henrymidfields

Right! Thanks for bringing this up, that is a good point you raised. 💡‼️ Do you mind pointing out a few examples from history to me? Would it be something like UK, US, and France during World War I/II? Or are we talking about different allied legions in Ancient Rome? I still don't know if I still want this restriction from a gameplay feature, though - well, at least not sure about 1 to 1. I mean, even with the justification, I still think the restrictions on trading is still drastic compared to other games, and it bring a question on why family members, or people in the same faction within your army can't trade. Perhaps, as you said, maybe allow some form of trade between same factions (say, fellow countrymen) of your army, such as both item and money between family members, or only money between two units that are from the same country/faction. Alternately, maybe lift the restrictions on trading depending on support level (maybe money to a limit on B, money and an item on A, and unrestricted on A+/S) regardless of romance, or the lack of. Glad you agree with the rescue, Pair-Ups, and I totally agree with the battalions for FE4-Remake. And now that you mentioned it, I think I remember reading somewhere that each unit in the original FE4 were implied to be battalions.... How would you go in implementing the battalion system? Same as 3H (with the obvious exception of names etc), or would we tweak some stuff in the system?

I was thinking more in lines of PvP battles where type-counter moves become more important. So for example, I think Venusaur and Torterra can learn Rock Climb in Gen 4. If it was a rock-type move, then Venusaur and Torterra has a better chance beating Bug, Fire, and Ice types.

I've always wondered why the useless ones like Cut are Normal-type moves (and thus no supereffective opportunities). It would have been nice if Cut was a Steel-type move, if only because of say Charmander potentially type-countering against Rock types. Strength should definitely be Fighting, Rock Climb could either be Ground or Rock-type move, and so on. If it going to be a crappy move, then at least be a generally crappy move that has potential type-countering moves as an exception.

Oh shit, thanks for reminding me about Fates. And you're right, if Nintendo managed to get away with Fates's incest (which is stupid even for fanservice), the really, there's no reason anymore to worry about Genealogy (which at least is there for good storywriting purposes as opposed to fanservice).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incest_in_film_and_television Umm, Texas Chainsaw Massacre? Rocky Horror Picture Show? Psycho? They're maybe not "widely popular", but they're at least well known/distinguished movies. Or even Book 4 of Star Wars or Back To The Future as an borderline example?? Incest as part of the story isn't as rare as you think.

Some QoL stuff should definitely be in order: Trading should be done like any other FE. If any weapon become overpowered as a result, then either nerf it accordingly or put a limit to who can wield it. Don't put arbitrary limitations on logistics involving supplies or financial transactions that aren't considered standard FE features. It doesn't make sense that you can't just physically walk up to your comrade and trade stuff with them. (One case which I can maybe buy the justification is if this had been discouraged/forbidden historically by doctrine or regulations...) Maybe as a compromise, allow a personal convoy vs a castle/barracks convoy, where you can only have 20-30 items for the former vs 200-300 for the latter. Incorporate Fates-style Pair Ups or Rescue to allow for speedy transport of infantry units, or maybe don't have such move differences between cavalry and infantry in the first place. Maybe even differentiate Rescue vs Pair Up (the former protects the back unit from all enemy attacks, but the latter gives bonuses instead of penalties). As for the gameplay involving worldbuilding/storytelling: The maps probably should stay as they are - this is an epic war story and the chapters should be treated as such. As a compromise, at least lower-level difficulties should incorporate minor and major checkpoints throughout the chapters where you can freely do the following: Minor Checkpoints Save the game Access the convoy Trade between units Basic purchases from stores or visiting merchants Basic weapon forging Support conversations Major checkpoints allows the following in addition to whats allowed in minor checkpoints Bigger range of purchases and forging available from stores or merchants Barracks training for bonus weapon skills or experience points Accept side quests Because of the huge scale of the chapters and maps, have the units lead batallions like in 3H. Finally, for the minority of people who plays FE to some extent who wants to play the original, either release the original game on the VC or provide an option to play the game in Classic Mode. Because let's face it, how many of us did play stuff pre-Awakening? And how much have gaming been streamlined since FE4 or even Awakening? And we (particularly purists) from Serenes Forest are how many people out of everyone who play FE, based on sales of copies? I can bet you, the number to the former would probably be tens of thousands at best, while the latter would definitely be at the very least a million, if not more. Also, the arbitrary trading method is listed up as a Scrappy Mechanic in the other wiki - you be the judge.

So, maybe the real problem is lack of options between Hard and Maddening, and maybe lack of options from Maddening onwards. Now that I think about it, I'd probably be more critical about the lack of challenge if there weren't other things to offer. It can be various other gameplay contents that are just as fun, or a story worth watching and paying attention, or as just said, a proper challenge that is yet still manageable. Part of the reason why Awakening's lack of challenge bothered me more than Sacred Stones or Three Houses was due to its lack of other content compared to 3H, its uninspired story compared to both, and it's lack of a balanced difficulty setting between Hard and Lunatic compared to, say, Shadow Dragon.

Yeah, I ended up writing my own story when I did a lets play for Conquest. I converted the story into a WW2 campaign on the Pacific Theatre, with Corrin siding with the Americans against Japan. Kind of stange saying this, but it was way better for my (and a couple of viewers) sanity.

I know over at TV tropes, the bread-and-butter chapter battles are considered to lack the challenge and thus a bummer in that regard. However, is there someone who thinks that the lowered difficulty is actually a good idea? I'm still in the middle of the White Clouds, so this may change, but I think I can understand why they made it easier for the main battles, at least on Normal Mode. There are variety of choices you can make to spend each month/chapter, some which don't necessarily involve raising your units. It wouldn't be very good game design if half of the chapters on Normal become unbeatable because of a wrong choice one made in-game months ago...

Sorry, what I meant to say is "If Nintendo is still censorship-happy as it once was, then LA Noire would not have a Switch port." A rhetorical question. That's admittedly true. Still doesn't make it easier for me to choose one route over another unlike Fates Conquest vs Birthright vs Revelations. Not to mention I think 3H is the first FE game to completely lack a Golden Ending option... I kinda tend to think that this whole Edelgard vs Rhea debate on this forum is more like a history debate with the expected controversies, with some dose of alternate history. Actually, the whole branching storyline is pretty much an excercise of AlternateHistoryHub for me... What rpg/choice-heavy games did you play previously? Did they have a clear evil/friend-alienating campaign or something like say Shin Megami Tensei?

Regarding attack speed, should weapon ranks and skill/dexterity play a role in mitigating being "weighed down"? Dexterity and weapon rank could be used to indicate how much a unit is used to using the particular type of weapon and counteract the weapon's "awkwardness" or "unwieldiness". Maybe Dexterity/10 for games with higher numbers of cap, and -1 to -3 (or more) effective weight for rank difference between unit and equipped weapon? (Like, an A-rank unit using a C-rank weapon.)

Out of all of the games I played: Shadow Dragon, Binding Blade, Sacred Stones, Awakening, TMSFE, Fates Conquest, Three Houses Awakening, no contest. Either it is too easy with Pair Up playing itself, or it's way too hard. And it doesn't have an engaging story like Three Houses, nor an entertaining one like TMSFE to make up for the boring gameplay. Conquest's story comes close. Cartoonish villains that is out of place, a story that just doesn't make any sense... (At least the gameplay was something.) Shadow Dragon - The gameplay has at least some challenge, and at least I finally get to experience the story that started it all, but without Rescue or Canto, the game suffers from slow pacing.

What do you mean "flower and rainbow"? Fates, yes 100%. Three Houses? I'm amongst with some of the people who disagree. Not when characters I love are dying in my playthrough, and especially not when the jury is still out with each of the routes and their ethics (and may never be resolved unlike Garon vs Mikoto), and especially not when the only consensus seems to be that maybe with a couple of exceptions, they're generally much less cartoonish than Iago, Hans, or even Validar. For me, I actually have to take a break for at least a week after 1-2 chapters, because of how heartwrenching it is to fight my former classmates. I think one thing the majority of us can agree would be the relegation the majority of the fanservice over to FEH or optional DLC. For me, it shows how one doesn't need to show tons of skin like Camilla to be fanservice. If there is one thing I'd like to see in the immediate future, I think it would be a DLC showing how each of the three countries move on from the big war in 1180-85. Particularly, the Crimson Flower route could do with extra chapters showing the downfall of the Slitherers. As for a new game, I'm not too fussed at this stage as 3H seemed to have done a number of things right in my book. I especially liked how Edelgard isn't shafted from the story, or at least shafted way less, compared to past female lords, and I also like how the more heroic Claude is both a minority and seem to act more chill than paragon. I also liked the idea of authority and batallions and adjutants, which I think adds to the realism in warfare. And now that I think about it, I think it is something alongside with Leadership Stars and Tactician unit skills that could be added to a Binding Blade remake to finally translate Roy's strength into gameplay. Speaking of which, a fully revamped Binding Blade remake with the aformentioned gameplay features, and additional scripts and conversations is something I'd like to see. I thought that was the case too. Actually, now that I think about it, I'm doubtful it'll be censored all that much. If it is censored, then what's to say about Bayonetta? Would Zangeki on Reginleif even be released in the first place? Would Nintendo approve having a Switch port of LA Noire?

So in an opposite to What FE game is the most chill for you?, what FE game made you pay the most attention to during the game? Aka, what was the least chill? Was it the dark and heavy tragedy of Jugdral? Was it the complex politics and the constant pro/ant-agonist switch of Tellius? Or was it the abundant world building (at least I think) and the borderline alternate history story of Fodlan? Or was it the mixup of objectives and stave-fest of Thracia 776? Was it the constant number-crunching of Binding Blade? Was it the generally improved AIs, strategies and buffs/nerfs of Fates Conquest? As for me, out of the games I played: Gameplay: The gameplay that was least chill is probably Binding Blade. It was one that really forced me to think of my next action, because of the lack of strong units, especially at the start of the game. It also did not help that strategy outside of stat numbers is nigh-non-existent unlike Fates Conquest. The other challenge was the turn limits imposed if you want to go through the entire story. Fates Conquest is a close second, but several things mitigate the difficulty (or the unfairness) compared to Binding Blade. Firstly, there is actual gameplay synergy between units through Pair Ups, Attack stances, and skills (and esp Rally skills). Buffs/nerfs alongside the aforementioned pair ups and attack stances with support and skill bonuses can also help if any of your units have screwed stats. Finally, the Pokemon BW-style experience payout scaling also helps in raising low-level units (and forces you to actually fight with numbers). Three Houses might come third, but that is more to do with the slice of life activities you can do in the Monastery/Academy and the sheer choices you have, instead of actual difficulty in the game. Story: Of the FE games that I played, there weren't many with stories that constantly grabbed my attention - though part of it is also due to me not playing anything from Tellius or Jugdral yet. However, Three Houses is set to become a major exception. I mean, good Naga, how heartwrenching this game is! You have to make some tough choices in who to side, who to recruit and save, and who to kill. And unlike Fates Conquest and its cartoonish villains and weak story justifications, I actually love the 3H characters on the whole (yes, I include both Rhea and Edelgard), the worldbuilding is quite detailed, and the moral of each story are understandable if not 100% justifiable. A bit too compelling to ignore and chill-out.