Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Crit'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Important Links
    • Serenes Forest Code of Conduct
    • Mistakes or Errors on the Site
  • Important Forums
    • Announcements
    • Member Feedback
    • Site Content
  • General Forums
    • Introductions
    • General
    • Far from the Forest...
    • Creative
    • Fan Projects
    • General Gaming
  • Fire Emblem Forums
    • General Fire Emblem
    • NES and SNES Era
    • GameBoy Advance Era
    • GameCube and Wii Era
    • Nintendo DS Era
    • Nintendo 3DS Era
    • Fire Emblem: Three Houses
    • Fire Emblem: Engage
    • Fire Emblem Heroes
    • Related Games
  • Miscellaneous
    • Forum Graveyard

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Member Title





Website URL





Found 5 results

  1. I wanted to start this conversation because I find that many people dislike these types of builds while I'm personally a fan of them, depending on the character. So I wanted to go through what I think makes a good crit build and why, and hopefully convince more people to give them a chance. In the end crits come down to chance, and I think that's why many people avoid them because they prefer 'more reliable' builds like brave attacks with enough Mt to ORKO. While I agree that a guaranteed kill is always favorable over something that is chance-based, not many characters can actually pull that off. This leads to players doing what I call the Juggernaut approach: "who should I recruit for X route?" The answer always falls down to Sylvain, Leonie, Lysithea, Ferdinand, Felix, Shamir, Cyril etc., basically anyone who can pull off brave skills pretty well (Swift Strikes, Hunter's Volley, Point-Blank-Volley, Fierce-Iron-Fists, etc.). Then comes, "what should I do with Ashe/Ingrid/Ignatz/Bernie" and any other poor shmuck who was designed with high speed/dex but low str and the standard answer usually lies between an evade tank incapable of anything else (poor Ingrid) or Sniper for Hunter's Volley, if not recruit someone else to use entirely. Don't get me wrong, all the above is sound and good advice because it works. Especially the Hunter's Volley approach for the bow boon characters, but I wanted to take a look at the mechanics (and numbers) behind crits and hopefully shed a light on how to maximize them. At the same time I'll look at the value of the Dex (and Lck by analogy) for such builds. Okay so to start off, Crit = (Dex + Lck) / 2. Which as many point out, means you only add 0.5% chance to crit with each Dex point and from that many conclude that Dex sucks. The thing is, with these types of things you want to maximize your chance to crit and there's two ways to do so: 1) Increase your crit chance via Dex, Lck, and Crit from abilities/weapons. 2) Increase you chance of landing a crit by actually hitting more frequently. If you've ever played Rogue type classes in MMORPGs or other games you might recall those crit-relying units always having higher attack speed or what comes down to more hits in the same amount of time. The reason here being that the more attempts you can make "per turn", the more you're likely to crit, and this goes up in a non-linear fashion. Take a look at the graph below which shows your chance of triggering at least 1 crit out of the number of hits you make in 1 action: Edit: I made reference plots of effective crits from some of these cases taking into account hit as well. They are posted further down in this thread. [Apologies for any color-blind people seeing this, higher hit goes up in the curves, sequentially]. So while the battle predictor tells you your "Crit chance per hit", the above plot is the actual "Effective Crit" for the entire attack. While yes, "a point in Dex only adds 0.5% chance to crit", that's only true for single hits. If you are getting more hits, then you can actually get more than 1% chance to crit per point of Dex (and Lck), depending on how high your crit already is. At lower values, each point of Dex (and Lck) contributes more towards your chance. The next plot might be a little more confusing, it shows how much each added point of Dex (or Lck) adds to your chance to crit. Meaning if you're at 21 Dex for example, the y-axis value is how much Crit you'd gain going from 20 Dex to 21 Dex, etc. Okay so what does all this mean? Well it means that the first plot is the "effective" Crit you're getting depending on how many hits you land. Clearly, it's a lot easier to land "at least 1 crit" the more chances you can attack, and often times this is all you need for these lower str characters to get a ORKO. Not on the toughest enemies like armored units, grapplers, warriors and war masters, but most anyone else (like mages, archers, thieves, and when using effective weapons). It also means that the value of Dex can be higher than 0.5% chance to crit if you make more attempts. For example, Dedue or Alois using One-Two Punch with only a 20 displayed crit chance, is actually a 60% of getting a crit (or roughly 35% chance of getting a crit in the first round of double punches). This is why for example using Hunter's Volley is such a great strategy for some of these characters. It not only guarantees 2 hits, but also adds 10 to Crit. On top of that Snipers tend to have high dex/lck stats making it fairly easy to land at least 1 crit with Hunter's Volley, especially with a crit bow. This also explains why Felix wielding gauntlets can land at least 1 crit with nearly every attack as you get close to the end game, because he has high Dex, and Spd allowing him to frequently get x4 hits with a good base crit chance. It also means, that you can land a stupid amount of crits using Astra combined with high crit chance. This is the real reason why Astra costs so much durability, not the mediocre 1.5x base damage which would suck if that was all. Finally I wanted to look at another interesting skill and how it looks under this type of analysis: Lethality. So Lethality triggers as Dex/4, which sucks, unless? Well here's the graph: Suddenly it doesn't look too bad for an insta-kill ability if you combine it with Astra. Wait, what? I can use an unlimited Rusted Sword to get kills with 1/4 to 1/3 chance? (Okay maybe don't since they weigh 20, ruining your avoid, but a cheap Training Sword works too). At 22-23 Dex you get a 1/4 chance of Lethality using Astra, while you need a 31 Dex for a 1/3 chance (using Astra). That's sounds pretty amazing to me (and like a lot of fun). Low str characters, can typically easily evade axe wielding enemies but deal little to no damage to them, why not take that chance if they have nothing better to do on that turn? Admittedly, I don't know if Lethality can trigger if you're only doing 0 damage. The only reason I say this is because I noticed monster barriers don't get hurt if you do 0 damage, so idk. So ultimately, should you go with str or dex? Well you want a balance of both since even if you crit you'll only be dealing 3x damage and if that damage is only 10 you're not getting a ORKO either way. That said, if you're at this junction of needing "at least 1 crit to ORKO" then you want to maximize Dex/Lck as well as "No. of Hits". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that usually, these low str characters are in this situation of needing at least 1 crit, unless they have Death Blow and using Hunter's Volley against a flier. And Deathblow can be quite out of the way for some of them (and unnecessary if you build crits). From my experience though, honestly anything above 70 Crit (as displayed in the battle-prediction) seems to land almost every single time. And as low as 30 Crit triggers more often than I expect it to. I don't know if the double rng is used for crits or not. If anything crits feel skewed towards triggering but that's just a feeling, and feelings are not only subjective, they also depend on expectations and mine are usually low, so don't take my word for it. The last thing I want to say is that while any % Chance should on average yield that chance, these things are ultimately binary in this system. You roll a number, if it's less than or equal to your crit it lands. Say your crit is 30 and you rolled a 31, no crit. But had you just one more crit then it would've landed. It's not like crit damage scales with your chance, it's either x3 damage or it isn't. So that's why for me, every single point of Dex/Lck matters. Again, on average you expect to get the same % of crits as your crit value but that's only true for a very large number of trials. Anyone who's played around with rng's before knows the results can be very skewed in the short term (in either direction). As an example, take a look at the coin toss simulation on the wikipedia page of the Gambler's Fallacy (not that the gambler's fallacy is relevant here). Watch it restart say 5-10 times, and see how often one side gets favored over the other in that limited number of trials. Usually by a small amount, but this is why I say every point matters. To conclude, obviously if you have a guaranteed route to ORKO then go for it, but for characters who can't achieve that, consider a crit build that maximizes both Crit and No. of Hits. Edit: See further discussion/analysis of Astra's effective crit chance of getting at least X crits out of the 5 hits, below. Edit: Another analysis comparing Astra and double hits, here.
  2. Quick note: In the future I'll eventually move these topics to the fan-game discussion forum. But for now, the ideas are broad and general enough that I think it makes more sense to discuss them in the context of the FE games we already know. Once I get to discussing more specific ideas that are further divorced from the context of any previous FE game, I'll swap over to fan-game discussion. Last time, I floated an idea for making skill and luck more valuable by tying them to a meter system instead of an RNG chance of crits/misses. It wasn't popular. Let's try the opposite approach. Instead of a system that removes most RNG, what if we actually increased the random factor, but reduce the punishment factor? But first, why do I want to change these aspects at all? Here are a couple reasons: I think 3X damage crits are horrendous. There's strategic merit in needing to have a backup plan. But 300% damage crits don't create those sorts of situations. They're more likely to be instant resets. It's certainly not a common problem, but that doesn't make it good design. Skill and luck feel underwhelming. That isn't to say they aren't important stats, but most units have, in a word “enough”. Individually, each point into one of these stats feels less important. There are a series of changes here, feel free to voice your opinion on all of them, or just each individually: Change 1: Make luck, not speed, the primary factor in dodging attacks. The formula changes in most games, but speed is always more important than luck. Sometimes by a factor of 2, or 1.5, or even 3. I think this needs to be reversed, so that luck is 75% of your dodge rate, with speed being only 25%. I was also considering making speed 0% of the formula. I think this is totally fair balance-wise, as even with the changes to doubling I proposed in the other topic, speed is still an insanely useful stat on its ability to let you double, at all. I'm also admittedly drawn to the simplicity of binding each stat to one purpose, instead of having formulas become complicated blends of stats in various proportions. But despite all this, it would also make speed a totally worthless stat to gain for someone already fast enough to meet relevant doubling thresholds. Luck's role in evading crits and your own hit rate remains unchanged. Change 2: Reduce critical damage. I've got 2 separate ideas on how to do this: First, we could reduce the 300% damage rate to a flat 150%. The only problem I have with this is the potential for confusion on if that extra 50% rounds up or down on odd damage numbers. Second, we could change the formula entirely. Getting a crit now adds the unit's skill stat directly to their strength/magic. This will mean lower crit damage across the board in many cases, but will be more notable for enemies as they typically have lower skill stats anyway. However, enemies might also do more damage with crits under this system, too. An enemy that would've done 0X3 damage off a crit may now deal actual damage. If this change were implemented, I'd include a “Crit Damage” number in the battle preview, so that players could see at a glance how much total damage they could take in the worst-case scenario. Change 3: Double the effect of skill on the critical hit rate formula. This means that players and foes alike will now have a greater chance of scoring a critical hit. Seeing a crit rate won't be rare, even on an enemy with a good chance to miss. This makes skill more desirable, since each single point gain is basically worth twice as much now, in terms of crit chance. It will mean enemy crits will be something you see far more of, but due to the above changes, you're far less likely to instantly die to one. Perhaps counter-intuitively, I think this will also make luck more valuable, despite being comparatively less effective at reducing crit rate now. A point in luck will seem more valuable when it's reducing the crit rate of a dozen enemies from 4% to 3%, instead of the 0% to 0% “change” we usually see. The enemies with crit rates in FE games are usually the ones with Killer weapons, where oftentimes no amount of luck will reduce their crit rate by an appreciable margin. This isn't an entirely novel idea – Thracia 776 and Fates both halved the effect of luck in reducing crit rates. While not quite the same as doubling the effect of skill, changes have been made in the formula to increase crit rates before. Still, if this becomes too much, and it very well might scale too drastically for higher levels and lategame maps, here are a few simple tweaks: Make skill 1.5X as important for crit rate instead of 2X. Make luck 2X as important at stopping crit rate. So essentially, if the attacker's skill = the defender's luck, no change. But each point of excess skill now has twice the implications on crit rate. Again, I think this makes both crit and luck more valuable. TL;DR: Make luck, not speed, the primary stat in the evasion formula. Make critical hits more likely for both the player and the enemy, but reduce critical damage. As they say “Crit happens” but now an unplanned crit is more likely to put a player onto the back foot, forcing them to come up with an emergency strat, instead of outright killing a unit. More chaos, but also more control.
  3. Ideas for a FE-inspired game #2) Meter-based crits and dodges. NOTE: To be clear, when I say “dodge” I'm referring to avoiding attacks entirely. I think some FE games use “dodge” to represent your ability to avoid receiving a critical hit. Last time, we discussed changing the double-attack system so that players only double on their own phase. Let's discuss a more drastic change to stat functionality this time. What if, by default, all attacks hit their mark? Instead of skill and luck providing you with small percentage chance bonuses, they now fill two separate meters. When the critical meter is full, your next attack will automatically crit. When the dodge meter is full, you'll automatically avoid the next attack. The formula for filling these meters would look something like this: Crit meter gain = your skill – their luck. Dodge meter gain = your luck – their skill. Perhaps divide the end result by 2 or something, if this feels too “swingy”. So just like in FE games, the frequency of crits you'll perform is based on your skill vs. the enemy's luck. Same goes for dodging attacks. You just have more control over when it all happens now. Some further stipulations I'm currently imagining, but which are open to change: - The meters max out at around 20-30 points. - The meters only charge when you attack. - Your meter only charges once per round of combat, regardless of how many attacks occur on either side. - Both you and the opponent always gain at least 1 point for both meters, even if the above math says you'd get nothing, or even lose meter instead (IE, their luck > your skill). Here are my arguments for such a system: Skill and luck are often seen as “dump stats”. When people judge the quality of a level-up, it usually comes down to gains in your relevant attack/defense stats, and your speed. Very rarely is anyone truly happy to receive a level up of only skill and/or luck. Under this system, with proper balancing of the amount of points needed to fill the meters, skill and luck become incredibly useful stats. Every gain in one of those stats is a tangible and immediate boon to the frequency with which you gain the ability to crit or dodge, instead of a minute % chance. Maybe it's more a matter of psychology than fact, but I think those stats would just 'feel' better under this system. They're not useless stats by any means, but the vast majority of characters have “enough” to get by. Characters with seriously crippling accuracy, or those that are prone to being crit on all the time, are generally rare, and for a simple reason – they're not fun to play with. One or two can usually get by OK thanks to stat boosters to patch them up, but under this new system, a player-controlled unit with low skill or luck isn't a complete gamble to use, which allows for more diversity in viable stat spreads. No more complaints about 1% crits or 99% misses. These systems aren't entirely novel. Fates had a meter-based dual guard mechanic that was generally seen as a vast improvement to the random nature of the equivalent system from Awakening. And Heroes uses cooldown-based specials in place of crits. I'm basically just proposing that we tie skill and luck into these systems, to give them a more consistently-useful function. Speed now has nothing to do with dodging attacks. As an aside, enemies would likely be given smaller meters to fill, since any single enemy isn't expected to live long. An enemy with a “killer” weapon, might even start out with a full or nearly-full crit bar. Another solution would be to assign enemies to small squads that share critical and dodge meters. The enemies won't gain their shared crit bar if they don't get a chance to attack, so this change, like the one I proposed last time, would encourage player phase activity. Another implication of this system is that it would be impossible to dodge or crit consecutively. At most, you could only do so every other battle, if you're able to fill your meters up in a single round of combat. Oh, and crit damage may need to be adjusted too. The upside and downside of this system is that it removes almost all RNG from the game. Now the main source of RNG comes from level-up gains, and to some extent, enemy movements. If this becomes an issue, two possible solutions could be implemented: Add random variance to meter gains. The above formulas still apply, but you may gain a bit more or less than that. It could keep you on your toes around enemies with nearly-full crit bars. Add a bit of random variance to regular attack damage. No more than +- 3 points, but enough to keep you guessing. IMO, these solutions are a lot less frustrating than the random chance of missing entirely, or taking a massive 3X damage. It may screw up your damage thresholds on occasion, but that's better than a chance of doing no damage at all. Does this all make sense? If you think I've described anything poorly, please let me know. It's vital that players understand it, so if this sounds too complex I may have to reword some things or even re-think the entire system. What other benefits or flaws do you anticipate this theoretical change would entail?
  4. Hi, I've read many topics on who's the best between Colm and Joshua, which class is the best between assassin and swordmaster, much bullshit about the classes because of BIAS, and most of it has been written long ago so I didn't want to necropost. So, let's compare the real thing. 1st: swordmaster class vs assassin class: - SM, aside from being the first letters for sadomasochist, have taken a major nerf from their previous iterations (+30 crit has become +15 LOL). So the big lead is on the crit department. SM has better stats caps than assassin for sure (+4 str, +2 def and +3 res, it that it?) with -1 skl to compensate (-1 crit because max skl is not a pair number). So if they reach max stats, assassin has -4 str, - 14 crit, +1 skl, -2 def and -3 res. But let's be serious, swordmasters never reach their caps outside from maybe skl and probably spd. Swordmasters also get more promotion bonuses to compensate for later promotion than thief to assassin. - Assassin has a stylish name, a nice crit animation too (very different from SM's), lower promotion gains, 1 point less in Con, and lower caps. On paper, it seems worse. But they have:1. Silencer, 1/2 crit chance to OS the ennemy, halved against bosses and denied against the final boss. 2. Better exp gain, meaning promotion bonuses get fixed by more level ups, +0 skl and spd make assassin's skl and spd better with equal number of fights (so more hit and crit rate to compensate for not having +15 crit), more potential hp/def/res if it means anything (good if you let him/her face lancers), more LUCK to dodge more and lower ennemy crit chance (for the occasional high crit ennemy like chap 14 and 17 berserkers, and some swordmaster put through the 2nd part of the game after the end of the routes plit, and against a few lethal weapon-wielding ennemies). 3. Thief utility: FoW is annoying, having 2 thieves is nice to avoid fiedling 3+ staff users to have enough torch users and wasting turns on it; lockpick is nice, costs less than keys (and you can have 2 lockpicks by chapter 8, Colm's and this chapter's thief's, plus chapter 16 and 19 thieves' lockpicks so you don't have to buy them ^^). Now for the characters getting these classes: 1.Colm: low base strength, high growth (40%, 5% more than Joshua, 10% more than Marisa if I remember well), low base skl, high enough growth (45% according to NMM, 40% according to Serenes Forest, so 10-15% less than Joshua, sure it's a lot), good base luck and good growth (45%, 15 more than Joshua LOL with 1 more base luck), very low base def (3) with the same growth rates as Franz, Cormag and a few others of this kind (25%, so 5% more than Joshua with 2 less base def), and ridiculous base res (1) with low growth (20%, 5 less than Joshua with 1 less base). Colm is a thief joining in chapter 3 (so 2 and a half chapters earlier than Joshua), he can steal 4 ennemies in his joining chapter at base, so getting 40% exp isn't hard, and he can reck the hell out of 85% of his joining chapter ennemies while they are displaying low hit rates. He can safely get to level 10-11 by boss abusing in his joining chapter, not optimal for LTC but great for efficiency since he can easily reach the 15-16 spd needed to steal HM chap 8 theif's lockpick after he finishes chapter 3 LOL, also being by far your fastest and best dodgetank unit for a while, and becoming able to take down the nasty halberd wielder in chap 6 without getting hit and without even having to rely on terrain bonuses to do it fingers in the nose. He steals chapter 7 mage str/mag booster, giving him 10 more free exp no one else can get this way (not needing to fight), and finally chap 8 thief's lockpick for 10% more free exp. He has a total of 40% free exp in chap 3, 10% in chap 6 (troubadour's elixir), 10% in chap 7, 10% in chap 8 so 70% free exp, which means he's virtually level 2.70 when you get him (even more since chap 6, 7 and 8 he's higher level to steal so the exp he get from stealing is higher than the exp he gains as a level 2 because of the exp curve). He has 3 more levels to be blessed/RNG screwed than Joshua, but a blessed Colm may be much better than a blessed Joshua (more luck, strength maybe, def maybe, res also, and less gap in skill). He gains far more exp per fight than Joshua will ever, gaining around 55 exp per kill in his first levels, against 30-ish for Joshua, and fedding him bosskills, if not optimal, are a way to make levelling him a joke (80-ish exp per boss kill until level 15+, maybe even more exp/higher soft cap). Being an assassin from chapter 9 onwards allows him to gain more levels, have more opportunities to use silencer for OHKOs and more exp, so more level ups...meaning he can reach chests easier, and fight better, and be self-sufficient far earlier than Joshua or slightly faster than Rogue!Colm (only silencer kills apply here). He can easily take on ennemies near the chests by himself, allowing your real fighting units to go straight to the boss or split for routs (also routing or being as close as possibe to rout in kill boss or defend/survive X turns chapters obviously allows your units to get more exp, and having a thief take a few ennemies isn't a bad thing if he can then make use of it to allow faster pace in later chapters, and less splitting in chap 19 is really nice because if Colm can solo the bottom-right side of the map until you end the chapter with all chests open, you get everything in one). With this play style, you can make Colm reach level 8 before Joshua can even promote if you give the 1st hero crest to Gerik, who's much more useful than Joshua in every kind of map design, and also less prone to RNG-screwage than his fellow crest user due to better base stats, and also higher level when recruited so he needs less level ups to promote (can even be instantly promoted if you want). Levelling a thief is never a waste. 2. Joshua: on the other hand this guy joins 2.5 chapters later, is an ass to recruit since he makes you slow down to avoid killing him or getting killed by him, has shit supports compared to Colm (his whole swordmaster's +15 crit advantage is getting reckt by A support Colm/Neimi which can be achieved in the same chapter you recruit Joshua in a non LTC run, also screwing Joshua's base damage with +3 damage from support, a +1 or 2 def/res bonus and a dodge bonus to his already better dodge rate than Joshua in the same chapter if Colm is trained, Neimi already makes Colm all that Joshua wants to be before any of them promotes). Joshua has higher base stats but lower growths in anything but Hp (+5%), skl (+10/15%) and res (+5%), meaning Colm's bonus exp is putting him potentially far ahead Joshua in terms of stats reached in the same chapter (also stealing less exp from your team even with 3 more levels to gain to reach 20). If you want something close to a swordmaster, Eirika in her route is forced so use her and she'll surpass Joshua in mobility, stats, combat utility (free sacred weapon that no one else is fighting for with 21 real damage, 53 on monsters LOL at Joshua's crits when she can OHKO most monsters at base unpromoted), overall utility (since she's forced and has the convoy, and is the only one who can seize in her route, she's better off trained than untrained so she isn't a dead weight), while Joshua also stays swordlocked but steals exp, weapons, a promotion item and a fielding space from more useful units who can 1-2 range with cheap weapons and don't have to be levelled up to do what they are used for, even benchable if they turn bad or get replaced by better units at their role like Garcia replaced with Gerik. So Joshua is more of a bad unit than Colm (or Eirika) to use, sure he has better bases, weapon rank, and level but he costs you to train unlike Eirika and Colm who give back everything you put into them by making the game easier (no game over, easier chest access, early game thief utility without getting killed, better promotion time and/or not fighting for promotion item). Joshua is going to be promoted later than Colm in most cases, so his only way to catch up is to go assassin for faster exp gain (and less exp stealing from the party) so he can beat Colm as an assassin with better skill. Still he will never reach Colm's free pass as a utility unit from join time, 2 chapters of easy exp with few really good units to compete with for exp (stop talking of Franz please, Seth can make good use of the exp you'd waste in Franz while Kyle or Forde have no other competition for the cavalier role in Ephraim's party in their joining chapter and can be better than Franz, Kyle being Duessel with lower def/res but higher hp/str/skl/spd, Forde being a "jack of all trades but master of none" like someone said in another topic or maybe another forum I can't recall where I found this quote. If Forde is blessed he ends up better than Franz and Kyle together because Kyle still lacks speed and skill and res while Franz has so awful def and res he's like a swordsmaster on a horse, with better weaponry an movement but no crit +15, less skill and lower hp than Kyle and maybe Forde. Franz is a glass cannon with higher terrain penalties than foot glass canons (not able to hide in low mountains for example or to attack an ennemy on a mountain while a foot unit could, and he's no flyer either). Franz should be a pegasus, it's be better for him (also he'd be able to ferry units easier before AND after promo with 7-8 con, namely Duessel, General Gilliam, warrior Garcia, and falcon promotion bonuses would patch his def/res a bit, stille Tana is Franz on wings with more strength and less HP). All this to say that Colm has little competition before chapter 9 on the exp Seth let go to rush the boss or do whatever you want him to do. Most good units come after chapter 9 anyway (Tana during/at the beginning of ch9, Cormag in 10 or 13, Duessel in 10 or 15, Saleh in 11 or 15, Innes who can probablyORKO dragonzombies at base if not OHKO them with killing bow crit, or killing them before they attack with hero bow, at 10 or 15, Gerik in 10 or 13, and that's it). The only real competition Colm has comes from Artur/Lute (Artur for bishop slayer-staffbot, Lute for OHKO potential with fire in mid game). And you only want one on these 2 anyway. Beating chapter 5 with Artur or Lute and Colm on the left and Seth on the right is a walk in the park. Meanwhile Vanessa visits bottom-right, middle-left and top-left houses easily and get you the mage ring and why not the torch (I usually sell it though). If you want a nice unit that works not far from a swordsmaster but with better weaponry and stat spread, make Amelia a super trainee (I know she lacks Con, but she is fast enough to be relevant). But she's not good for efficient play though since she needs 18 level ups be be ABLE to promote to tier 3 classes. Still +15 crit lance user with actual speed is nice, even if she looses some by equipping javelins. Still more durable than Joshua with better luck/def/res if she reached 10/20 before promotion (and nearly uncrittable without any support needed). So: Assassin is a little better than swordmaster, because it doesn't steal a deployment slot from better fighting units since it brings utility alongside combat, and has around the same ORKO potential with higher OHKO potential, more post-game viability, can actually kill heroes/warriors in one lucky hit with iron or even slim weapons, while SM need at least steel if not silver to do the same, so costs more gold, and it eases FoW chapters by much. And Colm if played alongside Neimi (who can just get a few lv ups to get an early promotion just not to die from one hit and even bring some bow utility like Innes with little investment and get high crit rate for this same bow utility) can be far better than Joshua, on top of being a more worthy unit for the exp he takes from the other members of the party (even some MEMEbers) just because he brings useful things to the party from his join time to the end of the game (or of the world if you manage to kill your whole trained party including Seth and Duessel so the Demon King wins). Also Colm doesn't risk to be critted to death by a berserker or lethal weapon hero if there is one, (0% hit berserkers and low hit + low crit lethal weapons users) while Joshua's luck is a bit shaky against promoted/lethal weapon ennemies, and so is his dodge because of -10 to -15 luk compared with Colm, depending on the level gap and how blessed each of them has been. Marisa would be Colm assassin but better (without Colm/Neimi support) but she joins later in the game, also fights for a hero crest and has even less strength than LOL Joshua. What do you guys think of it? Outside of this being a big wall of text obviously.
  5. In the Heirs of Fate DLC Velouria uses a different portrait in the second half of her critical animation. Normally she uses her "angry" portrait (in which her eyes are open), but instead she uses her "eyes closed" portrait. What do you think this is? Is it a developer oversight? A localization error? A glitch? Please let me know! Any responses are much appreciated. A link to a source which shows her different portraits: http://www.spriters-resource.com/3ds/fireemblemfates/sheet/67383/
  • Create New...