Martin
-
Posts
109 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Martin
-
-
Three Houses is also my favorite game. There's more than a few flaws that I can think of, but the raw display of intuition, creativity, and care that went into it far outweighs the negatives. There was just so many things within this game that I had always wanted in a Fire Emblem franchise. Gigantic monsters, creative weapons, dope villain designs, more chances to fight the "good guys", and especially, the way they handled classes.
I once advocated for the act of completely getting rid of classes period, but I will admit that the way Three Houses handled them is better than my idea. I wanted a game where classes are not locked to a single set of weapons and did play huge role in deciding the core of a character and I got that in this game.
Also Battalions....
I LOVE the battalions. I do think that IS could have done more with them, though. That point aside, battalions gives me more of that "war" atmosphere I desire instead of one where your team is like 12-20 dudes against another small group of individuals. Really add to my imagination.
tl;dr? Dope game. Love it.
-
I just want the option to attack or atleast get the chance to equip a more appropriate weapon whenever one of my guys run into a suprise enemy.
Other than that. I think it would be really cool to have certain parts of a map be lit up by torches or something: a scenario where your team is in a dark dungeon with some scary looking baddies elsewhere on the map, being visible to the player at the start, but runs off in the darkness when the enemy phase starts.
You wouldn't know where specifically they are, but you know that they are coming for your team. Oooh. The semi-thrill.
-
On 10/7/2019 at 1:27 AM, raphaelol said:
I liked it, but I preferred the system we had in some of the older games where magic had its own combat triangle. I think it's cool that each unit has his or her own set of spells as it gives them individuality, but I miss the diversity in magic classes we used to have when the magic combat triangle existed.
It might have seemed kind of cool to have a "wind spell breaker" or the such.
But me personally, I absolutely loved the way they handled magic in this game or just weapons in general. No more limiting a class to one or two weapons.
Magic ammo was indeed a little lacking at the start of the game, but as the game progressed, I barely remember a time that became an issue for me. Many of the magic classes doubles the amount of times a unit can use the basic spells. Plus, I don't exactly see how allowing a magic unit to just spam the big finishing attacks over five times would be a great idea. They're the big guns. They should be used in with care. Of course, I would not mind if they revert to the old ways or go to a completely different system, but I would mind a hell of a lot less if this is the new tradition.
Also, I REALLY like the idea of tomes being something that could give users specific spells if equipped like a shield. That sounds really cool.
-
-
Never played the Tellius games. But from what I've seen, it looks pretty fun with the beast race, the cool villains, and a big baddie that's not a dragon.
Another opinion, there should TOTALLY be a promoted class that uses only staves and can access an S rank mastery to them. (Is it "an" or "a" here...?)
-
On 4/13/2019 at 1:21 AM, Jotari said:
Not sure anyone has brought it up before, but I support the Hector approach to movement. That is to say standard infantry movement as a Knight, but no movement increase on promotion. Mostly it's only Knights who suck while Generals are actually decent because they've had time to snowball their stats.
I guess when it comes down to it, many if not all of us agree that this is a good step in a more balanced direction.
Now that I think about it, they already trade both spd and res for some more dfs. There's also the armor slaying weapons which exists. That by itself should be more than enough to balance the extra defense. Adding a movement penalty burdens them with more limits than advantages.
And that's another thing that baffles me about knights. You see, in most FE games, the cavaliers and sometimes other units are wearing armor as well. Fates's version depicts them with the type of armor you displayed in your post. So I guess armored knights generically are supposed to be hella bulky to actually be considered such in the FE verse, which I personally don't like. I'm of favor to those you showed, but then what would differentiate a great knight from a paladin?
Design wise, I think SoV depicted them pretty nicely.
-
@HappyHawlucha.
Blue Lions? Ah! Found a brother in arms! Although, I probably could've figured this out sooner by looking at your banner. I typically don't pay attention to those.
But if they are indeed going to to the route of clumping movement types together and allow them free range of weaponry, with them being depended on the character, not the class, I'd be glad. I've been advocating for something similar to this approach, but everyone seems to disagree with me on that idea. (strongly, I might add... ;-;)
So will swordmasters still be a thing, or will we just see a character that seems like the Navarre stereotype while just being classed as a mercenary?
Also, what is the possibility of even more weapon types being considered? Infantry units may have exclusive access to the gauntlets. What if there are other classtype-exclusive weapons? Maybe for once, IS will actually differentiate spears and lances, making the latter one exclusive to flyers or cavalry. I know this is not going to happen, but I'd totally be pumped to see chain maces or wrecking balls exclusive to armors. Hell, maybe even bring back the chained weapons animation from the GBA titles.
-
Renault.
I read a fanfiction called "wayward son" a while ago and his character really grew on me. It's to bad second seals did not exist back then. It'd be a pretty to cool way to hint to his past and maybe even put him into a more appropriate role.
-
2 hours ago, HappyHawlucha. said:
Like a Cavalry unit without the Cavalry weakness, armour and dragon weakness but no flying. I like it, or a Basilisk which has been tamed? Lance and Reason Magic.
As for pegasi/wyverns/griffons, I mentioned this earlier, but I think they're gonna have all 3 but similar to Heroes(again, but due to the popularity they'd be stupid not to incorporate some elements from it), they're gonna be statistically identical, with the actual creature that they're riding(pegasus, wyvern, griffon) being purely cosmetic and only effecting the character's model and class name. They could draw from the origin of each country, with Faerghusian fliers being Griffon Riders due to their apparent link to griffons based on the flag, Adrestrian fliers being Wyvern Riders due to their empirical and somewhat harsh demeanour, and the Leicesterian fliers being Pegasus Riders due to their sort of peaceful ideals due to them being a democracy, at least that's the vibe I'm getting(and me really wanting to see Claude on a pegasus upon promotion).Has that been confirmed? Through out the series, the pegasus have more resist while the wyvern rider gets extra def.
In terms of Claude, how about an ARMORED pegesus rider? ;)
-
9 minutes ago, HappyHawlucha. said:
I could totally see an armoured, flying and infantry manakete. If we get more than one Manakete I can see one of each or something, but if Sothis is playable my money's on armoured due to their recent popularity with Heroes. This same reason of Heroes bringing in unique combinations is why I believe that flying and armoured mages are gonna become more common in 3H and the future of FE after this.
Not a manakete, but a flying wyvern that's also armored. That just seems like a dangerous combination to me.
I personaly would love to see a badass, mounted, flightless wyvern that's armored, looking more like a rhino or something.
But if there is an ACTUAL population of manaketes that's not nearly extinct in game, I would absolutely love that. I also hope that in one day, we get more Corrins, people with human side weapons such as tomes, bows, and the such along side their dragon stones.
-
Ugh. An armored dragon as the promotion is the last thing I'd want to see. That'd give them THREE weaknesses worry about/ exploit. That plus their lack of resistance.
An armored Pegasus will be a more interesting thing to see. The Pegasus haves natural resistance plus armor. So they probably would not be overly resistant or susceptible to magic.
-
Paladin!Chrom. Get that juicy, early lance exp!
-
*Sigh
I guess. Also, I just thought of this, but having a shield in one hand and a gauntlet in another may look strange. (...Although, I sure as hell would be interested in seeing what that looks like)
-
My personal favorites are FE7's and Gaiden/Echoes' battle themes. Even when I first heard the latter in FE8, for some reason, that tune just sounds so powerful and challenging to me.
I would consider the 3DS era, but I'm sure rather or not those count.
-
On 3/30/2019 at 8:55 AM, Fenreir said:
Fates is far from being the best in terms of PvP.
it's literally the most broken feature when it comes to overleveling characters for maxed stats, pairing units for stacking stats even further and abusing some mechanics, along with specific skill builds.
the problem that comes from having too much freedom with characters builds, is that in the end most people will just run around using the same meta builds that everyone else is using due to their utility, with very few variations.
that makes the game overall uninteresting in the long run, while forcing people to play only with specific builds just for a chance to win a match, wich is sad considering that a PvP mode should be played not only for competition, but for fun as well.
for a PvP mode to be somehow balanced in a FE game, it would require to have units with fixed stats, limited items, limited or no skills available, and either open field or indoors maps with different scenarios selected at random.
that way you could actually have some decent matches between players, where what would matter the most would be the ability of the player to plan effective tactics, rather than just relying on some broken skill build from characters with maxed out stats.
out of all games i played so far from IntSys, probably only the Advance Wars titles were the most balanced in terms of PvP.
beside standard pre-set maps, you could even build maps on your own, with game modes going from straight GroupsVSGroup Deathmatches to Conquer&Seize modes.
those were really good and fun, because they were done right.
I checked out Wargroove's pvp and aside from having a limitless time limit, I really thought the way they handle the pvp was pretty neat. The thing about the units is that they don't level up or have different stats depending on single player campaign experiences. However, I really would like to see a good FE pvp, not an advanced wars one. I liked @Etheus idea where characters starts off at a low level, but have set level ups that are not RNG effected.
However, maybe just having a player vs player might not be enough.
@Dayni Yes. Definitely more modes or terms of victory in general. Or at least a side objective that could benefit the player's team greatly so that the match won't devolve into a turtling fest. In Mobas for example, there are multiple objectives to pay attention to and killing the guys is often not the top priority.
@thecrimsonflash I jokingly suggested a FE battle royal type game in the crossover topic one time. No one really responded to me, sadly, but I do think something like an enclosing barrier or a collapsing platform could spice up a match as well. The thing with Fate's multiplayer, is that the stuff found in single player is not limited or restricted in multiplayer. There's stuff in the campaign mode that obviously assists the player at crucial or even scripted moments at times and they should stay specifically in single player. Fates didn't follow that rule. It's literally just something that IS saw as a quick and easy addition. "Just copy everything in the main game and dump it in multiplayer" Because of the poor execution, a lot of the people who were even curious of an FE pvp got immediately turned off from it.
What if there were creeps roaming the battle field who are on no one's side and attacks everyone, being the player's main source of EXP that they may have to distribute carefully to get the desired team strength? Or bases of sorts that could also add a bit of utility?
I just feel as though it sucks that IS sort of just neglects the multiplayer side of things and focus purely on the single player experience, but then again, I don't really blame them. Tactical pvp games are not like shooting, fighting, or TCGs. It's often seen as boring to observe and only okay to play. Why is that so?
-
Mounted and flying gauntlets I understand, but why is it that armored gauntlets an odd or unlikely combination?
-
Title says it all. I know things like Fates and that Advanced Warfare-like switch game exists, but do you guys think that there were stuff missing from those modes that really took away from the fun and playability. Do y'all think that Fates is honestly the best as it can get and that trying to make a Fire Emblem PvP mode is kind of pointless?
-
1 hour ago, thecrimsonflash said:
I want my edgy kirito look alike to use an absurdly giant and overpowered sword with no issue even though calling him a twig would be an insult to the twigs.
Hey man. I personaly think seeing chicks who can swing giant weapons is kinda hot.
Although, a gigantic, muscled dude with a lot of CON who is a sword master, seems like a differant and exciting unit to play as.
I'd love it if there are differant animations depending on the weight of the weapon. Especially if the trigger for such animations are depended on how a character's strength or CON compares to the weapon weight they are handling. So while Vaike might be able to handle something like the Ragnell with one hand, Ricken might need to use the same weapon as if it was a giant, fantasy style hunk of iron that Beserker Guts swing around.
But anyways. Assuming that weight does return, would you guys rather have:
A lot of weight for a hella lot of power
Or accuracy to be the trade off instead when it comes to Dark Tomes?
Hell, I guess this question extends to axes as well.
Also, class specific promotion items. Thoughts on those? I personaly hated them.
-
On 3/28/2019 at 7:34 PM, Hawkwing said:
Glad to see another person found fighting Dean to be fun! He really is underrated as a boss.
On 3/26/2019 at 8:19 PM, Martin said:Fun fact, I actually fought Dean in the hopes of recruiting him afterwards. Obviously, I missed something in the dialogue and got Sonya instead. Huge L on my part. XD
On 3/28/2019 at 7:34 PM, Hawkwing said:Building onto what I said originally, I'd like to see more animations for defending beside "unit tanks attack" or "reacts to getting hurt". Things like characters rolling with the hit to minimize damage, or snapping dislocated bones into place. It would be a lot more work, to be sure, but I think it would be worth the trouble.
That's definitely a "hell yeah" on my end. It especially bothers me that we have gigantic armored soldiers that don't use their gigantic shields when being attacked except in the cases of "no damage". There should be levels of getting hurt. I would like to see units use their shields or deflect attacks when taking a small amount of damage. The point of such defensive actions is minimize potential damage, not ONLY when the person is not going to get hurt regardless.
In the case of infantry units, it would awesome to see those guys get knocked off their feet when taking a huge amount of damage from one attack (besides when they get ko'd.)
On 3/28/2019 at 2:56 AM, DarthR0xas said:I think this is actually a really good example for characterization, at least to a certain extent. Cordelia idolizes Chrom, worships him, but that also means she places him on an incredibly high pedestal. She's got the mindset of "He's so amazing, why would he ever talk to a nobody like me", so just avoids him, watching and loving him from afar. She's so intimidated by her own hyping up of Chrom that she just doesn't try. It's sad in a way. Although they totally should've had a support line in Warriors, that was a payoff to five-ish years of one-sided emotional tension waiting to happen.
That's all well and good, but this setting is not like in real life. Within a fantasy setting, nearly anything should be able to be possible. There are characters that support each other because of outside influences, like with Arthur and Setsuna chatting each other up because of them being assigned to and event that I don't remember. (...Or was that Falicia and Arthur?) ...Either way, that interaction is something that the fanbase would totally be interested in seeing. Just the possibility of Chrom marrying someone else adds to that type of characterization. The support between those two could have easily been about Cordelia getting over her nervousness with him and at least finally accepting him as a close friend to fight with, not a senpai to avoid.
8 hours ago, Ottservia said:again I agree. I mean it's not like I hate echoes' cast. I just feel like they're very shallow and just all around boring because of that. I like characters that I can sympathize with. I like characters who struggle with a conflict of some kind. Who have depth, nuance, and intrigue that get me care about them and their struggles. A lot of echoes characters just don't do that for me which is a shame cause I do want to like and care for these characters but the game does not really give me any chance to.
Xander is actually my favorite pseudo lord because of this. Unlike my favorite actual lord, who's just a dude with a spear that wants nothing more than to roam the continent as a mercenary and beat the crap out of other dudes, Xander's childhood was deeply explored. He's was a timid kid who had to face scary challenges, like his father, to mature and grow as a person. Unlike the perfect Ryoma, he practiced and trained day in and out to get the skills that was acquired to be a prince. When I first saw him in his opposing manner with that badass sword that shoots black lightning, I would have never imagined that he was like that as a kid, like myself as a kid. Only difference is, I was much more lazy in the self development department. XD
He's part of the reason I even bothered to pick Nohr over Hoshido. I wanted to see the "bad guys" given some more humanity and knew that IS would slack off in terms of introducing the dark side of the Hoshidans. Now it just sucks that, as you have pointed out, many of the characters have singular quirks about them and THAT is the only thing that is mentioned in their conversations.
-
On 3/28/2019 at 7:34 PM, Hawkwing said:
Glad to see another person found fighting Dean to be fun! He really is underrated as a boss.
On 3/26/2019 at 8:19 PM, Martin said:Fun fact, I actually fought Dean in the hopes of recruiting him afterwards. Obviously, I missed something in the dialogue and got Sonya instead. Huge L on my part. XD
On 3/28/2019 at 7:34 PM, Hawkwing said:Building onto what I said originally, I'd like to see more animations for defending beside "unit tanks attack" or "reacts to getting hurt". Things like characters rolling with the hit to minimize damage, or snapping dislocated bones into place. It would be a lot more work, to be sure, but I think it would be worth the trouble.
That's definitely a "hell yeah" on my end. It especially bothers me that we have gigantic armored soldiers that don't use their gigantic shields when being attacked except in the cases of "no damage". There should be levels of getting hurt. I would like to see units use their shields or deflect attacks when taking a small amount of damage. The point of such defensive actions is minimize potential damage, not ONLY when the person is not going to get hurt regardless.
In the case of infantry units, it would awesome to see those guys get knocked off their feet when taking a huge amount of damage from one attack (besides when they get ko'd.)
On 3/28/2019 at 2:56 AM, DarthR0xas said:I think this is actually a really good example for characterization, at least to a certain extent. Cordelia idolizes Chrom, worships him, but that also means she places him on an incredibly high pedestal. She's got the mindset of "He's so amazing, why would he ever talk to a nobody like me", so just avoids him, watching and loving him from afar. She's so intimidated by her own hyping up of Chrom that she just doesn't try. It's sad in a way. Although they totally should've had a support line in Warriors, that was a payoff to five-ish years of one-sided emotional tension waiting to happen.
That's all well and good, but this setting is not like in real life. Within a fantasy setting, nearly anything should be able to be possible. There are characters that support each other because of outside influences, like with Arthur and Setsuna chatting each other up because of them being assigned to an event that I don't remember. (...Or was that Felicia and Arthur?) ...Either way, that interaction is something that the fanbase would totally be interested in seeing. Just the possibility of Chrom marrying someone else adds to that type of characterization. The support between those two could have easily been about Cordelia getting over her nervousness with him and at least finally accepting him as a close friend to fight with, not a senpai to avoid and admire from as far away as possible.
-
1 hour ago, Ottservia said:
Really what I was trying to get at is that a character getting more supports can only really good thing if they're a complex enough character. If a good writer has a good character, they can make dozens upon dozens of good supports. Obviously there is a limit and time constraints can and will be factor but overall a character having a lot supports is not a bad thing. It's only a bad thing if the character is one-dimensional and shallow meaning more supports will only exacerbate the issue because with such a one dimensional character there are only so many interactions you can write for them but even then in the hands of a good writer these supports can be used to give them more depth. The reason a lot of echoes supports are boring(at least to me) is the characters themselves are boring. You cannot have interesting character interaction with uninteresting characters. Like I said good characters will lead to good supports. bad characters will lead to bad supports.
I mean haven't ever had that sort of lingering feeling of "I wish x character could support with y character"? That's basically the idea I'm getting at.
I definitely have. For some reason, I wanted Colm to have a support with Eirika; the sincere thief supporting the sincere princess. Or Ross, my favorite trainee having an aspiring warrior to warrior talk with my favorite lord Ephraim.
I still dont know what the hell IS was thinking with not allowing a Cordelia x Chrom conversation.
-
4 hours ago, Hawkwing said:
I forget if I mentioned this before, but the desert maps in Echoes are actually well designed. There are patches of land to speed up the time to get to the battles, but it's narrow, so you have to prioritize who will proceed. You have to make wise use of your ranged forces in every desert map, while also knowing where and how to use the mercenaries. Physic is vital on these levels, and you have to make interesting decisions of who to heal on that round. They're difficult, yes, but for better reasons beyond "the desert slows you down". It helps that Deen and Grieth are two legitimately difficult and fun bosses to fight.
I guess. I don't remember my play through Echoes a lot, but I remember just being bored wasting several turns trying traverse a relatively empty desert after the mages or so have been taken care of and I almost pulled my hair out trying moving the knights. If they sent more flying units or something that may reinforce at the base of the map, I'd probably be more interested in the battle itself. Although, I do remember taking careful consideration of how to place my units when fighting Deen do the desert and that indeed was a fun battle.
I don't know, if there is a battle on a desert map, I hope to get a feel of danger from units that can traverse normally while your own must work with limited movement options, not absolute boredom from moving them around.
4 hours ago, Hawkwing said:- I've this observation for a while, but I think that Fire Emblem could take a page out of Blustones book and explain why a character has such high defense that isn't "they're wearing armor". In fact, no one in Blustone has that excuse. Instead, they range from Robin being a wilderness survival expert, to Gerard having a "never give up" attitude, meaning he stays in the fight until he's knocked out (and it's joked that, though this is admirable, he ends up in the hospital a lot because of it), or Kain being a freelance bodyguard, to Athena being a trained warrior, and so on. It'd be neat to see this angle taken in both a mainline Fire Emblem game, and Heroes, where a unit there would have better reasoning for being armored despite not always wearing much.
[I've figured out how to make multiple quotes! Yaaay!!] Idk, man... The fact that troubadour Effie exists tells me that usually, devs at IS don't really consider the personalities of the characters when fleshing out how they function during game play. What you said is not at all wrong and I agree completely. I always day dreamed about how cool it would be if we had a thief that used to be a knight, which explains his good combat stats and the ability to re-class to a cavalier WITH the lance exp already at a higher rank or something.
On 3/25/2019 at 7:01 PM, Tediz64 said:I see the point you are making. So basically, players (especially veterans) already should be at the level of giving the map a glance over as well as the characters they are going to deploy including their equipment, and part of being a good tactician or strategist is also inevitably preparing for the worst in the event of enemy reinforcements. You are absolutely right in this. Sounds reasonable and logical. The premises i'm going based off of is that i want fire emblem to still be newbie friendly. I truly want fire emblem to become way more popular and mainstream so i can have more friends to play with. Plus if more people buy the game, the means the company gets more money, more money means more budget to do things with. Like for example make more spin-offs to satisfy an even greater audience. I cross my fingers for the day something like Fire Emblem Warriors with online multiplayer becomes something that exists. I don't neccessarily disagree with weapon restriction being removed. I was just sorta making counter points i suppose.
I still think that the game could be perfectly beginner friendly with this direction of classing characters. If anything, this idea gives more in every sense; more devs freedom to truly express the personalities of their characters and the gameplay they offer, more variety in enemy weaponry for all types of movement types, and even more replayability , to truly find the best characters and what specific combination makes them work so well. So in that case, the game could start out giving the typical enemies and characters their usual weapons and eventually branch out. Also, a flier is still a flier. Their movement will display options that goes over the mountains and pits when a newbie selects them, no matter if they use a bow, a spear, or whatever. A knight is still a knight. The newbie will always pay more attention to the knight's defensive stat and resistance stat, not just the weapon he uses. A cavalier is still cavalier, as observed by the horse and high movement. Fire Emblem already has switched up the formula for which weapons a class use time and time again. Sometimes, a cavalier can only use a lance. When I played Sacred Stones, my first game and my beloved, Pegasus riders used both swords and lances. The General class was able to use all three melee weapons. Light magic existed. I was not at all turned away from the series when I played awakening just because those things changed. They were the same classes with the same functions for the most part. Hell, I did not even notice the lack of a sword for the Pegasus riders. Give the noobs some credit. I'm pretty sure they won't be too flustered or overwhelmed if one horse rider used a lance while a different one uses a tome.
The only points where you got me is for the cases of a swordmaster or something, but even then, the character himself could be a swordmaster, with the edgy appearance, a lone wolf personality, and a lock to swords while the class itself could be an infantry unit with low attack, high speed, and high skill, something that actually sounds appealing to me if a character has that class while using an axe. Even a dolt like me can immediately see the interesting options for interesting characters with this direction of classing. I could finally get my soldier again, who is really just a mercenary, but can only use lances while his personality matches that of a hardened warrior. If FE was already like this since the first game and someone brought up the idea of locking the classes themselves to specific weapons, what arguments would they use to help their point?
-
So what's the deal with the oatmeal of that time, the hot cereal? Is everyone making it with almond milk and not that crap that is milk? I assume technological advances have allowed us to move on permanently from that substance. Also, I really hope that the cereal known as "Honey Smax" has been exterminated. Such a crime to flavor should be kept under heavy surveillance at all times if not wiped out.
-
I am indeed also curious. But I think I got the jist of things!
So! Once, there was an angel named Gonzoles DCLXVI
Who flew from cereal bowls both low and high.
What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?
in General Fire Emblem
Posted
I miss the 2D battle animations. There should totally be a spin off or something that brings that back.