to AOE with.

Zilong17 posted...
By that logic Medea Lily is top tier due to her excessive overhealing because no one party heals as well as she does. Herc is the best anchor, but an anchor unit isn't inherently good to have, and he isn't even necessarily the best anchor now that QSH exists anyway. Further, the gimmick that makes Herc high tier isn't even available for a player for 6-8 months. By the time they have that gimmick, it is not nearly as useful or clutch as it would have been in the past IMO, and the guide is written that way. If you take umbrage with that, feel free to write your tutorial, and let the board decide which they like.


No it's not "by that logic". The very team composition guide that you're linking within this guide directly contradicts you by saying that the anchor slot is slot 6, and pointing out that Herc is a great starter pick because he's unmatched in this slot. Honestly as a newer player it took me months to get up and running anyway. None of this will happen fast. Are you investing in a niche AOE killer, or are you investing in a unit that is the best pick for his party slot?
"I raised that boy"
https://youtu.be/EfiSTYBfYvk?t=173
(edited 7 months ago)

User Info: Zilong17

Zilong17
7 months ago#45
Actually you're right, sorry. That wasn't part of your opening post, that was a followup post by you. It just seemed like some big reason as to why you picked one over the other so that's why I'm zeroing in on it either way. That being said I'm not sure how your first sentence here does anything but points out playstyle differences between them. They're both buster units, and Herc has a lot more attack to work with for killing things faster. He just requires more protection doing it. That doesn't make Siegfried better.


Camelot is next to irrelevant to why I picked Siegfried; I specified why I picked him in multiple posts, and Kanz/Smoke shared their own thoughts on it as well.

And are you picking a starter just for those dragons? They're not in the first chapter.


Of course not. But they're far from "encountered much later," you can literally run into a dragon the first day playing the game, and it isn't a very rare niche or uncommon enemy type in the game in general either.

The problem is that starter choices should be made with these lower rarity units in mind in the first place, which is kind of my point. The only one that can anchor is Cu, but he can't anchor like Herc can. There are plenty of units to AOE with.


Not really. All the bronze units deserve to be leveled and do the same thing, the starter is the most irrelevant part of the entire thing. Euryale is better than any starter for boss killing, Robin Hood is better for nuking, Cu is better than any of them for anchoring (outside 6+ months investment into Herc), Hans/George/Leo are unquestionably good units no matter your starter or team at all, and aside from from a taunter with one of the zerkers and George/Siegfried there's no particular synergy between the gold starters and the bronze units to mention.

No it's not "by that logic". The very team composition guide that you're linking within this guide directly contradicts you by saying that the anchor slot is slot 6, and pointing out that Herc is a great starter pick because he's unmatched in this slot. Honestly as a newer player it took me months to get up and running anyway. None of this will happen fast. Are you investing in a niche AOE killer, or are you investing in a unit that is the best pick for his party slot?


That is why I specified repeatedly what my criteria were. I often speak out against the need for an anchor unit, but if you only want the best anchor unit yeah, go for Herc; everyone knows that, including half the new player topics I've seen in the past three years; I sourced agtady's guide for the full list of its content even if I disagreed with some of the things in it. But if you want to "learn to FGO," pick one of the others. A new JP player is "up and running" within a few weeks depending on an event due to the new mat rewards, and I can think of multiple JP players with and without starters who had solid line-ups ready to go inside 2 months before that system was put in place anyway.

And yes, I'd rather have Siegfried over Herc for reasons that have been stated laboriously already.
"I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength in futility and vanity; yet my vindication is with the LORD, and my reward is with my God." Isa 49:4

User Info: x Shadow

x Shadow
7 months ago#46
Zilong17 posted...
That is why I specified repeatedly what my criteria were. I often speak out against the need for an anchor unit, but if you only want the best anchor unit yeah, go for Herc; everyone knows that, including half the new player topics I've seen in the past three years; I sourced agtady's guide for the full list of its content even if I disagreed with some of the things in it. But if you want to "learn to FGO," pick one of the others. A new JP player is "up and running" within a few weeks depending on an event due to the new mat rewards, and I can think of multiple JP players with and without starters who had solid line-ups ready to go inside 2 months before that system was put in place anyway.


I don't think current FGO JP content is fair to discuss when looking at NA's state. FGO JP is basically s***ting out quartz and materials for newbies because (I guess) they finally realized that they were getting left behind and maybe their player growth rates showed a downward trend. I have no concrete idea why.

Either way, I'm just looking at this guide in a vacuum. I don't think Herc was presented fairly in that section. That's all. Your evaluation on him was dependent upon users having outside information that you assumed they had, even though this is a guide for new players.

Zilong17 posted...
Not really. All the bronze units deserve to be leveled and do the same thing, the starter is the most irrelevant part of the entire thing. Euryale is better than any starter for boss killing, Robin Hood is better for nuking, Cu is better than any of them for anchoring (outside 6+ months investment into Herc), Hans/George/Leo are unquestionably good units no matter your starter or team at all, and aside from from a taunter with one of the zerkers and George/Siegfried there's no particular synergy between the gold starters and the bronze units to mention.


Right and really I don't see any point to pick any one of these starters as an "end all" for gameplay tutorials when you should be raising lower rarities if you want to be self sufficient anyway... because even with his niche against dragons, Siegfried isn't exactly a powerhouse killer when you take Merlin out of the equation (which in any forced story support encounters, you will). Herc deals a lot of damage even without outside support.

Really I was just arguing with how you portrayed him in that one paragraph in the opening post. That's all.
"I raised that boy"
https://youtu.be/EfiSTYBfYvk?t=173

User Info: Zilong17

Zilong17
7 months ago#47
x Shadow posted...
Either way, I'm just looking at this guide in a vacuum. I don't think Herc was presented fairly in that section. That's all. Your evaluation on him was dependent upon users having outside information that you assumed they had, even though this is a guide for new players.


My evaluation of him was "He deals overkill levels of damage in the early game and takes months to be late-game good, so I don't like him as a starter." That's the long and short of it. I've made no secret that I don't particularly endorse Herc and that's why I sought out the opinion of two other people that are well-versed in advising new players (and have run 4 successful 500 topics doing so), and built that particular section based off of their recommendations. Herc was practically a nonfactor in both discussions which were independent of the other.

If you want to write an expose on why Herc is good for it, go right ahead; it doesn't bother me. I'm sure the readers and players can decide for themselves where they fall. But I won't be doing it for reasons I've beaten to death already.
"I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength in futility and vanity; yet my vindication is with the LORD, and my reward is with my God." Isa 49:4
(edited 7 months ago)

User Info: x Shadow

x Shadow
7 months ago#48
Zilong17 posted...
x Shadow posted...
Either way, I'm just looking at this guide in a vacuum. I don't think Herc was presented fairly in that section. That's all. Your evaluation on him was dependent upon users having outside information that you assumed they had, even though this is a guide for new players.


My evaluation of him was "He deals overkill levels of damage in the early game and takes months to be late-game good, so I don't like him as a starter." That's the long and short of it. I've made no secret that I don't particularly endorse Herc and that's why I sought out the opinion of two other people that are well-versed in advising new players (and have run 4 successful 500 topics doing so), and built that particular section based off of their recommendations. Herc was practically a nonfactor in both discussions which were independent of the other.

If you want to write an expose on why Herc is good for it, go right ahead; it doesn't bother me. I'm sure the readers and players can decide for themselves where they fall. But I won't be doing it for reasons I've beaten to death already.


I didn't really ask for an expose, just a few more sentences to his good points than what you have up there. I can't really comment on those topics since I don't think I can even see some or many of them, but just mentioning "cheese solution" and Heracles as one of your few mentions of him is a bit disingenuous I think. I can just imagine the question marks floating above peoples' heads from that sentence as it's vague and doesn't particularly list out your points against him, nor brings up any points for him. Just saying "he is the (or one of the) best late game anchors in the game, but [and insert your reasoning here]" would be way more fair and balanced than what you have up there, and isn't particularly any longer in length... your current paragraph is structured more to defend you from board regulars than actually give new players any useful information.
"I raised that boy"
https://youtu.be/EfiSTYBfYvk?t=173
(edited 7 months ago)

User Info: MrSmokestack

MrSmokestack
7 months ago#49
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

Herc isn't a good starter. When you asked why, it was explained. He's really not that good enough to warrant further mention.
DID YOU KNOW THAT NINETY-SEVEN PERCENT OF ALL LIVING THINGS ON PANDORA AREN'T EXPLODING RIGHT NOW? THAT'S BULLS***, BUY TORGUE! -Mr. Torgue

User Info: x Shadow

x Shadow
7 months ago#50
MrSmokestack posted...
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

Herc isn't a good starter. When you asked why, it was explained. He's really not that good enough to warrant further mention.


Uh what? I'm not sure how you're misunderstanding this. He gave me reasons why he thought Herc wasn't a good starter for new players. I disagreed with it but ultimately decided that it was his guide and so he could value a unit higher if he wanted. But saying Herc is "really not that good" to warrant at least a balanced (but brief) representation of his strengths and weaknesses... that's a bit misleading to a truly new player, in my opinion. Because he is that good. Just arguably not as good as a starter/tutorial unit.

On the other hand if you want to sit here and actually debate Herc's usefulness, battle by battle throughout story nodes and event nodes that they'll encounter, that's not something I'm going to bother with because you're obviously not doing so either.
"I raised that boy"
https://youtu.be/EfiSTYBfYvk?t=173
(edited 7 months ago)
  1. Boards
  2. Fate / Grand Order
  3. Chaldea Welcome Brochure - New Masters, come here!
  • Post New Message

GameFAQs Q&A