thoughts on FF tactics GBA and/or disgaea?

[geozeldadude]

so i played the first FF tactics on PS and it was fine. the story was boring and hard to follow, and the game had a decent amount of difficulty overall. battles weren't all that interesting, but the class progressions made the game interesting.

then i tried out the GBA sequel and was bored b/c it was pretty much exactly the same. i also tried out the first part of disgaea which also seemed way too much like FF tactics. any comments on those two games? FE has kind of spoiled me for these other tactics games which just seem too easy in comparison.

Edited August 7, 2010 by geozeldadude

[Strawman]

FFTA is really easy sure. But I find the classes and races and weapons and stuff make it quite fun. Never played Disgaea.

[Don Draper]

FFTA was a pretty terrible game. Way too easy, laws were dumb, non existent story, simplified game mechanics compared to the original FFT, it was overall pretty bad.

[Narga_Rocks]

FFTA was a pretty terrible game. Way too easy, laws were dumb, non existent story, simplified game mechanics compared to the original FFT, it was overall pretty bad.

Let's not forget some of the broken combos you can create (Assassin's instant death attacks + Archer's concentrate). Or some of the broken abilities in their own right like steal weapon/ability and Damage -> MP (1 MP completely absorbs damage from one attack? Count me in). If you like godstomping, the game is okay. If you don't like it, you need to play badly or place arbitrary conditions on what you let yourself do in order to have anything resembling a challenge for most missions.

[Original Alear]

FFT's plot, boring and hard to follow...I am speechless.

Anyway, I personally think disgaea is worth your time because the story is fun, but if you're not enjoying the story I wouldn't encourage spending any more time on it as it has pretty boring gameplay.

[geozeldadude]

so then the follow-up question is, what other tactics games would you recommend? i've already played all the US advance wars games and liked them almost as much as FE despite the lack of story. also tried ogre battle SNES but couldn't really get into that either.

[dondon151]

In before Colonel M recommends Shining Force.

[Narga_Rocks]

so then the follow-up question is, what other tactics games would you recommend? i've already played all the US advance wars games and liked them almost as much as FE despite the lack of story. also tried ogre battle SNES but couldn't really get into that either.

Bahamut's Lagoon (SNES) japan-only (I think). Shining Force 1 and 2 (Genesis/MegaDrive, I think there was also a third one on another Sega system). Monstania (SNES) japan-only (I think).

Monstania is short but I found it fun. Graphics might even be above the GBA FEs, though I'm not certain of the comparison.

Edit:

In before Colonel M recommends Shining Force.

And before I did.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Narga_Rocks

[geozeldadude]

Bahamut's Lagoon (SNES) japan-only (I think). Shining Force 1 and 2 (Genesis/MegaDrive, I think there was also a third one on another Sega system). Monstania (SNES) japan-only (I think).

what are the differences b/t shining force and FE? they seemed pretty similar.

[Narga_Rocks]

what are the differences b/t shining force and FE? they seemed pretty similar.

Turns are more like ffta. Though not. It is kinda based off speed, but nobody ever actually doubles up. In FFTA, if you are fast enough you can go, say, 4 times for each time an enemy goes 3 times. In SF, there is a "round", and you go earlier or later in the round based on your agi when you start the round. If you've ever played D&D, imagine rolling initiative each "round" and additionally there are moves (slow and boost) that greatly alter the agi stat making it as if you could greatly change your initiative bonus (only it's more like rolling a d4 or d6 rather than a d20, so agi plays a much bigger role than initiative bonus).

Aside from that difference, you nearly always hit, as does the enemy. Every attack has a specific % chance of missing, criting (enemies get 1.5x damage, you normally get 1.25x, and they call it something different for the enemy but it is basically a crit), doubling up (call it adept if you like). Agi plays no role in any of this, nor does any statistic. The only thing is what type of unit is attacking and what type is being attacked.

Also, there are some AoE attacks in SF (that do a lot more damage than Onager). Even the player actually gets some. Magic does a specific range of damage no matter what you are attacking (level, defence don't matter) unless the element is specifically resisted or the guy is weak to it.

There may be other difference I'm forgetting at the moment, but they probably don't matter too much.

edit: oh, terrain works differently. Rather than increasing your evasion or increasing your defence, terrain has a % reduction in damage received. Hence, if you'd normally take 20 damage and you are on a 15% land effect tile, you'd probably take around 17. Usually between 16 and 18. If you are on 30%, between 13 and 15. If you are on 0%, 19 to 21. That's another thing about this, damage is always random. It is usually only +/- 1 from what attack - defence would indicate, but on occasion it can be +/- 2.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Narga_Rocks

[geozeldadude]

would you say SF1's game mechanics/strategy are about the same level as FE's (i.e. FE1)?

[Narga_Rocks]

would you say SF1's game mechanics/strategy are about the same level as FE's (i.e. FE1)?

Last time I played sf1 was so long ago and I've never played fe1 beyond like 5 attacks.

as for sf2 compared to any of the fe games (like fe3 or 4 since they are probably around the same time), I vastly prefer the fe mechanics. There is much more strategy involved when you can actually prevent random death from the enemy hitting their "I win" button and pulling off double + crit to cause 2.5x damage at once. In fe4, if an enemy has critical, use a unit with Awareness. In fe5, if an enemy has high crit, use a scroll (or a unit with high enough luck or a support or whatever). You can employ strategy to prevent random death. You really can't in SF so I find it more luck based. Not quite War (entirely luck reliant) vs. Bridge (still some luck involved, but also a lot of skill), but I find SF annoying for the randomness.

At least there is no perma-death. Playing FE when every enemy has a ~4% chance to simply kill you from full HP would be a pain. They miss out on exp for the rest of each map, but at least you generally can get to a priest so you have them back for next battle.

[Furby]

FFT's plot, boring and hard to follow...I am speechless.

Glad I'm not the only one who was left that way by that.

Anyway, Judging by what you've said, you seem to dislike games where the turn is based on speed of individual characters and instead based on army turns...

Besides any Fire emblem, I believe Yggdra Union follows that trend as well.

[geozeldadude]

Anyway, Judging by what you've said, you seem to dislike games where the turn is based on speed of individual characters and instead based on army turns...

no, i don't have a problem with that. the reason i disliked FFT and disgaea is b/c all the focus is on the classes and their abilities and much less on the tactics, e.g. coordinating multiple groups to attack different areas at once or fending off hordes and hordes of enemies when being surrounded on all sides, that kind of thing.

[Narga_Rocks]

no, i don't have a problem with that. the reason i disliked FFT and disgaea is b/c all the focus is on the classes and their abilities and much less on the tactics, e.g. coordinating multiple groups to attack different areas at once or fending off hordes and hordes of enemies when being surrounded on all sides, that kind of thing.

If you like hordes, I should probably mention that the maximum number of enemies on an sf2 map is 20, and there are often less than that. You'll never get the 40+ enemies on a map that you get in most FEs (though not on each map in fe, obviously, just some of them).

[nabvfgsyeahuwdefgfue7huiwr]

FFTA and FFTA2: GotR were great. The customization and large party compensated for the lack of storyline.

[Parrhesia]

FFTA was a pretty terrible game. Way too easy, laws were dumb, non existent story, simplified game mechanics compared to the original FFT, it was overall pretty bad.

It was rubbish in every way, but somehow addictive. I haven't been able to buy FFT yet, and am unwilling to buy a PSP for, in essence, two games. And at least you could imprint on the characters.

[grandjackal]

I'm with Dale Cooper there, FFTA sucked, but it was addicting. I have no clue why. Maybe just Concentrated Stopshot and Last Breath BS were hilariously awesome.

STOPPED form 10 spaces away! Ugh, imaginet hat. If ballista in FE could just freeze you up...

Though I hardly see the charm with the original FFT either. While it's story was good (up to a point), the game is just slow as molasses, and frankly didn't really like the classes and how they were set up.

FFTA2 though is just dull in it's own right. It's story isn't there and while it's gameplay is more solid than the last two, it's still nothing new. It feels like an expansion pack of FFTA1.

As for Shining Force, DO GET. While Narga pointed out the shining flaw with that game (basically imagine an FE game where everyone had 75% acc on everything along with 25% crit rates), it's still a delightfull adventure on it's own. You can still strategize (though again, stupid flaws as Narga pointed out, but I find it better executed than some of FFTA's bullshit), and I like the worlds and map designs they're set to, along with a pretty rich character diversity.

SF1 is perfectly fine, but feels a little archaic. It's remake, Resurrection of the Dark Dragon fixes a lot of the problems it had (Archers sucking balls, Mages are no longer lollerskates, Paladins and Birdmen don't QUITE godmod anymore), but it adds it's own (Musashi and Lyle are nerfed to the point of unusability, Hanzou is hilarious, Blue got nerfed for some bloody reason, the broken trio of Narsha/Zuika/MAWLOCK). But if you want fresher, get the remake. SF2 is also quite excellent.

[Don Draper]

As for strategy games you should get:

http://serenesforest.net/ts/intro.html

[eclipse]

FFTA is my favorite among the Tactics series. I'm the very small minority that loved the story, and I liked being dumb with my Viera (why bother with Stopshot when an Assassin/Elementalist can stomp half the game flat?)

Disgaea's story is mostly silly, but there were a couple of moments that made me tear up. The gameplay can get really boring (especially if you're the type that likes to get the best stuff. . .oh gosh, don't get me started). You can be really silly on certain maps, and that's what I liked about it.

[grandjackal]

FFTA is my favorite among the Tactics series. I'm the very small minority that loved the story, and I liked being dumb with my Viera (why bother with Stopshot when an Assassin/Elementalist can stomp half the game flat?)

*Stopshots, then Assassin's turn next for the finishing blow that can't miss which is better than the Assassins' taking two turns to pull off the same thing*

Not to say Assassin/Elementalist is bad, but that allows more rapidity.

Disgaea's story is mostly silly, but there were a couple of moments that made me tear up. The gameplay can get really boring (especially if you're the type that likes to get the best stuff. . .oh gosh, don't get me started). You can be really silly on certain maps, and that's what I liked about it.

Yeeeaaahhh, forget about the extra stuff in Disgaea.

[eclipse]

I usually keep my moogles to a minimum, because I like being (extremely) dumb with viera. Nothing's funnier than having Marche the Klepto surrounded by a bunch of bunnies, with a unit or two in the other classes for a little variety.

I think I would have enjoyed FFTA2 much more if the nu mou had a good Speed class.

[nabvfgsyeahuwdefgfue7huiwr]

FFTA is my favorite among the Tactics series. I'm the very small minority that loved the story, and I liked being dumb with my Viera (why bother with Stopshot when an Assassin/Elementalist can stomp half the game flat?)

Assassin, Red Mage, and Summoner were great classes. A Red Mage/Summoner with double cast was great, as was a Red Mage/Spellblade in the sequel.

[frat_tastic]

It was just as easy to rape face in FFT as it was in FFTA.

I mean, I liked FFT more than FFTA, but I would hardly praise FFT then turn around and call FFTA a terrible game. The two are still pretty similar, and I even find some of FFTA's gameplay changes to be an improvement, like the addition of a defense stat. Also the removal of the Zodiac symbols in battle. I personally wasn't a huge fan of those in FFT.

[Cory Halavan]

I think I might know a game if you want to take on hoards, Warsong.

That and the later game Der Langrisser.