Do you prefer Wyvern Riders starting off with lances or axes?

[Dunal]

Why is that a bother? Axes and Lances are functionally very similar. Diversity of weapon types is not a meaningful goal when those weapon types function the same way.

Because weapon triangle and player's control surrounding making the most of it? (which is the whole entire point of having 3 standard melee types to begin with). When only fighters exist in tier 1 that use them and there are an abundant amount of lance users instead it makes sword wielding enemies less of the threat to you as a whole. Having variety in weapon users in general is a good thing.

Plus it just makes them more different from Pegasus. That's worth something.

And like I said, your particular argument before was that "Axes are too good to give to them" when you can just remove 1 base STR from them and then they are even worse off in hit for the same MT.

In fact, the whole "Axes are so good" stance in this community is pretty bizarre. Most axe users/classes just have higher strength also so it creates the illusion that the weapon is better than it is. 1 point of damage vs. +1/20 chance to miss is minor and isn't a strictly good thing anyway.

Edited January 10, 2016 by DLuna

[solrocknroll]

Lol axes are not too good

If anything, Swords are the best weapons in the series. They have none of the accuracy issues Axes/Lances can have. In FE6 especially, Axes were near useless.

Lances suffer from insane amount of overuse in the series. I don't favor lances so I don't need ten thousand Lance classes.

I'd much rather see Wyverns with Axes. It's more fun that way, and I want Griffons to be their own thing with Swords as a counterpart to Axe Wyverns and Lance Pegasi. Pegasi are fast and weak, but Wyverns are slow and strong? Make them a mix of both statswise.

[Anouleth]

Because weapon triangle and player's control surrounding making the most of it? (which is the whole entire point of having 3 standard melee types to begin with). When only fighters exist in tier 1 that use them and there are an abundant amount of lance users instead it makes sword wielding enemies less of the threat to you as a whole. Having variety in weapon users in general is a good thing.

No it isn't. We had three weapon types before we had the weapon triangle. Many SRPGs and RPGs and even Roguelikes that don't have a weapon triangle still have different weapon types. The idea is that different types of physical fighters should have different capabilities.

Nothing dictates that different weapon types should have perfectly identical availability. If anything, I think that's a bad thing; it makes different weapon types more homogeneous and interchangeable. It's cool to have units like DS Minerva and Lex that use weapons that aren't easily accessible otherwise.

Lol axes are not too good

If anything, Swords are the best weapons in the series. They have none of the accuracy issues Axes/Lances can have. In FE6 especially, Axes were near useless.

Lances suffer from insane amount of overuse in the series. I don't favor lances so I don't need ten thousand Lance classes.

I'd much rather see Wyverns with Axes. It's more fun that way, and I want Griffons to be their own thing with Swords as a counterpart to Axe Wyverns and Lance Pegasi. Pegasi are fast and weak, but Wyverns are slow and strong? Make them a mix of both statswise.

I'm referring specifically to those games in which Wyverns got Axes (rather than Swords + Lances). That is to say, FE9, 10, 11, 12, and 13. And there's little doubt that Axes were better than Lances in most of those games (FE11 excepted, because the game gives you far more good lance-users than axe-users).

While I wouldn't object to a sword-using flying class, I think three flying classes is too many. I'd rather either Wyverns or Pegasi be retired, or even both of them.

[Dunal]

No it isn't. We had three weapon types before we had the weapon triangle. Many SRPGs and RPGs and even Roguelikes that don't have a weapon triangle still have different weapon types. The idea is that different types of physical fighters should have different capabilities.

Well, that's true but not really indicative of a main purpose before that anyway, aside from aesthetics.

Other RPGs tend to have different weapon types do completely different things so that's not really a good point to make. Games like Disgaea make swords standard but with powerful unique skills, lances have 1-2 range. Axes reduce DEF on every hit. So beyond stats they are used differently. Other RPGS are similar these days. Old school DND can often have this as well.

While with FE, WTA is the only interesting thing as a way to separate weapons. Otherwise you're looking at 1 MT and 5 HIT differences in raw stats. Which isn't meaningful at all. Magic has the same problem too and could be better (strictly 1 range or 2-3 range magic to separate types would be something great, or just more types of magic with unique properties like dark magic). But effectiveness like WInd > Flying at least separates the anima trio to some extent. Although with Fates they have now removed magic types altogether so may not even be relevant going forward.

Edited January 10, 2016 by DLuna

[Shadow Mir]

Why is that a bother? Axes and Lances are functionally very similar. Diversity of weapon types is not a meaningful goal when those weapon types function the same way.

In addition, the fact that only Fighters/Barbarians use axes is a good thing because they're historically a weak class and are stronger when they have uncontested access to strong axes such as the Hero Axe. Part of what makes Lex good is that he's virtually the only unit that can use Axes (except for promoted Lachesis and Arden).

You actually answered that for me (See: the bold). Their being such a weak class might discourage people from using them. Also, most of the few fighters I'd consider good are from Path of Radiance or later games.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Levant Colthearts

[Topaz Light]

Well, that's true but not really indicative of a main purpose before that anyway, aside from aesthetics.

Other RPGs tend to have different weapon types do completely different things so that's not really a good point to make. Games like Disgaea make swords standard but with powerful unique skills, lances have 1-2 range. Axes reduce DEF on every hit. So beyond stats they are used differently. Other RPGS are similar these days. Old school DND can often have this as well.

While with FE, WTA is the only interesting thing as a way to separate weapons. Otherwise you're looking at 1 MT and 5 HIT differences in raw stats. Which isn't meaningful at all. Magic has the same problem too and could be better (strictly 1 range or 2-3 range magic to separate types would be something great, or just more types of magic with unique properties like dark magic). But effectiveness like WInd > Flying at least separates the anima trio to some extent. Although with Fates they have now removed magic types altogether so may not even be relevant going forward.

To be fair, "Magic" referring to a subset of weapon types rather than a singular weapon type in itself wasn't really introduced in the form we know today until Genealogy of the Holy War. It would be very possible for them to just bring back the either of the Fire/Thunder/Wind or Anima/Light/Dark splits in a later game. I do agree that more variety in the range of Magic would be kinda neat to see, though.

I think the weapon triangle is definitely fairly important, unless you have the enemies you're fighting significantly outgunned. The value of a given weapon type to your team is also sort of tied into the kinds of enemies you're facing. A lot of Fire Emblem games end up pitting you against a lot of Lance-wielding opponents, which makes Axes a very useful weapon type, since not only do they get WTA against these enemies, but they and their wielders also have the punch necessary to break through the sturdy defenses that Lance-wielding classes often have. The fact that Hammers are often one of the most accessible Slayer-type weapons also contributes to this, since Armored enemies are usually fairly common.

This, I'm guessing, is at least part of why Wyvern Riders switching over to Axes was "a straight buff with no associated downsides"; the loss in accuracy isn't really significant since the WTA makes up for it against the ample Lance-users. They also lose their weapon triangle disadvantage against other Axe-wielding classes, and while they gain a disadvantage against Sword-wielders, the low Might of Swords combined with the generally-low Strength of the classes that wield them means that they probably still won't pose that much of a threat even if Wyvern Riders no longer threaten them as much, either.

If anything, Swords are the best weapons in the series. They have none of the accuracy issues Axes/Lances can have. In FE6 especially, Axes were near useless.

Lances suffer from insane amount of overuse in the series. I don't favor lances so I don't need ten thousand Lance classes.

They aren't, actually. At least, not in most games. They may have high accuracy and low weight (in the games that have the weight mechanic), but their low Might- in conjunction with often being given to classes that have low Strength to begin with- hurts them, as does the fact that the 1~2 range Swords are few and far between and often force the wielder to attack using a stat that, for them, is generally pitifully-low (Magic). Then there's also the matter of the fact that you're often fighting a lot of Lance-users, which generally tend to be fairly sturdy. Pit weapon triangle disadvantage and low attack power against sturdy units wielding weapons of an advantaged type, and Sword-wielders are in for a bad time. They're certainly not terrible; they definitely have situations in which they're extremely helpful, and there are sword-wielding characters and classes that can be absolutely beastly, but as a weapon type in general they're not quite as good as the other two melee types once the enemies start to shift over to Lances and your own characters start to get going stat-wise.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Topaz Light

[Tetragrammaton]

Let's say we get the unpromoted Althena, Trabant and Arione.

And they can use nothing but axe.

[Solkia]

I usually go with axes because other axe classes tend to be really slow

[Sock]

Lances. Feels normal to me.

Except FE10. Axes feel normal. POLEAXES, HELL YES.

[Sasori]

I always thought lances made a lot more sense. Its the weapon I would use if I would ride a giant flying mount, instead of an axe thats usually not long enough enough to work well on such a thing. You do have poleaxes, but thats usually not the weapon that gets shown.

Axes make more sense from a gameplay perspective though. Wyverns are the strong, sturdy, slow ones, compared to the pegasus knights so an axe fits in that way. It also doesn't make all the mounted classes so lance centric.

[Dwlr]

I prefer lances, but voted Axes for diversity reasons, but they could split the difference and give them poleaxes.

[Busterman64]

Wyvern Riders and Pegasus Knight are pretty much opposites. Wyvern riders are more offensive & physically defensive while Pegasus knights are more speed & skill oriented (some times luck since they're pretty good dodgers too) and are pretty good magic tanks, second to magic users and healers...most of the time (unless RNG screwed).

If it's making sense, lances make the most sense since you kinda need range when mounted on something.

On a personal level, Axes fit the Wyvern riders more. I'm not against the both of them uses lances( because I could complain how [unpromoted] units in FE games, 50% use swords, 35% use lances, and 15% -10% use axes...it may not be accurate, but not many people use axes. Heck, some games changed what some weapons promoted units can use like how Generals in FE:Path of Radiance switched from Axes to Swords...even if it worked good in their favor because axe users weren't as big as a threat as before...and I loved how Brom could tank everything much better...expect magic...oops! Going a bit off topic).

Although, I REALLY, REALLY wished they would do like Radiant Dawn and change the Wyverns weakness from Arrows to Thunder magic (and magic was pretty dangerous for them since there were long ranged magic tomes like "Bolting"). I guess it's a way to balance them, but when your "super tanky" Wyvern Lord can stand up to a lot of physical attacks, but can go down in 2 or so arrow shots AND a few magic attacks......it's a bit dishearting. It would be nice if they brought the "Full Guard" item back from FE:Path of Radiance (which cancels any bonus damage you would have gotten. For example, Archers won't have the bonus attack power they get when attacking Pegasus Knights since Full Guard protcts them from that weakness)!

It also kinda depends on the game. Speaking of Path of Radiance...in that game, there are TONS of enemy axes users in that game (some chapters more than others) and having two flying units weak to that kinda sucks( but...since the weight system in that game is based on your actual strenght, something that the enemy axe users have a issue with almost halfway through the game, and those two flyers are Wyvern Rider Jill and Pegasus Knight Marcia...I don't mind too much since they're awesome and take them out regardless, even more so in Radiant Dawn...well...for me anyway :3 )

Edited January 11, 2016 by Busterman64

[Anouleth]

Well, that's true but not really indicative of a main purpose before that anyway, aside from aesthetics.

Other RPGs tend to have different weapon types do completely different things so that's not really a good point to make. Games like Disgaea make swords standard but with powerful unique skills, lances have 1-2 range. Axes reduce DEF on every hit. So beyond stats they are used differently. Other RPGS are similar these days. Old school DND can often have this as well.

While with FE, WTA is the only interesting thing as a way to separate weapons. Otherwise you're looking at 1 MT and 5 HIT differences in raw stats. Which isn't meaningful at all. Magic has the same problem too and could be better (strictly 1 range or 2-3 range magic to separate types would be something great, or just more types of magic with unique properties like dark magic). But effectiveness like WInd > Flying at least separates the anima trio to some extent. Although with Fates they have now removed magic types altogether so may not even be relevant going forward.

Yeah, but different positions on the weapon triangle isn't really justification for giving Wyverns Axes instead of Lances. WTA itself is only worth 1MT and 10HIT, which by your own admission isn't meaningful at all.

I would personally like to see the weapon types better differentiated. But as long as they remain in their current state it doesn't really matter which one you use, except that Axes are slightly stronger in most situations. In that light, I don't see how the switch "increases diversity" (as it was claimed earlier). If anything it decreases diversity because part of what made axes unique was that not a lot of units used them, and that they had WTA against Lances which were very common.

To be honest, I think that switching Wyverns to Axes is the worst possible move they could have made. It ended up making Wyverns even stronger in FE9/10/11/12/13. It didn't meaningfully distinguish Pegasus Knights and Wyverns. It made Axes less special and interesting. It would have been better to switch one of the flying classes to Swords or even Bows, which would have helped balance out the whole "flying units are usually ridiculous" thing.

[Loki Laufeyson]

Axes. I like having a winged unit axing thing in the face from the get-go. Lances felt too close to Pegknight.

[Magical Glace]

Lances, because I don't like axes. Also more logical for extra reach from atop the mount.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Axes, because I want more Jills.