Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'double-attack'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • 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 Heroes
    • Fire Emblem Warriors
    • Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE Encore
  • Miscellaneous
    • Forum Graveyard

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Interests


Location

Found 1 result

  1. I'm creating an FE-inspired game and wanted to spark some discussion on mechanics I may implement. Starting simple today: What if both player and enemy units could only double attack on their respective phases? Assume they still need some amount of speed to do so. It makes sense intuitively to me that you'd only be able to double if you took initiative. If put on the back foot by a foe who gets the first attack, of course you'd only manage one attack in response. What effects would this have on gameplay? Here are my arguments: 1) This change puts emphasis on player phase. It's more important to be more active now, clearing out enemies on your turn. 2) At the same time, it doesn't make enemy phase entirely worthless. SRPGs without countering at all tend to be very slow. I think allowing one counter attack will keep the pace up, but you'll rarely be outright killing foes with a single counterblow. 3) This serves as a direct nerf to speed. It's still ridiculously useful (you need it to double), but now you only double a fraction of the time you would have been able to. 4) Armor knights, as a result, are now the premier enemy phase units. They tank best, and deal more return damage in a single blow than any other unit. 5) Enemy placement needs to be deliberate. I can't just spam enemies on a map and expect players to mop them all up on enemy phase. Similar alternatives: 1) The speed threshold for doubling changes based on who initiates. You may only need 3 more attack to double when you initiate, but when that same enemy attacks you on their turn, you need 6 to double. 2) The doubling threshold remains the same, but the initiating unit gains a speed bonus. This could create situations where units of comparable speed can double each other, but only on their respective turns. I prefer my original concept over the alternatives, because I believe the latter 2 ideas, while interesting, still lead to a meta where speed is too important – perhaps even more important, because of the higher requirements for doubling on enemy phase (alternative 1) and guaranteeing you avoid being doubled (alternative 2). But what do you think? Do you like any of these ideas? What benefits or challenges do you foresee in a game implementing these concepts?
×
×
  • Create New...