Regarding GamePress Character Guides

One of my irregular forays into the strategy section.

What’s the forum’s opinion on the character guides that have come out recently?

Because I have some pretty severe criticisms about the guides for the spring banner.

Narcian and Est guides are late, and the Est guide has especially little in the way of excuses because what are you going to do with her other than mirror impact + mystic boost or all-in glass cannon builds?

Bartre: first of all, disappointing that they didn’t include steady breath + spiral + ignis because it’s a pretty solid answer to the spd inflation in swords that have variations of null follow-up and it’s pretty good against sturdy impact and other forced undoubles while still being able to blow up bold fighters before the enemy’s ignis comes in.

But when they’re going for a spiral + bonfire build, shouldn’t they at least execute it correctly? Sturdy impact should be the default choice, not death blow, because sturdy impact hits for more damage. Plus, they should have gone for the def refine because it produces as much damage on the bonfire as an atk refine while also providing defensive benefits. And they should almost certainly have gone for the brave sword, because 61-67 atk is certainly enough to make you forget that a brave sword has 8mt.

On their budget tank build, why is the A-slot a stance and the seal a bond? On enemy phase with this kind of unit you go double bond if you use any bond, otherwise you take all stances for independence. Atk/def bond is grail-available. Plus, there should be a suggestion for a spd bond (probably spd/def bond seal) to get his spd up into the 30s to natural double slow units once he uses up his QR on some fast unit that doubles and specials him. This kind of statline with such high atk is good for fighting other slow units.

Also, not saying they should have recommended this, but I figure it’s probably a good idea to have an extra anti-Surtr for AA and this one will kill any Surtr even if the bastard is on a defense tile

And what’s this about Fir’s bulk being too weak? The build below works on +spd or on +def, and it might even work on heavy blade galeforce with merges. It does depend on flier buffs to get her spd up when it’s insufficient, but that’s what flier mobility is for. And it works even without merges.

The only page I’m not really criticizing is dracoduo, and that unit kind of builds itself.


I never really read them, but I do know one of my favorite is Oliver’s.
“ We have all been truly blessed as Fire Emblem Heroes players as Oliver has decided to allow us to bask in his glorious and overwhelming beauty.”


Reads Amelia’s guide page

"Amelia is great in general"



Was Rath the name of the Sue’s son? That one was pretty funny too.


This is backwards.


Ok yes that’s the guide I had in mind.


i think most of us here have long stopped paying attention to gamepress builds themselves. i can only shudder at how much fodder has been wasted by people who looked at their builds over the years and took them as anything close to gospel. honestly, i think it would be better to just remove the builds entirely. i would say they are kind of a joke, but it’s more confusing than funny.

tier list placings, on the other hand, that shit is serious business. :face_with_hand_over_mouth:


IntSys: adds a mage unit with good Atk and Spd that doesn’t have a prf

1 Like

Tbh this part isn’t all that bad, but recommending DC for every swordfighter (even those with no res stat to speak of, like OG Marisa)… Gods, noob me almost made a huge mistake back then.

1 Like

I fell for that, my Marth has DC :feh_lucyshrug:(i still use it tho) but yeah some suggested build don’t utilize the full potential of units. When i started playing i thought that those build were like the best you could possibly do with said units


Yeah, same. I used to see the star and “recommended” above the build and think that was truly the optimal build for said unit.
Now I’ve learned how to build units myself, but I remember thinking DC was optimal for literally every melee unit and getting mad that I could never summon a Hector for it.
I’m glad I didn’t manage to summon him at all back then, otherwise the staggering amount of dead Hectors for dumb builds in bad units would haunt me to this day.


I never read them anymore, and for a reason

Whoever writes them just goes

DC. That’s it. Like why is there a L!Marth build with guard 3 on it??? Why have I never seen a rouse or oath skill on anything.

Ah well I don’t use them because the usually aren’t great. Sometimes they’re useful but most of the time, nope. Just a general idea if it’s a super old unit I’ve never used before and even then, I haven’t done that in months


Tell me more


This build is actually big brain
Whoever made this is actually a genius
You can put LnD 4 now on it for even more power


Not reading the GP stuff, but your take on with builds was interessting to read
Sadly the “Which IV” threads are dead, but now I know why I read and liked them


Yeah I always find gamepress character guides not that good. It’s okayish for new players but their advices often aren’t all that relevant.
Just like tier list! :feh_rein:


Turns out keeping over 500 character pages updated is a lot of work :feh_legion:
So yeah, the quality isn’t going to be the best.
At this point maybe they could ask for build recommendations from the community to put on many of the older pages? Since the writers are probably working on other things and there are loads of capable people here. :thinking:


Except they’re not jokes, at least most of the ones I’ve seen. A lot of them are reasonable at least in concept and in more than half the execution, and in the rest they don’t miss by a mile but the precision is not quite there. People are offering examples of some pretty wacky stuff but I think some of it is just outdated (ex: guard 3 on L.Marth). Maybe some of it really is just bad, but I get the sense people are remembering all the quacky stuff and ignoring a lot of work which I find at least passable.

Maybe we should suggest that GP make “last updated” info more prominent on pages containing advice and include in small text a note that offers a general sense of how long information needs to go semi-obsolete or mostly obsolete with a link to a page looking more into that. There are a lot of out-of-date character pages with builds that really shouldn’t be recommended today.

@nobody625 yes that defnitely used to be a problem, partly because DC/CC used to be the only 300SP A-skills. Some of us still remember the days when people would see Alondite+DC or Leiptr+DC in the arena just to inflate score. This is one issue that IS actually did fix. Nowadays you will still see DC recommenations on some units which will make a lot of people go ?!? such as F.Byleth but usually pulse smoke will also be on the build and it’s intended to be an omnitank build supported by mythic blessings and tons of investment.

@TeaTime I tend to cut the writers some slack because what exactly are you supposed to do knowing that some people are just going to look at the build, not read the explanation, and start copy-pasting with little to no understanding of whether that’s good for their goals or their barracks or if they’re even using the build for the correct purpose and supporting properly (ex: AR omnitank builds)? It’s really hard if not impossible to write simultaneously for people who have a sense of what’s going on and could build the unit unassisted if they really needed to (but maybe not as well) and for people who are going to copy-paste mindlessly.

When I applied for the writer position about half a year ago something along those lines actually came up as a point of disagreement between me and my potential employer

I didn’t really believe in one or two theoretical best builds for a unit because I considered theoretical optimal highly dependent on function (ex: PvE? AR? Arena back when we were still trying for 4 kills with bonus unit? RS? You might need at least three completely different builds for a non-support unit or multipurpose units) and several variations of the build might be equally theoretically optimal or indistinguishably close. Even if theoretical optimal exists, a minimally relevant concept because in practice something like 99% of the playerbase is non-whale which means optimal also depends on their goals in the game, availability of fodder, and who else in the barracks is already built to do what, and that’s the part where I said “the guide should written to target the situation in which the player finds himself/herself, not to be abstract theory.” I wanted to write in a way that would have been more helpful to people who really don’t know what they’re doing, but it wasn’t the vision that leadership at that time had for the site. At the time I thought it was just a difference of philosophy, but now that I look at the big picture a bit more, I think both site and readership are simply the worse for it and ergo it’s simply a mistake.

Except I’m criticizing builds they posted this week (or haven’t posted this week) and they do have a section for the community to offer their builds. Maybe they should implement a system for registered users to upvote and downvote builds not from GP writers, especially if you offer an explanation? It would sure keep people occupied whenever they were bored.


To be fair to the writers, most of the issue isn’t that the builds are bad necessarily - at least half of the issues are due to fact (as you pointed out) that many (most?) of the builds are noticeably outdated, leaving them up makes things more confusing than anything else.

To be more charitable to the writers, a lot of the remaining issues are likely due to the fact that there are multiple people making build recommendations without a uniform standard, which makes advice inconsistent across units that are really quite similar in statline/prfs. Some units have an AR specific plug, others don’t, etc, well past the point of double standards, or even quintuple.

My two cents: this isn’t a game that lends itself to unique character builds like a typical rpg with a detailed class system. What would be far more informative to people most likely to be using them as a guide would be detailed skill descriptions - when you would want to use it, what modes you would tend to want it for, which character roles, statlines suited, etc.

Just as importantly, it would scale ~100x better than what we have now with 500+ characters and increasing. The current system will only get worse and worse.