Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Luninareph

What's your opinion on the map size of FE4?

The map size of FE4  

98 members have voted

  1. 1. How do you feel about the giant-sized maps?

    • I love them. They're one of the reasons I play the game.
    • I've always liked the idea, but feel it could have been done better.
    • I'm pretty neutral on map size. It doesn't matter much to me.
    • I don't really like how enormous they are.
    • I can't enjoy FE4 BECAUSE the maps are so huge.
    • I haven't played FE4, but I think the map size was a great choice.
    • I haven't played FE4 because I dislike the giant maps so much.
    • Other
      0


Recommended Posts

Kaga said explicitly that the point of canto was to prevent a situation where a player unit is able to kill any unit that attacks it on enemy phase but still gettes killed due to the chip damage. (tell me that this has never happened to you in non-canto games) The implication was that he wanted more of a player phase focus. Canto certainly did that, but it was at the cost of massive imballence between player characters.

Mounts are well designed to be player phase specialists, with the ability to retreat after attacking they can minimise their exposure on the enemy phase. It's too bad they tend to be competent on the enemy phase as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is ardan really worse than Amelia, or Wendy, or Shanam, or Macellan or you get the point now?

I'd actually argue that he's better than said units. He's certainly way easier to use.

And while Celice/Sigurd are solo experts, Celice is only good because most players get him super overlevelled super fast. If he promotes like, in Chapter 8 or something, he's pretty shitty in 6 and 7 and never really doubles a whole lot for the rest of the game until Tyrfing because his caps suck. It's kind of unfourtunate that they're lords though, no other lords have really done the same (since they're not mounted). Would the game really have been different if Sigurd had been in Alec's spot? Celice wouldn't even be a good unit if he wasn't the lord!

also @ Levant i'd argue that mounts overall are worse in FE4 than in all the GBA games because Fliers don't have higher movement like the cavalry and can't rescue. Mounts can get just as far ahead in GBA maps by rescuing each other forward as they do in FE4, probably farther considering every FE4 castle only takes ~5-7 turns and most additional castles can have unmounted units further ahead to start with so they can be used. And the arena makes it so they aren't stuck with base stats so they aren't completely useless.

For someone who's claimed to not have actually played the game you make a lot of assumptions.

Edited by General Horace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i have honestly never been bothered by the map size

i don't think it was executed particularly well, but it i didn't (and don't) find it nearly as much of a drag as everyone else seems to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the huge maps but it's not something I'd want in every single game.

Pretty much this

I like FE4 for what it is, and wouldn't really change anything in it, but I wouldn't want every game to be like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is ardan really worse than Amelia, or Wendy, or Shanam, or Macellan or you get the point now?

I'd actually argue that he's better than said units. He's certainly way easier to use.

also @ Levant i'd argue that mounts overall are worse in FE4 than in all the GBA games because Fliers don't have higher movement like the cavalry and can't rescue. Mounts can get just as far ahead in GBA maps by rescuing each other forward as they do in FE4, probably farther considering every FE4 castle only takes ~5-7 turns and most additional castles can have unmounted units further ahead to start with so they can be used. And the arena makes it so they aren't stuck with base stats so they aren't completely useless.

For someone who's claimed to not have actually played the game you make a lot of assumptions.

Well, when you look at things in a void, I guess that's true.

Second part: I wasn't thinking about fliers when I was talking about mounts - only horses, given that it would be irrelevant for fliers. Second, as far as the GBA games go, I generally don't see that situation you're mentioning (which seems to be something along the lines of a mount falling behind the army; I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to get at here) crop up very often, so ehhhh. Third, I wouldn't exactly like to have to waste time trying to get my foot units caught up before seizing just to get some use out of them come the next part of the map (and I stated as much earlier)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second part: I wasn't thinking about fliers when I was talking about mounts - only horses, given that it would be irrelevant for fliers. Second, as far as the GBA games go, I generally don't see that situation you're mentioning (which seems to be something along the lines of a mount falling behind the army; I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to get at here) crop up very often, so ehhhh. Third, I wouldn't exactly like to have to waste time trying to get my foot units caught up before seizing just to get some use out of them come the next part of the map (and I stated as much earlier)...

Reading what I said again, it made very little sense. I mean in a chapter like chapter 8 in FE6 (Lilina's recruit one), you can make a 7 move mounted unit move 30 spaces in 3 turns with the help of other mounts (two 8 move dudes and a bunch of 7 move dudes), while unmounted units can only punt a unit 19 spaces in the same scenrio, so an 11 space difference over the course of 3 turns (including someone promoting using the Hero Crest in the previous chapter for a 6 move dude)

In FE4 Chapter 10, the distance between Celice and Shanan after 3 turns was only 10 spaces if they moved ignoring all enemies. It's really not that different. It's just rare for players to actually abuse the rescue function. When dancers and fliers get added to the equation, the difference becomes even greater, especially considering the GBA chapter in question doesn't have any places fliers can ignore terrain and just blow the whole comparison in GBA's favour, but I decided to use a chapter that didn't take that into account.

as for not wanting to move your foot units, you don't have to wait for them to catch up to contribute in Chapters 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, Prologue, or Endgame.

Ayra and Jamka can easily help out in Chapter 1 when they're around too (Ayra has more move than everyone in the forest but Sigurd and Cuan whom she ties, and is recruited close to a huge wave of axedudes, and when Jamka is recruited he's pretty much out of the forest). They only struggle in chapter 6 if Celice inherits the leg ring, otherwise they have no problems. They are kinda screwed in Chapter 5 and 8 though.

Staves and dancers exist too but I'm not going to bother going into that too much.

Edited by General Horace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going off what General Horace said, here are all the places where foot units can contribute in every chapter without really having to catch up in FE4:

In the prologue, Arden and Azel start near enough enemies to fight.

In chapter 1, Azel and Arden probably aren't doing much, but Aira and Jamka and Deidre start near enough to contribute.

In chapter 2 your infantry should be dealing with macklily and if you break through quickly they can probably also help out a bit with agusty.

In chapter 3 they can fight the cross knights, deal with other units scattered across the map, help take Silvail (if you move them far enough forwards in the beginning), and guard the northern bridge from the pirates

In chapter 4 as long as you're not going ridiculously fast they can help clean up bandits, pegasi, and wind mages.

Chapter 5 is harder for infantry, but they can deal with bandits/ that group of armors that advances on you at the beginning, as well as being warped to Phinora to defend against Thracia.

Chapter 6 is alright for them as long as Celice isn't killing everything.

Chapter 7: due to how much running around Celice needs to do to get from castle to castle, foot units can help out with pretty much every castle.

In chapter 8 there's not much besides defending against the armors at the beginning.

In chapter 9 infantry can be warped to deal with the empire's reinforcements and defend against draco knights.

In chapter 10 infantry can help fight the mass of dark mages in front of your home castle and can later catch up through warp.

In the final chapter infantry can deal with the axe brigade, fight the bow knights, and abuse the cliff south of Barhara to deal with some of the dark warlords.

These are all the places where infantry can be realistically expected to contribute without assuming a slow pace of play, which is quite a bit. Considering how large the gap in performance is between mounts and infantry is in other games (which has been mentioned before), I feel that although mounted units are by far the best in fire emblem four, that's true across the whole series, and infantry is only a bit worse off than in other entries when compared to mounts.

Edited by MartyTheDemonSlayer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could always link Balcerzak's AAAA run as a frame of reference, although it's probably not fair to hold every player to that high of a standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FE's best maps have always been the tight, claustrophobic ones.

i pretty strongly disagree; good FE maps tend to be big. they just don't tend to be as boring and linear as FE4 maps. even when they are linear, other FE games have more mechanics to diversify the strategy space.

just for FE5 in particular, most of the maps are pretty good (even if they are staff-fests), but the best ones are near the end of the game.

my impression of playing FE4 can be best approximated by repeatedly playing some combination of FE6 chapter 8 and FE6 chapter 24, except your units don't have 15 mov, so it's not quite as fun without toys like rescue.

Edited by dondon151

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like if you cut out all the dead space where you're moving but not doing anything else they would be better. So yes, I think they're a bit too big. It also wouldn't hurt to give foot units +1 mov each.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going off what General Horace said, here are all the places where foot units can contribute in every chapter without really having to catch up in FE4:

In the prologue, Arden and Azel start near enough enemies to fight.

In chapter 1, Azel and Arden probably aren't doing much, but Aira and Jamka and Deidre start near enough to contribute.

In chapter 2 your infantry should be dealing with macklily and if you break through quickly they can probably also help out a bit with agusty.

In chapter 3 they can fight the cross knights, deal with other units scattered across the map, help take Silvail (if you move them far enough forwards in the beginning), and guard the northern bridge from the pirates

In chapter 4 as long as you're not going ridiculously fast they can help clean up bandits, pegasi, and wind mages.

Chapter 5 is harder for infantry, but they can deal with bandits/ that group of armors that advances on you at the beginning, as well as being warped to Phinora to defend against Thracia.

Chapter 6 is alright for them as long as Celice isn't killing everything.

Chapter 7: due to how much running around Celice needs to do to get from castle to castle, foot units can help out with pretty much every castle.

In chapter 8 there's not much besides defending against the armors at the beginning.

In chapter 9 infantry can be warped to deal with the empire's reinforcements and defend against draco knights.

In chapter 10 infantry can help fight the mass of dark mages in front of your home castle and can later catch up through warp.

In the final chapter infantry can deal with the axe brigade, fight the bow knights, and abuse the cliff south of Barhara to deal with some of the dark warlords.

These are all the places where infantry can be realistically expected to contribute without assuming a slow pace of play, which is quite a bit. Considering how large the gap in performance is between mounts and infantry is in other games (which has been mentioned before), I feel that although mounted units are by far the best in fire emblem four, that's true across the whole series, and infantry is only a bit worse off than in other entries when compared to mounts.

I won't deny that the advantage mounts had over infantry was always a thing, but it's like you said - they're better in FE4 than in any other game by far. The only other game I could think of that had anywhere near this level of mount dominance was Path of Radiance (and maybe Binding Blade).

Edited by Levant Caprice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that in fire emblem four infantry still has plenty of uses even if you're playing at a brisk pace, though they'll never be the main focus. This is no different from most other fire emblem games. The only time the larger gap between infantry and mounts is significant is when you try and use infantry in the place of mounts to fulfill the same objectives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that in fire emblem four infantry still has plenty of uses even if you're playing at a brisk pace, though they'll never be the main focus. This is no different from most other fire emblem games. The only time the larger gap between infantry and mounts is significant is when you try and use infantry in the place of mounts to fulfill the same objectives.

That's true of just about any other FE game. Take Sacred Stones, for example. The village at the left edge of the map in chapter 9 Eirika route REQUIRES a mount to save, given that the pirate who tries to destroy it spawns far enough away that there's no chance in hell any foot unit can get there in time.

Also, don't get me wrong: I don't really care about going at a brisk pace. It's just that even so, I'd tire quickly of waiting for infantry to catch up.

You could always link Balcerzak's AAAA run as a frame of reference, although it's probably not fair to hold every player to that high of a standard.

I actually did watch said run, up to the beginning of chapter 2 or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are very unfair towards some aspects of the design of Genealogy of the Holy War and I can't help but think that some of the most common complaints, like the idea that calvary has a huge advantage over foot units are just patently false.

Let's take the first generation as an example. What units are weak because they aren't mounted? Certainly not Brigid, Levin, Ayra or Dew and I would rather take Holyn over the likes of Noish, Alec or Midir despite not having a mount There are simply more factors in the game that make an unit good or bad than having a horse.

For example, Azel has fairly mediocre stats. But he's a ranged magical unit that attacks twice in a game in which most units have no resistance to magic and there are no other wizards to take his spot in the team until the game is midway through. That makes him an useful unit, even if he's fairly slow and weak to direct hits.

One should also notice that other than Sigurd, every other mounted unit of the first generation has some kind of drawback, they are not just "foot units but better". Kaga is a very sharp designer and realizes

1) Noish has mediocre stats, weak skills, attacks only once

2) Alec has mediocre stats, low strenght.

3) Lex hits hard, but lacks Pursuit and is better suited to a defensive role, which beggets more units around him.

4) Finn starts with lances against axe-infested fields and needs care to grow into a solid (but not great) unit.

5) Midir has worse stats than Jamka on every single aspect, needs more babysitting.

5) Cuan is (intentionally) more powerful than other units but leaves halfway through. He's like a different take on the Jeigan archetype, serving a similar role on the game.

6) Ethilin is similar to Cuan, but for different reasons.

It's also difficult to take the huge armies of Genealogy with only those horsemen, you are bound to get ganged up by a superior force it. It's better to wait a turn and get Ayra ready to hit than to plough through and restart because getting hit by the enemy boss or the wizard gets Alec by any other unit.

Of course, some players abuse the Arena so I wouldn't be surprised if they think this or that unit is overpowered. The arena breaks the game but that's hardly something exclusive to Genealogy :V

I won't deny that the advantage mounts had over infantry was always a thing, but it's like you said - they're better in FE4 than in any other game by far. The only other game I could think of that had anywhere near this level of mount dominance was Path of Radiance (and maybe Binding Blade).

How can you know that if you haven't played it? :Kappa:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I like to defend FE4 as it is my favorite game, I disagree. Finn will have the hero lance and Lex will have the hero axe (unless you're LTCing) which makes their offense amazing. Noish, Midir, and Alec all have problems, but put together they have enough combined strength to kill a lot. Ethlin gives both Sigurd and Cuan extra evade, which helps a lot, Sigurd gives the whole cavalry squad an evade boost, and Lex, Sigurd, and Cuan are all amazing defensively. FE4 is also an easy enough game that having Cuan and Ethlin gobble up experience really doesn't matter at all, since by the time they leave, you have more amazing mounts to play around with like Lachesis. And I don't know what you mean by abuse the arena... considering there is a limited number of fights and they don't take up any turns I feel that the arena in FE4 isn't really abusable in the same way as in other games. And I wouldn't say that all infantry is better. Jamka is bow locked so even if he's stronger than Midir he still isn't amazing. Aira is quite weak defensively and can't reliably dodge all enemies. Even though infantry may be better in some ways, their comparative strength is often just overkill. Anyways, that's just the first generation. By the second generation you have cavalry with better skills and probably some high kill weapons to play around with too, making any difference between infantry and mounts almost nonexistent.

Of course, massive character imbalance is just fire emblem in general, though it is a bit worse in FE4. I enjoy the game in spite of its flaws, not because of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

meh i haven't effortposted about fire emblem in a long time

Certainly not Brigid,

brigid kind of sucks dude

Levin,

lewyn is a good unit but hampered by being slow as rocks (by foot); i'm a casual as hell player and i still left his broke ass behind a lot of the time

Ayra

ayra isn't all that special but she is a good unit

or Dew

lmao what

For example, Azel has fairly mediocre stats.

azel isn't particularly useful at any stage of the game. the only thing you'd use him for is shooting 1-range armors and the ones you'd shoot with him are castle guys who can auto switch weapons to counter anyway, thanks fe4

One should also notice that other than Sigurd, every other mounted unit of the first generation has some kind of drawback, they are not just "foot units but better".

you're correct to a point. the difficulty with this is that it's easier to put the resources into "fixing" a horse unit than it is into "fixing" the movement of a foot unit. you only get the canto ring and the movement ring once, for one foot unit, while every horse unit has it built in.

skipping alec and noish because frankly i've never bothered to raise alec and noish is a pimp for other reasons

3) Lex hits hard, but lacks Pursuit and is better suited to a defensive role, which beggets more units around him.

lex is unkillable once he gets going, gets going faster thanks to double xp, gets his own hero weapon earlier than anyone else (with no competition!) putting him on par with anyone with pursuit and then he can pick up the pursuit ring from ardan if you're really jonesin for some favoritism. hell, the fact that he can do anything with axes as they are in fe4 makes him a miracle worker.

4) Finn starts with lances against axe-infested fields and needs care to grow into a solid (but not great) unit.

pumping finn up gives you a beefier gen 2 finn, which behooves you to pump finn up. he's a solid unit who is also on a horse, which makes him better than a good chunk of gen 1.

5) Midir has worse stats than Jamka on every single aspect, needs more babysitting.

midir is jamke on a horse. he does less damage (and kind of sucks but archers kind of suck in fe4) but he can run away. he's the actual skirmisher that i bitched about this game not really accommodating, actually!

5) Cuan is (intentionally) more powerful than other units but leaves halfway through. He's like a different take on the Jeigan archetype, serving a similar role on the game.

quan is great yes and he leaves halfway through yes which is when your other pony units gets going. also, quan's great.

6) Ethilin is similar to Cuan, but for different reasons.

for actual healing ethlyn is basically a strictly better wossname (the blonde one) because she's on a horse and can therefore run into/out of danger to deliver ...the big heal staff. she doesn't get to use the warp shenanigans though, that's her problem.

It's also difficult to take the huge armies of Genealogy with only those horsemen, you are bound to get ganged up by a superior force it.

but the crux of the problem is that it isn't. sigurd or lex or a promoted raquesis can just stomp any given army (with a few exceptions) without support, let alone the three of them. i'd argue it's distinctly harder to take fe4's piles on as a cohesive unit rather than just as a few superstars on ponies.

It's better to wait a turn and get Ayra ready to hit than to plough through

and to add onto that, why would we literally sit in formation for a turn (note that it's more likely to be two to five) for ayra to show up when one of the good ponies could have already done it? you're attributing some aspect to ayra while simultaneously denying that other people have it. ayra has to get going too, you know.

Of course, some players abuse the Arena so I wouldn't be surprised if they think this or that unit is overpowered. The arena breaks the game but that's hardly something exclusive to Genealogy :V

no but it's like bexp in fe9 versus the tower in fe8. bexp in fe9 is this persistent presence you're encouraged at all stages to take advantage of and it can just blow up your units. the tower in fe8 exists off to the side and you can use it to blow the difficulty out of the game if you really want but it's not particularly easy to just nip out and put somebody 15 levels up like pouring bexp. ease of use of a mechanic is a thing, you know.

fe4 exacerbates the issue by having the arena be your primary source of cash, which you need for repairs and to trade items because the fe4 item system is stupid. so you have to do the arena to get the cash to do things, but the arena exacerbates the differences between good units and bad units and hell, why hold it against lex if he can clear the arena for 42069 gold and 5 levels every chapter before you even set out?

don't get me wrong man i love fe4 but balance is not its strong suit by a long margin. we aren't even touching on gen 2 which is half the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are very unfair towards some aspects of the design of Genealogy of the Holy War and I can't help but think that some of the most common complaints, like the idea that calvary has a huge advantage over foot units are just patently false.

Let's take the first generation as an example. What units are weak because they aren't mounted? Certainly not Brigid, Levin, Ayra or Dew and I would rather take Holyn over the likes of Noish, Alec or Midir despite not having a mount There are simply more factors in the game that make an unit good or bad than having a horse.

For example, Azel has fairly mediocre stats. But he's a ranged magical unit that attacks twice in a game in which most units have no resistance to magic and there are no other wizards to take his spot in the team until the game is midway through. That makes him an useful unit, even if he's fairly slow and weak to direct hits.

One should also notice that other than Sigurd, every other mounted unit of the first generation has some kind of drawback, they are not just "foot units but better". Kaga is a very sharp designer and realizes

1) Noish has mediocre stats, weak skills, attacks only once

2) Alec has mediocre stats, low strenght.

3) Lex hits hard, but lacks Pursuit and is better suited to a defensive role, which beggets more units around him.

4) Finn starts with lances against axe-infested fields and needs care to grow into a solid (but not great) unit.

5) Midir has worse stats than Jamka on every single aspect, needs more babysitting.

5) Cuan is (intentionally) more powerful than other units but leaves halfway through. He's like a different take on the Jeigan archetype, serving a similar role on the game.

6) Ethilin is similar to Cuan, but for different reasons.

It's also difficult to take the huge armies of Genealogy with only those horsemen, you are bound to get ganged up by a superior force it. It's better to wait a turn and get Ayra ready to hit than to plough through and restart because getting hit by the enemy boss or the wizard gets Alec by any other unit.

Of course, some players abuse the Arena so I wouldn't be surprised if they think this or that unit is overpowered. The arena breaks the game but that's hardly something exclusive to Genealogy :V

How can you know that if you haven't played it? :Kappa:

The last part: Because the map design screams mount heaven. :Kappa:

The rest: I agree that whether a unit is good or bad isn't something that can be determined by having a horse alone. Still, while Holyn might be better than those other three you mentioned, just how much does that mean when it takes several turns just to start clashing with the enemy force??? Not very much, I'd imagine, unless you're intentionally slowing down so that infantry can catch up. As to the middle: That's ignoring the part where Finn and Lex get their hero weapons, as pointed out by Marty, and I agree with his point where teamwork means a lot. And it's not like the infantry units don't have their fair share of problems, either. Like the part where Ayra's made of glass.

Edited by Levant Caprice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Holyn's credit I'd say he manages to do more than say, alec noish or midir, even once you factor in his movement, since his high base stats and proximity to promotion make him really shine in those situations where foot units can keep up. Also, about Finn, I forgot to mention the fact that he has prayer, which is absurdly powerful if you plan knocking him into prayer range out. Outside of Holyn and Levin I feel that all infantry have issues. Aira is weak defensively, Arden is just all around worthless, Dew has nothing besides his money giving utility, Jamka and Brigid are locked to bows, Azel is incredibly vulnerable and doesn't have access to wind until really late, Lachesis takes time to get going, and Deidre is Deidre. Besides Sigurd the individual mounts might not be game breaking to the extent some really powerful infantry are like Levin, but the cavalry mob sure is.

I feel the chapter that the huge maps right is chapter three. Though Madino castle is a massive cavalry rush the smaller distances and the multiple directions enemies come from allow infantry to stay relevant throughout the whole chapter if you position them right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

christ mks quit posting about fe4 if you haven't and are not going to play fe4 i'm starting to be tempted to just make you stop in a moderator way

I feel the chapter that the huge maps right is chapter three. Though Madino castle is a massive cavalry rush the smaller distances and the multiple directions enemies come from allow infantry to stay relevant throughout the whole chapter if you position them right.

chapter three is a good chapter except for the claude clusterfuck area tbf, easily my favorite gen1 chapter even though the actual story bits are dumb and made me madpost more than a little bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I don't know what you mean by abuse the arena... considering there is a limited number of fights and they don't take up any turns I feel that the arena in FE4 isn't really abusable in the same way as in other games.

Seven times per character, every chapter is enough to break the game, sadly. The game isn't designed to account for all that extra experience nor that extra influx of money, though the latter is not as important.

Seriously, if you guys are using the Arena, I can totally understand why you think the game is poorly balanced because using it completely destroys any semblance of balance it may have had. It's the root cause of practically every issue you guys have with the game. For example:

1) Feeding Cuan experience isn't an issue. Why? Because you are using the arena for experience

2) Dew has nothing besides his money giving utility. But his money-giving utility would be vital if you aren't using the arena to earn cash!

3) Promoted Lachesis at Chapter 3. Why are you able to promote such a frail character so easily? Because you can train her on the arena.

4) Azel isn't useful beyond killing armor. But armor is only easy to kill without Azel because your units have a much higher level thanks to the arena.

I'm not saying you are "wrong" for using it, but I do think it's the entire reason you find the game so easy. Despite the limitations the arena is antithethical to Genealogy of the Holy War's design and completely breaks it.

And Levant, I don't know why you are so keen on regurgitating what other people have said about the game but it's kind of pointless. You haven't played the game, you can't contribute to a discussion of its balance, c'mon :V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the limitations the arena is antithethical to Genealogy of the Holy War's design and completely breaks it.

so is the game well balanced or poorly balanced? if your argument is that the game is well balanced contingent on ignoring a part of the game that costs you the player very little time to use then c'mon buddy :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so is the game well balanced or poorly balanced? if your argument is that the game is well balanced contingent on ignoring a part of the game that costs you the player very little time to use then c'mon buddy :P

Well, that's the thing, really. As I see it, "Genealogy, the Arena game" is awfully balanced and all the things you've said are true because the game wasn't really designed around all that extra experience. But if you don't mind a variant of sorts, you can rule out the arena and play the game closer to its intended design, which is actually balanced.

Not sure if that makes sense but it's what I think ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game is easy without the arena. Even on 0% growths (so a game mode where the extra stats don't exist) things like holy weapons and massed cavalry charges (for the first four chapters of each generation) can trivialize the game. Furthermore, not all units can reliably clear the whole arena, at least in the first generation. Balcerzak's AAAA play through managed to get most units through every arena, but this was with some rng planning (not that there's a problem with that, it just isn't representative of normal play) or the abuse of mechanics like prayer or the sleep sword. In fact, a lot of mounts actually don't preform that will with the arena like Lex, Midir, Alec and Noish as they normally hit fights they can't pass without planning or luck. In spite of lots of infantry like Jamka, Aira and Holy gaining a disproportionate advantage from the arena, the gap between mounts and infantry is huge. Even if you removed the arena it would remain, since even under leveled cavalry can still take care of what the game has to offer. And this all ignores that the arena doesn't take up turns and was clearly intended to be used (as without the money how would mechanics like high kill weapons ever be relevant?) FE4 is my favorite game, but I don't think it could ever be called well balanced, even if you removed the arena.

Edited by MartyTheDemonSlayer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that's the thing, really. As I see it, "Genealogy, the Arena game" is awfully balanced and all the things you've said are true because the game wasn't really designed around all that extra experience. But if you don't mind a variant of sorts, you can rule out the arena and play the game closer to its intended design, which is actually balanced.

Not sure if that makes sense but it's what I think ;)

i find it really hard to believe that the game wasn't designed with the arena in mind considering the fact that most of your available dosh comes from the arena (i cannot belabor this point enough; regardless of the balance if you don't factor the arena you have no fucking money and money is the only way to trade) and you even recruit one character from beating the arena with a character in a particular chapter.

plus what marty said is true, the arena also functions as an equalizer in that foot units who don't see as much action as the mounties can easily get a few arena wins at the beginning of each chapter and stay caught up that way. hell, infantry tend to be better fighters than cavalry in general so they actually get more xp from the arena than the mounties iirc!

also a reminder that the arena is literally zero risk. any given chapter (except, i guess, chapter 10?) has zero time pressure on you at the beginning of the map so you're free to rush the arena until you lose a match and heal up outside afterwards (or reload a save, since you can arena before you move; you don't even need states to do this!)

EDIT: ah yeah chapter 5 also has time pressure since you have to secure tyrfing ASAP

Edited by Integrity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...