Jump to content

Ertrick36

Member
  • Content Count

    2738
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ertrick36

  • Rank
    Creepity Creep
  • Birthday 03/28/1995

Profile Information

  • Pronouns
    He/Him
  • Interests
    Wide range of games (e.g. Metal Gear, FE, Sims, The Legend of Zelda, Fallout), politics and themes in creative works, music, lets-plays/streams, friendly discussions, bad hacks or bootleg games, oddities, and sometimes discussions about PC hardware might peak my interests.
  • Location
    Zanzibar Island, 5 PM

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Fire Emblem Game
    Three Houses

Member Badge

  • Members
    Oboro (FE World)

Allegiance

  • I fight for...
    Archanea

Recent Profile Visitors

7646 profile views
  1. Tiers from favorite to least favorite (characters within the tiers aren't listed in any particular order). The Big Three 'Boro, Takumeme, Smolzu The Grand Council Velouria, Forrest, Flora, Keaton, Laslow, Leo, Charlotte, Midori, Mitama, Sakura, Reina, Kaze, Saizo, Selena, Kaden, Selkie, Hinata, Benny, Shiro The Conscripts Camilla, Hana, Soleil, Nina, Odin, Caeldori, Rhajat, Siegbert, Percy, Rinkah, Peri, Jakob, Silas, Sophie, Felicia, Beruka, Azama, Arthur, Dwyer, Gunter, Orochi, Hans, Lilith, Yukimura, Hinoka, Ignatius, Kiragi, Nyx, Ophelia, Ryoma, Mikoto, Sumeragi, Zola, Arete, Elise, Shigure, Kagero, Scarlet The Convicts Corn, Asugi, Xander, Kana, Azure, Effie, Hayato, Setsuna, Subaki (only because he's always a terrible unit whenever I use him), Anna, Hisame, Niles, Groan, Anankos, Iago What surprised me is how definitive a lot of my opinions were. Obviously the "Big Three" were characters I absolutely loved, but among the "Grand Council" I can't think of anything major that makes me reticent to place them there, and for the "Convicts" I had some fairly definitive misgivings about them. What didn't surprise me, though, is how many I put into the "Conscripts" part (which is basically for characters I have indifferent or mixed opinions on). In a way I'd say it's almost worse to be in this section than the one immediately below because at least I remember the characters I have a strong dislike for. Half the time while looking through this section I was forgetting the names of the characters I was judging. But this goes to show the issue with pursuing quantity over quality in this case - you'll get a few great or moderately likable characters and you'll get a handful of detestable characters, but more than anything else you'll just get characters to forget about. If you were to contrast this to my opinions on Three Houses characters, and very likely I'm probably not gonna put very many of the playable cast into the "Conscripts" section. There are roughly thirty fewer playable characters in that game than in Fates, and because of that the writers are able to put more care and effort into making them all more distinguishable than just random quirks that nobody cares about. Even if this will at times make some characters almost detestable, at least we can actually have strong opinions on them instead of just tossing them aside. Also, for the record, I would also list the two genders of Corrin and Kana as separate characters, but while I will say that I like female Corrin slightly more than male Corrin (partly because of design, partly because the few supports that are different between the two I prefer the female ones over the male ones), I ultimately dislike them all too much to place them any higher than I have them. And I wish I could've put 20 in the "Grand Council", but I just couldn't justify putting anyone else up there.
  2. I believe it's a different Merchant class because the Merchant class in the base game has nowhere near the stat caps that Apotheosis Anna has. The skills are in the game, but not the specific class with the stat caps, textures, or models. With this said... I was fiddling around a lot today with the files and I figured out a way to kinda port Apotheosis Anna into the base game, both cosmetics and stats. You can't simply just take the DLC Merchant class and put it into the base game, but you can just change the base game Merchant's stats to match the DLC's version's stats and then make it Anna's base class and her reclass option (also would recommend giving Anna the skills in Paragon). In terms of the model and textures, it was kind of a convoluted process, but I basically extracted the DLC files and replaced some base-game files with the DLC files (not all the DLC files, of course, because that'd probably screw with the game). Technically it's not the same class, but following the steps I went through (which I could explain more in-depth if people want me to) you basically recreated Apotheosis Anna. EDIT: I should add that this site isn't all that great a place to discuss 3DS rom hacking. From what I've seen there's not a whole lot of activity here in that regard, and the activity that does exist comes from people inexperienced with rom hacking. There are a couple of hubs I can think of where more discussion happens. You can go to Gamebanana (find the Fire Emblem Awakening or Fire Emblem Fates pages) to find active, skilled hackers, and go to GBATemp to have a general discussion about hacking the games. And just to clarify on my point about the Merchant classes being different... I actually did test throwing in a Merchant Anna as a player unit (completely vanilla, btw) and loaded up Apotheosis. My hypothesis was that because the classes had the same names for their meshes and textures that if I brought a Merchant from the base game into the DLC that her class would be temporarily modified to the Apotheosis Merchant's class. Her class model did change, but the max stats remained the same, so I would conclude that while they're similar and depend on same-named files, they're distinctly different classes. I spent basically a day figuring all this stuff out, lmao. An actually experienced modder probably would've known immediately, but I will say that it would've taken me longer if not for Citra's awesome system for modding games.
  3. I'm unaware of any hacks specifically for this (Gamebanana and GBATemp are the sites to browse for 3DS FE hacks, maybe there are other sites but I am unaware of them), and there was a discussion on this matter, like, five years ago here. That was a while ago, but I doubt it's much easier now than it was back then to do something like that. It'd involve acquiring the DLC data and transferring the data you need into Awakening proper (which is probably a lot more complicated than it sounds). You can't just simply edit the Gamedata.bin file to add an Anna with DLC properties.
  4. I was gonna say, I could do this in, like, five minutes with Paragon. Even if you didn't have all the files ready, it'd be maybe 10 minutes or so to extract the files from the ROM, another 5 to get Paragon, and then you just open up the program and find the single line of dialogue to change. Recompile however you need to and voila, the game has a minor change that is apparently worth "hundreds of dollars".
  5. On the basis of "knowing what will happen", I'd point to historical stories. You know the broad strokes of how things will end, but it's the observation of how things get to that point, as well as maybe some of the smaller twists they throw in, that make it compelling. I'll also point to Fire Emblem Blazing Sword/FE7. We know that at least two of the three protagonists survive after the end of the story and go on to have children, but we know little of the actual struggles they suffered through or exactly how they may have came to prominence (apart from noble inheritance). They also weren't afraid of stepping outside of what was previously known, having established the entirely new faction of the Black Fangs as well as the morphs (I don't recall either being in Binding Blade, anyway). They even made a new protagonist altogether with a somewhat substantial place in the world. I think with movies (and some games) it's more a greater problem with the people in the positions of power that enable them to decide what to make, not with prequels themselves. I'm inclined to believe you can make just about anything into a compelling story if you have the chops for it. Problem is, a lot of people in charge of high budget movies or AAA games - the executives, middle management, directors, and the like - end up getting their positions not because they're actually good at their jobs, but either through founding their own studios (e.g. Jeff Bezos founding his own TV show production studio) or by getting in the good graces of higher ranking members of the industry. This kind of environment breeds deteriorating media quality, as the top ranks of companies end up being made up of yes men and moguls inexperienced with writing instead of people who actually challenge the higher ups or people with the actual experience needed to carry their jobs. Obviously this isn't always true. Also, often times in high budget media the idea for creating a prequel comes from creative bankruptcy, which from the onset basically sets these prequels up for failure. It's generally a safe assumption that the reason a prequel is bad is because they ran out of ideas. You can point to specific things like trying to stay too faithful or knowing in advance how the story will end, but those issues result from a writer's incapability to work within the confines of firmly established lore and events and a lack of creativity. Overall, I think a prequel's success or failure stems solely from the skill and experience of the teams involved, most notably the executives, the middle management, and the directors because management and direction often make or break a project. It isn't a symptom of a prequel being a "bad idea", though there is a very good reason why it's so often that prequels end up bad, which is that too many in entertainment fall back on prequels when they run out of ideas. This applies to any form of media, btw.
  6. There's a very easy way to install mods for the games you play on Citra emulator (at least on PC, I'm not sure how it's done on other devices). There will be two methods for modding the game that'll depend on if you already have mods installed or not, but both will require you to access the mods folder. So first you'll want to open Citra. If you haven't, make sure you link to the directory Fates is located (I can provide advice for this if you don't know how to do it). From the Citra menu, right-click on Fates then select "Open Mods Location". Since you are lost on this I'll assume that the folder you'll be taken to will be completely empty. You'll want to create a new folder here called "romfs". Then inside that folder you'll want to place either the folders contained in "Felicia-Jakob Swap" or "No Swap" (depending on whether you want Felicia to appear for female avatar and Jakob to appear for male avatar, or you just want that aspect to stay as vanilla). For either of these folders, it'll be two folders - "GameData" and "m". Just transfer these as-is into the romfs folder you created. I'll add, however, that the modder also expected the user to have other hacks installed. If you want this mod to run in conjunction with the mods you already have installed (and they change the files contained in this mod), then you'll need to install those mods into the mod folder I told you how to reach (again, under the romfs folder I told you to create, unless the mods come as a romfs folder in which case you merge the two) and then apply the IPS patches as the readme instructed. You'll need BatchLZ77 and Lunar IPS to do this - you can easily find both yourself with a quick Google search. In this case, do not copy over any files within the "Felicia-Jakob Swap" or "No Swap" folders, because they'll overwrite the mods you have installed. To give a quick run down: Open your Citra emulator Right-click on Fire Emblem Fates (whatever version you have) from the Citra menu Select "Open Mod Location" Inside the folder that opens, create a folder named "romfs" (without the quotations) If installing into a fresh game (that is, no other hacks had been installed), transfer the contents of either the "Felicia-Jakob Swap" or "No Swap" folders into this romfs folder you've created - do not transfer the contents of both, just one If there are other mods installed, first reinstall those mods into the romfs folder you created in the mod location Find both Lunar IPS and BatchLZ77 on the internet If any of your other mods changes the files within the directory romfs>GameData>Person (specifically the files with "HANDOVER" in their names) then decompress those files with BatchLZ77, apply the Lunar IPS patches to the corresponding files, and then recompress the files and delete the leftover trash files (that is, whatever files were created when you decompressed - don't delete the newly patched files) If any of your other mods changes the "GameData.bin.lz" file contained within romfs>GameData, then you'll want to do the same as you would with those handover files - decompress, IPS patch the "FloraEarlyGameData" patch onto GameData.bin.lz, recompress, delete trash files, and there you have it Also, try playing the game without any modifications installed. If it doesn't work, then the issue is the ROM is encrypted and needs to be decrypted to play.
  7. AFAIK Thracia 776 is the first place to actually mention it. I don't ever recall it being mentioned in Genealogy - and trust me, I was pretty thorough in reading up the script of the game - and they definitely didn't even talk about it in the earlier games. In Mystery of the Emblem you did have male pegasus knights as enemies, and in earlier games it was kind of ambiguous since... well, there's only so much you can show with NES graphics. The only other time there were male pegasus knights, and the only time they were actually even playable, was in Fates. And the Archanea remakes I think retconned male pegasus knights, so it is canon that Fates is the only FE world where men can ride pegasi. There were later mentions, like in Awakening when Chrom tried to tame a pegasus and it reared up, but was completely calm with Sumia, and likely other places as well. And I also think some conversations with Subaki (particularly a support with Selena) touch upon that fact as well, and apparently pegasi in the world of Nohr and Hoshido are an entirely different breed that is more accepting of men. Regardless, I think it was a deliberate decision given the apparent gender neutrality of pegasi in the games preceding Genealogy of the Holy War. Maybe semi-deliberate, because while there were male pegasus knights in the preceding games, the only pegasus knights that were actually playable were all female, and so perhaps they thought "well what if lore-wise the mount actually was exclusive to women".
  8. I can't believe I've been turned into an East African snack brand. It's probably better than what I actually am, which is a vaguely Germanic North American shitposter, but still.
  9. AFAIK it's generally the same story, but the English version is told in a worse way than it was told originally. The greatest creative liberties definitely came with support conversations and some character personalities, though. I'm not entirely sure, but I think originally Effie wasn't a meathead but rather just small girl who was incidentally freakishly strong. Female Corrin x Rhajat was also different from male Corrin x Rhajat in the Japanese version - gender disparities which also existed with the supports between Corrin and Niles in Japanese. Another notable change was with Saizo and Beruka's C-support, which changed from an actual conversation to just the two trading ellipses in the localization. If there's one good thing that came out of the localization, it was getting rid of a lot of... icky elements in supports with Soleil/Soleil's personality in general. Granted, I still think there are some serious issues with how they handled her in the localization (for some reason she's portrayed in her introduction as very charming and easily able to score dates with girls, but in supports she's kind of a creep to certain girls), but things were way worse in the Japanese version. Also, apparently Mozu originally sounded awful. In the localization she has a fairly cutesy farm girl voice, courtesy of Karen Strassman, but in the Japanese version people have said she had a really bad country accent that was grating to listen to. Generally speaking, though, I think most people consider the localization to be a net-negative in terms of what good and bad it brought in presenting Fates to the western world.
  10. It was just a still from one of the end CGs in Birthright. Probably didn't work because I'm lazy and did a big oopsie hotlink instead of just using imgur; probably will edit and upload it properly in a bit. I think you'd be surprised how much slipped through the cracks in the localization. The studio that localized the game, Tree House, was pretty callous and arbitrary with how they went about their job. I'm not sure what the end cards say in the original Japanese version, but I have to assume they were careful not to accidentally create inconsistencies in the narrative. But again, it's more or less the same entry for Corrin in every ending. The only exceptions I'm aware of are when you marry female Corrin (specifically female Corrin) to Rhajat and when you marry male Corrin (again, specifically male Corrin) to Niles, as the homosexual pairs spawn unique paired endings in this game. Otherwise, they're basically the same. For instance, read this one between Corrin and Xander, and note the bolded part in particular: Notice how the bolded part is literally the exact same as the first two sentences in the ending you shared. This is what I mean by "copy-paste entries". And if you think that maybe this just applies to Corrin x important character, no, lemme share Corrin x Felicia: All that really changes is the placement of Corrin's entry, depending on if Corrin's male or female (because they give preference to males). Everyone technically has a "unique" paired ending with one another, but in reality paired endings are just formatted scripts that work as such: As unbelievable as it may be, they did this exact same thing with Corrin x Azura for some unfathomable reason. They went and made unique endings for the gay pairs, but couldn't be bothered to even make a slight change to the paired ending between two titular characters in the game. It is as ridiculous as it sounds, and the only reason I could think of for why they even bothered making unique endings for the gay pairs is because they couldn't get away with just doing the usual [male entry, female entry] format since, you know, both are the same gender.
  11. I think the main reason the end card says what it says is that it's basically just a copy-paste job. Every paired ending for Corrin in Birthright and Conquest says that Corrin "worked alongside his/her spouse", no matter who it is Corrin pairs up with. It's the same deal with every other character's ending in the game if they're paired up - everyone just has a copy-paste entry for their paired endings. It's likely just an oversight where they didn't think about what if the player married certain characters. Seriously, look it up if you doubt me. Look for other paired endings for Corrin in Birthright or Conquest (because Corrin's ending in Revelation says something different than Corrin's ending in the other two paths) and look for any of Azura's other endings. They always say the same things for those particular characters. Corrin's ending in Birthright and Conquest always tells of Corrin working with their spouse to spread peace in the land and Azura's ending always says she's a historical mystery.
  12. This comment irks me. Lay off that tone, okay? You may think this is a calm, rational thing to say to someone you're debating with, but it's condescending and presumptuous, as you're making the assumption that I was angry about what you said. I wasn't angry - maybe I was being a bit condescending myself, and I apologize for that, but I was not in the slightest bit angry. We've been on this point long enough that it's derailed from the original point of the topic, so I won't respond to the rest of what you said. But maybe have some more respect for the people you debate with, yeah? Because otherwise you will make people angry.
  13. I'm gonna say it's not necessarily general raw strength, but rather a certain set of muscles and muscle memory. Thing is, it sounds like you're talking about using a spear with a grip that's a good ways away from the center of balance. If you try holding a broom by the very tip of the haft completely horizontal, of course it's gonna take a considerable amount of strength to hold it like that - that's just how physics work. But there are ways to hold a spear one-handed that won't require much strength at all, and in a resting position you should always carry it at the center of balance. The nice thing about spears compared to swords is that you can easily slide your hand up or down the haft, even with just one hand. It's a matter of knowing where to hold it at what times. And to further discuss, no, there isn't much need for strength in thrusting the weapon. You need good fitness/stamina to do that, but strength is of secondary or tertiary importance compared to other factors in this respect. I think it's not accurate to say it's "skill" so much as training and practice that makes for a good spearman. I take issue with all of these statements. This is not at all the reason why realism would bog down the game. Moreover I'm gonna take back what I said - realism can make for a fun game if used correctly, as games like Kingdom Come Deliverance and Mount and Blade are honestly quite entertaining games - it's just when you get too bogged down trying to craft the absolute most realistic game ever is when it becomes troublesome. Lords did take to the field to wage wars. Not all the time, as they would have to also ensure they're still around to issue commands to their troops, but they did. If they didn't then dukes and kings would not have died on the field of battle - we wouldn't have seen to the deaths of Charles the Bold or King Harold, two famous cases of higher-caste nobles dying on the battlefield. It really just depend, but lords did train for war and fight on the battlefield directly. If there was a time when they might not have, it'd probably have been post-Medieval period when all the noble families were firmly established and have become even more absurdly wealthy than they were before. But in Medieval times lords did indeed fight. Axemen would not be trash, or else axes would never have even been a type of weapon used on the battlefield. Spears would reign supreme on a battlefield, and swords are great for personal defense, but the advantage of axes is the force they can strike with. You can actually use them fairly nimbly, just not as nimbly as swords. Even taking into consideration they aren't quite as nimble, there are two ways to get around that. Either you get a shield or you get a bigger axe. Yes, seriously, I'm saying you get a bigger axe. Not fantasy bigger, where they make the axe head absurdly large for some reason, I mean you turn it into effectively a polearm like a Dane axe. The extended reach of a Dane axe means you can strike from a safe distance, but it also has more power meaning it's basically impossible to parry it with a one-handed sword. But the biggest advantage to using a weapon with lots of blunt force is dealing with armored foes. A slashing or piercing weapon simply cannot get through plate armor or good quality chain mail (I'm talking riveted, high-grade steel chain mail) - you can maybe get a bodkin arrow to get through the chain mail, but the only way you'll get through plate armor with an arrow is if you get lucky or if, in melee combat, you half-sword. But if you have a blunt-force weapon like a mace or an axe (axe isn't as good because its blade means its force is more easily deflected by the rounded plating of most 15th Century plate armor, but still) then you don't need to pierce the armor - you can jostle the wearer and the blunt force will transfer to wherever you strike without needing to pierce through the armor. Axes also do have a design that allows them to hook things, so you could use it to wrench a weapon from someone's hand (or simply push it aside) or you could grab at an enemy and pull them towards your formation, enabling your allies to easily swarm them. There are other uses for axes as well, but overall axes are not trash weapons in the real life. If you're talking about those dumb speedo-wearing buffoons called "fighters" in the games, yeah they'd suck, but it's because they use oversized axes and don't wear armor, not because axes are inherently a bad weapon. Most "combat classes" is a bit of a misnomer, but it is true that most troops would use spears or bows. Thing is, though, that most troops were not regular soldiers, but levied peasants who were given a measly wage if they were lucky, handed a weapon, and told to stick with their mates as they marched against what feels like an almost certain doom. It wasn't only because of spears generally being better for fighting in formation, but also because spears were exceedingly cheap to produce compared to swords, meaning they could be more easily mass-produced and given to every soldier in the army. You have to keep in mind that for much of the Medieval period there were no standing armies. You really just had three sources of soldiers - your few well-trained knights (who were nobles in their own right), your peasant levies, and mercenaries with questionable methods and allegiance. The last one is tricky because at times they would be willing to turncoat if offered better deals by the opposing side of a conflict, and they may end up turning on that side as well. There is also the fact that when they weren't fighting some nobleman's wars they'd be raiding the countryside and robbing merchants and peasants along the roads, and it might not be the smartest idea to give them funding to do that even more. At the same time though maybe you would want to keep them employed so that they won't pillage your subjects. Either way, not as reliable as your knights, your vassals, and your levies, as they're much less likely to turn on you or cause trouble. On the point about forces being mostly men, you mistake me when I say "realism". I don't necessarily mean the kind of historical realism you see in Mount and Blade where they attempt to accurately emulate Medieval society in a new world. I more mean in the sense of how fighting with swords, spears, axes, and other weapons is concerned, at least for the sake of this discussion. Or if you mean to imply that women can't fight, well, we can have all manners of discussions as to why we didn't see women as combatants as often as we've seen men historically, but women absolutely can fight - you can find women practicing HEMA and participating in HEMA tournaments, and they can do quite well. And of course you also have women in various military organizations in the real world, and you have women in history who've fought duels and battles. But of course, I'm not sure in what way you meant that women not being combatants was "realistic", so if you don't mean it in the latter way then don't take this as me thinking you think that way (though if you do then I'm not gonna cry, kick, and scream and say that you're sexist). They'd also have damage drop-off for the further away they shoot at enemies. When I made the comment about "unique advantages/disadvantages", I meant against certain kinds of weapons. They're no more powerful against a spear than they are against a sword, precisely because they're ranged weapons so all melee weapons have basically the same performance against them. In a fight between a dude with a sword, spear, or axe versus a dude with a bow, you'll want to be the guy with the bow every time. That is, unless the other guy has armor, in which case you'll want to run for the hills. Oh, and with how experience would work, could you just imagine how heavily favored the game would be towards anyone that uses a bow? Cavalry, too. LTCers would literally just use archers and knights. If there'd be a game that'd be appropriate for making bows OP, it'd be one that drew inspiration from Southeast Asian countries as they more strongly emphasized bows than western cultures did (though they still played a very strong role in Medieval combat there - they were strong everywhere). This reminds me of a game I really love, Fallout: New Vegas, and how the leader of one of the factions basically wants to recreate the old Roman Empire (he even calls himself "Caesar"). Mainly how for some reason they want to abandon firearms, but instead of opting to use bows they only use javelins. Like, they have basically their two pilums that they carry into battle as ranged weaponry, and they're fighting against people with high-powered .50 cal sniper rifles and machine guns. Not that bows would make it all that more fair for that little wannabe empire, but it'd be better than just expecting your raw muscles to stop bullets as you charge the enemy, lmao. Well, I'm just judging based off what's being fed to my eyeballs, not what they could be - and I'm just seeing them yeeting knives at samurai and mercenaries and those samurai and mercenaries falling instantly to such attacks. But I guess they'd have to give them combat viability to be useful. Still would probably be better if they used swords, but then there's less setting them apart from all the other classes that use swords, lmao.
  14. Typo, yeah, it's meant to say it's not as easy, lmao. Well, to go further into depth, there are also anti-cavalry pole weapons (pikes, halberds, bills, and voulges) that you cannot use on horseback and are distinct from standard infantry spears which could be used with shields. Regular spears are kind of a tricky category, honestly. Somewhat off-topic, I recall someone tried to argue that Mipha using her trident with one-hand (or rather, holding it one-handed, because she'll use her second hand in some attacks) meant she was stronger than Link - using a spear with one or two hands is hardly a matter of strength, but rather of skill and preference. At the end of the day, there's a reason they keep this relatively simple. If you were to categorize every single kind of weapon there was, you'd either end up with classes using too many different kinds of weapons or weapon types being so restrictive that most units will probably only ever receive one weapon and the ability to carry different weapons would be mostly rendered moot. And honestly, if realism was applied to a T swordsmen would just not be a thing in battles because a sword is a self-defense weapon, not a primary battle weapon that you use in formation with a few dozen other soldiers (of course, this is barring the Romans during a certain period of their history, but they switched back to the spear because it was more effective overall on the battlefield).
  15. I'm not sure what the weapon triangle is to Intelligent Systems (how they feel about it or whatever), but I'll give my opinion. I'll give two, based on gameplay and realism. From a gameplay standpoint, it depends. Some games are able to use the triangle to encourage you to use a wide variety of units. For example it's not as easy to beat the DS games using strictly sword users because many enemies will be wielding spears/lances. Other times it can prove too crippling for some units, such as in Fates how the already severely nerfed mages also have to contend with weapon disadvantage against armor knights and cavaliers. It really just depends on how they implement it and how balanced the game is overall, because the thing the weapon triangle will do is exaggerate the strengths and weaknesses of the wielders. On realism, there was a video made two years back by famous HEMA YouTuber Skallagrim on the topic. But to argue from my perspective, I can definitely see where they were going with it. Sword beats axe because sword is nimbler, spear beats sword because of reach, and axe beats spear because grappling is difficult to contend with for spears. The trouble comes when you consider how many different classes of weapon there are for each category, and take into consideration other tactics that can be employed. I'll also point to hidden weapons and bows being part of the weapon triangle in Fates as a colossally unrealistic situation - bows have no unique advantages or disadvantages against other types of weaponry as they're ranged weapons (no archer would be a total sitting duck when engaged in melee, though, they would brandish a sword and fight if it came to it), and you'd be a fool to use throwing knives and throwing stars as actual weapons meant to kill your foes. And just try to stab a skilled swordsman with a knife - the swordsman will laugh at you as they cut your knife-hand off. Magic in this regard is kinda whatever in terms of realism, but I doubt spells would throw off arrows any more than they'd throw off knives. There's also the magic triangle to talk about, but I'm not really a physicist or meteorologist so I have no goddamn clue if fire would beat wind - with what I know about fire it would depend on if it's a grease fire or not and whether there's any nearby kindle for the fire to catch on. Gameplay-wise I think it may complicate magic a bit too much. I like when magic is more a class of its own and has special properties, instead of when it's paralleled to the physical weapons or just kinda bullied into a corner like it is in Fates. All in all... I can see it continuing to have a place in the series, but I wouldn't exactly miss it if it were to disappear. I generally like it more if the weapons have stats to both balance and reflect their real-life parallels. For instance, cavalry lances having enough weight to almost guarantee they'll only strike a single time and swords being light enough to nearly always double. I'd also like it if they made axes better. Maybe whenever they get around to doing Skyrim Viking Emblem they could make axes strong. Yeah, I know vikings had swords and spears, but you know that'd be the setting where they'd make axes OP.
×
×
  • Create New...