Is the hate on Shadow Dragon justified?

[dondon151]

Sorry but when you start your post with "the short answer is" and not mention above post, I'm going to take your post as its own separate opinion unrelated to the one above it.

yeah whatever, i know people on the internet like to find an excuse to feign rage.

I vehemently disagree. For me at least, the greatest indication of poor level design is tedium. This is why any level where you can easily get lost (either due to a confusing map or lack of information from the game), or have your time wasted with vasts amount of nothing for no reason is usually terrible. Fe6 (particularly past midgame) has long and boring straight corridor-like OR vastly open maps with no real sense of thought put behind them. 14x is tedious. 19S is tedious. 21x/22 is REALLY tedious.

how are these maps tedious? you're simply declaring that they're tedious, even though FE6 HM can be completed in fewer turns than FE7 HHM.

Your rationalization of "necessary" doesn't really make sense. Players are already punished for turtling: the tiles disappear, which greatly encourages the player to rush ahead. A breakneak speed isn't required to reach the short path, IIRC it's pretty liberal in the time it gives you. The long way has little reason to exist other than for aesthetics. The necessity for very specific team composition should not factor into the thought process behind level design.

this guy went the long way in his LP: http://lparchive.org/Fire-Emblem-Sword-of-Seals/Update%2030/

clearly, many casual players prefer to go the long way around because 1) the bolting sage is dangerous and 2) they like to rout maps.

It absolutely and positively does have bearing on it. The inclusion of the chests signify an optional objective that requires more strategic input to reach. It doesn't take a game design major to understand how these things generally breakup monotonous gameplay.

a minor objective is tucked away in a corner of a map: what part of this constitutes "full utilization?" well, i shouldn't have to expend much effort to point out how ridiculous this statement is - the self-contradiction is evident.

I'm terribly sorry the game developers didn't prioritize 0% ltc as their main target audience.

we can't have a substantial discussion about slow styles of play because they inherently trivialize maps. you may not make the complaint that FE6 is tedious, because FE7 is equally tedious for the turtler. so you have to operate under the assumption of a medium-to-fast playstyle.

This wouldn't change anything except for a small niche style of play.

of course it would.

This is deflection. You don't respond to a negative interpretation of your post with "well why don't YOU try it"

no, actually, i am allowed to do this, because i assume that the users here have some power of inference. RFoF implied that warpskipping in FE6 doesn't require one to "plan accordingly." my implication was that this was false.

Even if they were a serious threat (excluding the unmoving boss, the former has, at best, 19 atk/74 acc and Restore exists for the latter) why is it bad to have enemies that you can't mindlessly plow through?

that's not what i said. FE6's LRTs and staff users can't be "mindlessly" trivialized, either.

Edited July 4, 2014 by dondon151

[Florete]

no, actually, i am allowed to do this, because i assume that the users here have some power of inference. RFoF implied that warpskipping in FE6 doesn't require one to "plan accordingly." my implication was that this was false.

If we're all so good at inferring, why couldn't you tell that when I said "plan accordingly," I meant for the entire map instead of half of it?

I also don't really understand how bolting mages threatening Ninian is a sign of bad map design.

[solrocknroll]

I know I have probably have no idea what I'm saying, but does everything have to be based on LTC runs? I mean, maps can be rated on other factors too, but dondon' s main points are about LTC.

[Constable Reggie]

how are these maps tedious? you're simply declaring that they're tedious, even though FE6 HM can be completed in fewer turns than FE7 HHM.

If FE7's maps take longer to ltc because it's harder to move Florina w/Hector the straight 8 tiles per turn right up to the throne then I consider that a win for 7.

Before you complain that ltc is more than just this, keep in mind that this is an exaggeration built on the evidence in your own posts. Fe7 is harder to better ltc because of more significant obstacles to the go-to flier/rescuedrop/warp ltc strategy that Fe6 better accommodates.

6's levels are more tedious because the map design is dull, uninspired, and needlessly large, with several maps just being straight lines and large open areas, or otherwise similarly rudimentary layout. This, for just one example, results in less utilization of terrain/layout for one's advantage.

In other words, more tedious.

this guy went the long way in his LP: http://lparchive.org...eals/Update 30/

clearly, many casual players prefer to go the long way around because 1) the bolting sage is dangerous and 2) they like to rout maps.

A) one obscure LP is not indicative of the typical style of play

B) the player has already been punished due to his decision to turtle by stranding the majority of his units in the starting point. Forcing the rest of his units (which could have easily passed the short path had he not WAITED for the rest of his units to catch up) to take an even longer detour on top of that is tedium

a minor objective is tucked away in a corner of a map. what part of this constitutes "full utilization?" well, i shouldn't have to point out how ridiculous this statement is.

I'm sorry, could you point out to me where I said that the inclusion of chests was the ONLY thing that constituted completely utilization of the level?

This along with the other design choices of the level allow for multiple styles of play with differing rewards and outcomes. A chapter as robust as that is something I would consider full utilization of good level design.

of course it would.

of course it wouldn't.

no, actually, i am allowed to do this, because i assume that the users here have some power of inference. RFoF implied that warpskipping in FE6 doesn't require one to "plan accordingly." my implication was that this was false.

Whoa whoa whoa stop that inference because it makes no sense at all. Even if she was somehow inferring that it doesn't require planning for Fe6 ltc (which she didn't, as she straight up says "easier time ltcing" in response to your constant mentioning of 7's difficulty of ltc. As the benchmark for "easier" is, according to you, the very difficult Fe7, this in no way equates "easier" to "mindless"), her post was primarily focused on only 14x vs 28x. In response to this, you automatically assumed she was extending this to the whole of 7 vs 6 (which, although uncertain, leans toward she wasn't due to the quoted post and no indication of hers for otherwise) and hit back with a response that missed the point of her post entirely.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Constable Reggie

[dondon151]

I also don't really understand how bolting mages threatening Ninian is a sign of bad map design.

an LRT threatening a weak utility unit is not inherently bad design - this happens all the time. the problem with the triplicate of mages in FE7 chapter 28x is that they have low enough accuracy that hitting ninian (or another unit) is a near-coinflip, and they can be anywhere from a non-issue (if all miss) to a serious threat (if they hit). whereas a single stronger LRT can be dispatched by a single player unit, three weaker LRTs cannot be dispatched by a single player unit (i.e., a single threat can be better dealt with strategically).

tl;dr higher variance is poorer map design.

If FE7's maps take longer to ltc because it's harder to move Florina w/Hector the straight 8 tiles per turn right up to the throne then I consider that a win for 7.

the real reason FE7's maps take longer to LTC is because FE7 has those terribly designed defense chapters on top of everything else.

6's levels are more tedious because the map design is dull, uninspired, and needlessly large, with several maps just being straight lines and large open areas, or otherwise similarly rudimentary layout. This, for just one example, results in less utilization of terrain/layout for one's advantage.

all of this is asserted without evidence, because - to nobody's surprise - none of this is true.

of course it wouldn't.

the fact that the meat of the map is suddenly permeable to player units within the first 12 turns is not going to change how players approach the map? lol, don't be ridiculous.

Edited July 4, 2014 by dondon151

[Baldrick]

but does everything have to be based on LTC runs?

Apparently so.

[dondon151]

well, i pointed out why it's impossible to have a useful discussion under the premise of a turtling playstyle. the allegation that i can only be talking about LTC is just a trick to discredit whatever points i bring up.

[Baldrick]

TIL turtling and LTC are the only two speeds of playstyle there are. And that a playstyle is only valid if you can argue about it on the internet.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Baldrick

[Constable Reggie]

the real reason FE7's maps take longer to LTC is because FE7 has those terribly designed defense chapters on top of everything else.

So having different mission objectives which, again, relieves the tedious nature of Fe6's one objective, results in more tedium than 6's levels because they're slower to ltc?

all of this is asserted without evidence, because - surprise, surprise - none of this is true.

Do I seriously have to point out specific examples for you? Come on, show some initiative.

13: The majority of the map is straight, wide bridges.

14x: Already discussed in detail

15: stupidly long, wide trail to get to the throne.

16: long pathways to get to the throne. Lack of enemy density. Inclusion of Douglas somewhat mitigates this.

18I: Do I seriously have to explain why this is tedious

18S: Huge open map that is poorly utilized

19S: No explanation needed

20xI: lol one of the most uncreative levels ever. Literally nothing but corridors.

21: stupidly excessively large map. The overabundance of wyvern enemies negates significant strategic use of level layout

21x: stupidly excessively large map. The design in particular means excessive traversing without use of fliers

22: stupidly excessively large map. Nothing but straight corridors. Switches add even more pointless traversing

the fact that the meat of the map is permeable to player units within the first 12 turns is not going to change how players approach the map? lol, don't be ridiculous.

I was mocking your lack of evidence to back your claim (which you are now hypocritically doing to me lol). And no, the ability for an average of 1-2 units being able to fly over walls will not significantly affect the typical style of play. The exception to this, of course, is for ltc/efficient/niche playthroughs, which I've already mentioned.

the allegation that i can only be talking about LTC is just a trick to discredit whatever points i bring up.

Jesus dude quit the witch hunt bs you're pulling here. Your main counterpoints to the good/bad level design of Fe6 have been in the context of ltc play, and generally inapplicable to a more casual style.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Constable Reggie

[dondon151]

Do I seriously have to point out specific examples for you? Come on, show some initiative.

13: The majority of the map is straight, wide bridges.

14x: Already discussed in detail

15: stupidly long, wide trail to get to the throne.

16: long pathways to get to the throne. Lack of enemy density. Inclusion of Douglas somewhat mitigates this.

18I: Do I seriously have to explain why this is tedious

18S: Huge open map that is poorly utilized

19S: No explanation needed

20xI: lol one of the most uncreative levels ever. Literally nothing but corridors.

21: stupidly excessively large map. The overabundance of wyvern enemies negates significant strategic use of level layout

21x: stupidly excessively large map. The design in particular means excessive traversing without use of fliers

22: stupidly excessively large map. Nothing but straight corridors. Switches add even more pointless traversing

all of these maps are super fun except for 19S and the gaidens, and the gaidens are mostly tolerable.

I was mocking your lack of evidence to back your claim (which you are now hypocritically doing to me lol). And no, the ability for an average of 1-2 units being able to fly over walls will not significantly affect the typical style of play. The exception to this, of course, is for ltc/efficient/niche playthroughs, which I've already mentioned.

do i need evidence to back up the claim that a change to the map will result in a change to how the map is played? this is almost a tautology.

Jesus dude quit the witch hunt bs you're pulling here. Your main counterpoints to the good/bad level design of Fe6 have been in the context of ltc play, and generally inapplicable to a more casual style.

baldrick just committed the same fallacy that i asked him not to commit, so this is not some "witch hunt bs."

[Constable Reggie]

all of these maps are super fun except for 19S and the gaidens, and the gaidens are mostly tolerable.

This is like responding to filmic criticism of the Bayformers movies with "but they're fun"

do i need evidence to back up the claim that a change to the map will result in a change to how the map is played? this is almost a tautology.

Quit generalizing and back up your claim against my specific claim. Allowing 1-2 units of a player's team to traverse over walls will not change a casual-pace player's style of play, at least not enough to merit discussion.

baldrick just committed the same fallacy that i asked him not to commit, so this is not some "witch hunt bs."

Nu-uh, he also mentioned turtling.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Constable Reggie

[dondon151]

This is like responding to filmic criticism of the Bayformers movies with "but they're fun"

i can already predict the response if i went over each of these maps and explained how they're fun: "they're only fun in LTC!" so i've spared myself the effort.

Quit generalizing and back up your claim against my specific claim. Allowing 1-2 units of a player's team to traverse over walls will not change a casual-pace player's style of play, at least not enough to merit discussion.

if there exists a casual player who uses a flying unit (a lot of casual players use milady), that flying unit can inadvertently be played differently in chapter 19S...

[Constable Reggie]

i can already predict the response if i went over each of these maps and explained how they're fun: "they're only fun in LTC!" so i've spared myself the effort.

Way to strengthen your assertion that you're not only considering ltc play.

I don't care how you think they're fun, I care about your substantiated opinion as to how Fe6's level design is not bad/tedious. Since the only things you've countered with so far are "Fe7's is worse because its harder to ltc", "fe6 level design is better suited to my very niche style of play", and "fe6 is fun", I'm just gonna assume you concede the point.

if there exists a casual player who uses a flying unit (a lot of casual players use milady), that flying unit can inadvertently be played differently in chapter 19S

Inadvertently =/= enough to merit discussion. Flying over the wall in place of going through the gate or just for the hell of it does not count, as that barely constitutes playing differently. No typical player is going to send a lone flier or two over the wall straight into magic/bows.

[Baldrick]

baldrick just committed the same fallacy that i asked him not to commit, so this is not some "witch hunt bs."

I'll spell it out for you. Your response to the claim you're only considering LTC is that turtling isn't worth discussing. Hence my sarcastic response that those are the only two playstyles (even efficiency does not have so strict criteria that being hit by a status stave requires a reset) and that playstyles are only valid if they generate interesting discussion.

[dondon151]

Way to strengthen your assertion that you're not only considering ltc play.

I don't care how you think they're fun, I care about your substantiated opinion as to how Fe6's level design is not bad/tedious. Since the only things you've countered with so far are "Fe7's is worse because its harder to ltc", "fe6 level design is better suited to my very niche style of play", and "fe6 is fun", I'm just gonna assume you concede the point.

look, if you're not playing under some semblance of speed (whether it be efficiency or LTC), then literally every map in fire emblem can be beaten by the same formula: bait out enemies, kill them, advance, repeat. if there are LRTs or status staves, you bait those and stall until they break.

any tactical considerations necessitated by map design are rendered inconsequential. it doesn't matter that chapter 13 has a neat trick where you can influence milady's starting position by getting roy as far as possible through the map. it doesn't matter that in chapter 15, lalum needs to recruit perceval, who is in the opposite direction of the hammerne village. it doesn't matter that in chapters 17I through 19I, the ballista AI can be manipulated to attack certain decoys based on smart trading of the delphi shield. it doesn't matter that in chapters 20I, 22, and 23, enemy staff users target combat-ready units in reverse deployment order, a detail that is essential for developing reliable strategies. it doesn't matter that in chapter 22, there's a neat trick involving merlinus where you can transport the warp staff from the right side of the map to the left side of the map. it doesn't matter that in chapter 24, manakete AI prefers targeting units incapable of countering over units near death, which extends the longevity of melee units, or that the chapter requires some of the most demanding rescue-drop sequences of any game in the franchise.

no, once you lower the bar, "tedious" simply becomes a word without meaning. of course the game is tedious if every map can be beaten with the same stale formula. that's not a property limited to FE6; if you can't tell, there's a considerable depth to FE6 that FE7 really just doesn't have.

Edited July 4, 2014 by dondon151

[Constable Reggie]

You're really not helping your case as you're basically describing turtling. Looks like Baldrick was right. You do know there's speeds between a crawl and ltc? It may not work for tier listing, but it accurately describes the typical speed of the general Fe player.

As for details

it doesn't matter that in chapter 15, lalum needs to recruit perceval, who is in the opposite direction of the hammerne village.

The hammerne village is moderately easy to reach without a dancer. Even disregarding that, Percival and co follow you, giving you no real reason to have the dancer go towards him, unless you need to get him immediately for ltc. Either way, the rest of the level is still garbage.

it doesn't matter that in chapters 17I through 19I, the ballista AI can be manipulated to attack certain decoys based on smart trading of the delphi shield. it doesn't matter that in chapters 20I, 22, and 23, enemy staff users target combat-ready units in reverse deployment order, a detail that is essential for developing reliable strategies.

How the fuck is anyone supposed to figure this out normally and how does this equate to good level design?

it doesn't matter that in chapter 22, there's a neat trick involving merlinus where you can transport the warp staff from the right side of the map to the left side of the map.

This equates to good level design how?

or that the chapter requires some of the most demanding rescue-drop sequences of any game in the franchise.

Really? I had no problem beating that chapter without any rescue-drop. And for the record, I was neither turtling nor ltcing.

Well, at least you're citing actual evidence for your argument, as opposed to your feelings. It's a step up, I guess.

no, once you lower the bar, "tedious" simply becomes a word without meaning. of course the game is tedious if every map can be beaten with the same stale formula.

The game's tedious because it severely draws out most conventional styles of play and doesn't offer incentive to do anything different. Fe7/8 have very tight, well built maps and different objectives (optional and mandatory) to keep new chapters feeling (for lack of a better term) fresh. Fe6 does not.

[Jotari]

The long way has little reason to exist other than for aesthetics.

Is this a point of bad level design? Because I think the aesthetics are very important especially for a map like that. You need to convey a certain image and feel from each map to stop them being plains with mountains on repeat. Gameplay wise they could have cut the entire right hand section of the map and little would change gameplay wise but the map would look very squashed and you wouldn't feel like you were getting to see the full extent of the temple. Even if there is no gameplay importance to half a map I still think it can qualify for good level design. A lot of maps similarily have large sea sections that aren't utilized but help to make the player feel like they're fighting on an island or costal region.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Jotari

[Constable Reggie]

Even if there is no gameplay importance to half a map I still think it can qualify for good level design.

You would think this invalidates it, though. Non-open world games should not include vasts amounts of nothing in their levels. If it's in the level, it should at least hold some kind of gameplay relevance. And unless the game has a strong mutual link between story and gameplay (ie Fe4), the story aspect of it should be considered after the gameplay aspect. And while 14x kinda does have a gameplay aspect to it, it's handled so damn poorly it might as well not exist.

If an FPS included a level with two paths; one that basically leads immediately to the next set piece, while the other is like 10x longer than the first with the same amount of enemies as the short path, would that be acceptable game design?

[Chiki]

It depends on what it's being criticized for. Something like "is extremely unbalanced" or "wasn't well implemented" is a legitimate criticism for (optional) reclassing. Something like "it eliminates unit uniqueness" is not. Someone trying to argue that Luigi mode in NSMB "destroys any sense of challenge and trivializes the game" would be laughed out the room.

Fe13's reclassing on the other hand can be criticized for the latter, because it heavily pushes you, if not forces you, to reclass your units to different classes. No one complains of 13 "eliminatating unit uniqueness", though. Whereas in SD, a completely optional and ignorable feature somehow does this.

You mostly ignored the general statement he made: a bad feature being optional does not make the game much better.

Now you have to give the necessary and sufficient conditions for what "completely optional" means. One could think that a script could be completely optional too if you press A at the right times. One could think that reclassing isn't completely optional because it shows up at the base.

I know I have probably have no idea what I'm saying, but does everything have to be based on LTC runs? I mean, maps can be rated on other factors too, but dondon' s main points are about LTC.

Extreme LTC may not be the best way to judge how well a chapter is designed, since in that case, it's bad game design if you need to get a 1% crit on a boss. You need something a little slower than that, which is definitely a pretty good metric to see how well-designed a map is. The first reason is because the game designers seem to want you to go fast in pretty much every game (FE5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12? etc.) 9 and 10 most of all, since you actually get rewarded a lot for going quickly.

The second reason is because every map in most FE modes (maybe except FE13 Lunatic+) can be beaten just by a semi-decent player turtling. The game designers seemed to have this in mind when they chose to reward you for going faster.

The third reason is because of luck. Turtling is often the best way to handle chapters like CoD where you get spammed by sleep staff users, since if you take your time you can keep Restoring your units or keep using Pure Water until their staffs break. But this strategy is not good for when you want to go fast. LTCing really allows you to see how bullshit some of the chapters are.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Chiki

[Irysa]

Do I seriously have to point out specific examples for you? Come on, show some initiative.

13: The majority of the map is straight, wide bridges.

14x: Already discussed in detail

15: stupidly long, wide trail to get to the throne.

16: long pathways to get to the throne. Lack of enemy density. Inclusion of Douglas somewhat mitigates this.

18I: Do I seriously have to explain why this is tedious

18S: Huge open map that is poorly utilized

19S: No explanation needed

20xI: lol one of the most uncreative levels ever. Literally nothing but corridors.

21: stupidly excessively large map. The overabundance of wyvern enemies negates significant strategic use of level layout

21x: stupidly excessively large map. The design in particular means excessive traversing without use of fliers

22: stupidly excessively large map. Nothing but straight corridors. Switches add even more pointless traversing

Okay hold the fucking phone.

13: The map has two wide bridges, but Percival is included as an optional challenge to recruit at the top of the map. Getting Lalum to Percival safely is no mean feat. You are actually somewhat encouraged to ignore the top of the map because it is considerably more difficult to go through the top than the bottom, and splitting up your forces can cause problems because this is the first map that promoted enemies start to appear with frequency. If you WANT, you can attempt to do both, and recruit Percival early (only really beneficial in NM).

14x: I don't agree that this is a "a bad map" beacuse the amount of tiles you are probably going to end up visiting is low. The map has a unique gimmick that means you have to move forward quickly, lest you get trapped, and has fair positioning on the enemy bolting sages. The boss and the other sage only overlap on a very small area near the start, and further in the map any 8 mov unit can reach the first sage without also being at risk from getting blicked by the boss, and that Sage won't retaliate because he will have inevitably used Bolting on the previous turn, meaning you can reliably have healed them and them had them attack. There's no coinflipping going on here at all if your positioning is considered. I would accept the criticism that "this map has a lot of empty space if you play efficiently" but to be quite frank, quite a lot of maps have this "problem", and I don't think that it would have really "improved" the design of the level to stick some chests in the top right. If anything THAT would be tedium because anyone who wants to get to the chests would have to waste a bunch of extra turns doing fuck all else.

I don't think this map is "fun" but I would strongly contest it being "poorly designed".

15: Similar to 13, to recruit Percival, you have to send some units the opposite direction to where you want to initially go. The hammerne village has to reached promptly or else it will get sacked by bandits. There is a cleverly placed mountain tile (that kind of thing is not just random tile placement) that allows you to do a quick clear by utilising a flier with Horseslayer who has dropped Roy on the mountain. This map is a massive breather before the game starts to get a lot more difficult, and is a great way for units behind on EXP to catch up due to the enemies here being mostly weaker.

16: This map is the definition of what you seem to want out of your maps and yet you're criticising it. There are tons of things to do here, and different ways to approach the map that all make things easier. You can eliminate the bolting mage on turn 1 with a longbow. You can bait the Purge bishop with Fae whom you got on the previous chapter. You have a multitude of chests with great treasure. To recruit Zeiss you have to get Miledy to the top left of the map through a wall. Douglas has to be kept alive, and cannot be recruited and will behave aggressively. You can attack various enemies through the walls, or lure them to do so to make your life easier later on (an easy example is the left wall just after you take the left entrance). Hugh could be recruited from either entrance, but the furthest entrance from where Roy is forced is the easiest one to make it to him from. The Member Card is instantly useful on this map, but you have to get it to the top left of the map along with Zeiss to reap any benefits. The boss has to have a Delphi shield stolen in order to be made more managable. There are enemies with items to steal, including a Dragon who can probably oneshot your thieves. Cath can be recruited.

Like, how on EARTH can you dismiss chapter 16 as a "tedious romp to the throne"? Do you just ignore everything?

18I: Being a FoW map, on a fpt this is probably the only thing I would accept a complaint about on your list. There are a lot of things you can do to advance faster and efficiently though, I usually like to drop a unit over to the right of the starting area whilst having Niime on a Forest or Fort advance up whilst building Dark rank and using statboosters, since she onerounds most of the enemies and can't really be hurt.

18S: The openness of this map is unrivaled in the entirity of FE6. There is simply no other map that has as much free wide open space, so whilst it may not be effectively utilised, its by far the exception, not the rule. There is something of a gimmick in how enemy nomads can spawn when you're inside the circle, but it's somewhat poorly utilised and I would be comfortable saying this map doesn't have much going for it. However the openess does allow for less predictable enemy movement compared to usual.

19S: I agree with dondon that this map basically needed a way to open the main gates or to fly someone over the walls. A feature where you could drop some units over the wall, kill an enemy and hit a lever to trigger the release of the gate would have been a fantastic alternative.

20xI: Much like 16x (heck, most of the gaidens period), this is a chapter that basically incentivises you to do something that doesn't revolve around a slugfest because you will incur more problems the more time you spend messing around. Too many enemy longbows, but the status staff placement is a lot fairer. Note that base Niime has just enough mag to warp a unit to the centre of the map, which allows you to greatly simplify the map.

21: You can beat the map in like 5 or 6 turns even somewhat casually and it's way less annoying than something like CoD. Since all the enemy reinforcements are trigger based on your position, you can smartly avoid most of them. The game gives you a second high mag warp user in order to handily get over the mountain at the start to avoid spawning Paladin or Wyvern reinforcements. You can berserk enemy sages to kill a lot of Wyverns. That being said, the very first time around on this map it's a pretty cool experience to see so many enemy reinforcements constantly incoming, it puts the scale of the enemies you've been fighting up till now to shame. Even on my FPT I enjoyed this map a lot, wheras now I can can enjoy skirting the more difficult parts.

22: "stupidly excessively large map" that is also not that hard to beat in like 7 turns or so even casually. Now admittedly, if you don't have boots up the ass you're going to have to deal with the throne room, but the left side allows for an obvious easy use of warp to reach the first switch quickly, the second switch is easily accessible by your normal progress through the map, and this is another great place to burn Berserk charges to thin enemy ranks. The brave weapon heroes on the throne are also some of the meaner enemies in the game, they're practically minibosses in their own right. The throne room enemies aren't all that difficult anyway, and it adds a nice climactic moment when Roy bursts through the door to the throne room and confronts Zephiel and his elites, whist reinforcements from behind are closing in, which so you have to deal with the throne room promptly.

FYI none of what I have said has been WRT LTC. I am not an LTC player, I merely try to play somewhat efficiently.

You would think this invalidates it, though. Non-open world games should not include vasts amounts of nothing in their levels. If it's in the level, it should at least hold some kind of gameplay relevance. And unless the game has a strong mutual link between story and gameplay (ie Fe4), the story aspect of it should be considered after the gameplay aspect. And while 14x kinda does have a gameplay aspect to it, it's handled so damn poorly it might as well not exist.

If an FPS included a level with two paths; one that basically leads immediately to the next set piece, while the other is like 10x longer than the first with the same amount of enemies as the short path, would that be acceptable game design?

This isn't the same thing at all. Maps can be looked at visually from an overlooking standpoint. 14x visually looks better when it has that extra space to the right, and the space has a purpose for slower play.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Irysa

[Baldrick]

For me, the problem with FE6's maps is not so much lack of things to do but too much time walking.

13: Considering the enemy density and the reinforcements come from behind, the bridge is too long.

14x: This map is fine, the right hand side could be cut without hurting anything.

15: Same as above.

16: Holy winding corridors, Batman! There's no reason why we shouldn't be allowed to go straight to the landing where Cath appears. Again, the enemy density and reinforcements mean there's no point in this big map. For the third time, the right hand side is pointless, except now there are chests there, so you have to go up there.

18I: I have nothing more to add about this map.

18S: This isn't too bad, though it could be cropped pretty liberally.

19S: There's no reason we couldn't start right outside the city and cut everything below the lower NT.

20Ix: FE7 23x did this kind of chapter right.

21: I like this map, it's pretty epic. It throws eleventy billion reinforcements at you that are in your path so there's actually a point in the map being huge.

22: Bullshit you could beat this map in 7 turns without careful planning and liberal use of Warp. This real reason Bern is such a military force is that anyone who tries to invade the capital starves to death trying to cross their ENDLESS FUCKING CORRIDORS

Of course, it's far from the worst game in that regard.

[Irysa]

I beat ch22 casually in 7 turns on my no HM chars playthrough with only 1 use of warp, and that run isn't even an LTC run. I even fucked up my positioning and had to spend extra turns waiting for Percival and Saul to kill one of the enemy heroes, and Roy wasn't in the right space before so I could have done it faster. That being said I did buy like 24 pairs of boots or something because buyable boots is the best thing about FE6. Without boots that extends to like an extra 3 or 4 turns and a rescue use. I'm really wondering how much of the time you actually fullmove or rescuedrop units around if you think 22 actually takes TOO LONG.

How is the right side of 16 pointless? What exactly makes it "pointless" to go that way, when in fact most players send most of their units that way?

A lot of your complaints seem to just revolve around the fact that "in your experience" it takes too long to beat the map, when comparatively I find that basically none of them except for chapter 8 and 14 (because of items) and gaidens (which I'll freely admit I warpskip), take a considerably long amount of time on a normal playthrough.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Irysa

[ZemZem]

Chapter 22 of FE6 isn't bad because all my units have 8 - 15 MOV by this time thanks to the buyable boots.

And I love the design of this chapter.

[Baldrick]

Outside of drafts, I only fullmove if there is a subobjective in danger or there are no enemies around and only use rescue to get units out of danger to keep them from falling behind. What's the rush? The enemy will almost always come to me, and if I hurry unnecessarily, my formation will be weaker, I may even risk fatal hits. Outside of drafts I don't count squares, or count turns, or do anything other than react to what I see.

Apart from generals and dancers, Boots are the worst statbooster you can buy. Even Goddess Icons protect against the possibility of an enemy crit. Those two classes like extra movement so they can keep up and do their thing without having to be ferried all the time, but for other classes, it's more movement to do ?????? (see: point about enemies coming to me)

Casual suggests to me a laconic pace, with no Warp/Rescue, no Boots, no carefully choreographed rescue chains. Saying you "fucked up your positioning" implies you were planning out each turn, which is very much not a casual mindset. I would call your playthrough an efficient one.

Pointless is the wrong word. Extraneous? There are two paths, and so the resistance you face is halved. And this map has a low enemy density as it is.

It's not just "in my experience". For some chapters, I have mentioned sections of the map you could remove (and redistribute the enemies therein) to reduce the amount of distance you need to cover without reducing the amount of combat you will see.

[Irysa]

Outside of drafts, I only fullmove if there is a subobjective in danger or there are no enemies around and only use rescue to get units out of danger to keep them from falling behind. What's the rush? The enemy will almost always come to me, and if I hurry unnecessarily, my formation will be weaker, I may even risk fatal hits. Outside of drafts I don't count squares, or count turns, or do anything other than react to what I see.

Quite frankly I think it is somewhat ridiculous to complain that the map takes too long to complete if say you would always rather wait for enemies to come to you rather than the other way around. That is the very definition of turtling.

Calling a map "bad" because you felt you had an unenjoyable experience turtling...oddly enough, I would agree that a lot of maps ARE quite miserable in FE6 if you want to turtle, which is EXACTLY why I appreciate the design in that game. It was the first game in the series that really got me to stop, take a step back and start thinking a bit more about my playstyle and what I was doing, and how I could make it easier. However, I would propose that is more a reflection of intent by the developers than it is "bad design".

Apart from generals and dancers, Boots are the worst statbooster you can buy. Even Goddess Icons protect against the possibility of an enemy crit. Those two classes like extra movement so they can keep up and do their thing without having to be ferried all the time, but for other classes, it's more movement to do ?????? (see: point about enemies coming to me)

Movement is by far the best stat in the game because the more movement you have the more possibilities you have open to you. Statistically, by the time you get to the secret shop in FE6 there are only a few stat benchmarks that you really want to have hit by then, unless your team is RNG screwed. If you don't see the value of boots, then this only reinforces what I just said, you're in the mindset of turtling not "casual" play. Unlimited boots is incredibly fun in casual play.

Casual suggests to me a laconic pace, with no Warp/Rescue, no Boots, no carefully choreographed rescue chains. Saying you "fucked up your positioning" implies you were planning out each turn, which is very much not a casual mindset. I would call your playthrough an efficient one.

You would be hard pressed to find anyone who'd call this run efficient really, aside from 1 or 2 warpskips. When I fucked up, I simply messed up where Lalum needed to stand in order to dance Roy after he opened the door.

Casual playthrough's don't neccessarily imply turtling, they just imply that you don't really care about turns or whatnot, so you play at your leisure, which is what I was doing aside from a few attempted 2/3 turn clears on Gaidens. The only personal requirement I have is that I like to try to avoid reinforcements because I think they are annoying, so I would try to beat chapters before reinforcements spawn, or before they reach me.

Also, the game also gives you a gigantic base mag A staff rank prepromote, and then later another pretty high mag A staff rank prepromote. I don't think that it's cheap or "non casual" to decide to utilise those since it still requires some thought (unlikes a game like FE11 where you can warpskip nearly everything pretty easily).

Pointless is the wrong word. Extraneous? There are two paths, and so the resistance you face is halved. And this map has a low enemy density as it is.

The fact that there is low enemy density is exactly why you can afford to move up quickly on ch16 though. That's the point. That's also why there are a lot of things to do on the map, and its not heavily focused on killing enemies or sitting around baiting everything till the reinforcements stop. Now what I WOULD say is that nearly all FE games are biased as hell to anyone on a mount, and in FE6 if you deploy too many foot units and don't carry them around then you're going to get swamped beacuse you don't move fast enough. I would accept that in other FE games, this problem is not as magnified, but it is still present and a problem with the series, not specifically FE6.

It's not just "in my experience". For some chapters, I have mentioned sections of the map you could remove (and redistribute the enemies therein) to reduce the amount of distance you need to cover without reducing the amount of combat you will see.

Again, I would say that if you actively decide "I want to wait" and decide not to utilise the game's mechanics to your advantage then you are literally inhibiting yourself on purpose, so to say it is the game's maps at fault for not accomodating your playstyle is absurd.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Irysa