I know we're all excited about our lady axe lord, but...

[Dunal]

3 hours ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Which is what I have a problem with - low con is nothing but a handicap, whereas on the other hand, the closest thing to a downside to having high con is that you're harder to rescue. Yay?

I don't see how that's any different that saying "low STR is nothing but a handicap". Yes, having a low amount of something is a drawback of a unit. That's kind of the point. But it's a counterbalance to the SPD stat itself, which is inherently one of the most important or game-breaking aspects of FE (doubling your damage output or dodge tanking ad-infinitum it it's high enough).

You're still focusing on the individual balancing (most of which you discussed) rather than the system itself, and the pros and cons of it. Florina is one of the most extreme examples when using a Steel Weapon (and it's arguable as to whether that actual numbers should be different) but it's counterbalanced by her SPD or other attributes like class/utility/availability. And using steels to secure kills is incredibly useful early on -- and when that's no longer needed to avoid damage, she can double a fair amount of enemies with it anyway (shortly past promotion and/or being a decent body ring candidate) mostly because FE7 enemies are slow. So despite being weighed down by a Steel, it's useful especially since it's barely more expensive than other cheap/common options. Slim Lance is also situational because it's weak, but might be her only option to double in some cases. Or Javelin similarly weighs her down a lot, but often having a 1-2 range equipped is better than not. Silver is "situational" because it's expensive -- same with Killer/Brave/Reaver which are limited in quantity. 

Either way, it doesn't take her long at all to mostly avoid being doubled with a Steel, so the trade-off is merely hitting harder for not doubling. Which is completely fair. What else would you expect in this case? Again, steel isn't a premium weapon like Killer or Silver, so a cheap/powerful option to double most enemies wouldn't be interesting. All it accomplishes is a buff to Florina... which is unnecessary. So what do you do? Nerf her STR to be balanced around doubling with a steel consistently? Nerf SPD to counteract the lower SPD loss? Nerf the HIT of steel weapon even further to still give it a legitimate drawback etc... Keep in mind that relative to enemy SPD and Florina's own SPD long-term, the numerical loss isn't even that detrimental, nor is it a bad thing that it often situational early on (like Iron, Steel is cheap and unlimited; this isn't a Silver Weapon situation like in Fates).

However, that's still ignoring the point of the mechanic's existence. The advantage of the system is that low SPD units are not further penalised for already having a serious flaw (which is exactly what happens when weapons have a flat SPD penalty) which high SPD units (generally the better units in FE on average) have drawbacks in taking advantage of their SPD in terms of stronger weapon usage. That mitigates the huge power difference of unit archetypes of low/high SPD. Dorcas and Florina in the early/mid game usually have around the same AS when using a Steel Axe or Lance respectfully, but Florina still has the upper hand of being faster when using a different weapon like Iron or Silver (and since her SPD growth is higher, the gap in AS increases as the game goes on when using Steel). 

Meanwhile, if Florina and Dorcas both lost SPD on a steel weapon (let's say a flat -4), then Dorcas would then get doubled by a huge amount of enemies (he would have ~4 AS) in the mid game (Dracos can have 8-9 AS, Mercs with Steels would start doubling him as well). While Florina would have 12-14 AS and still double a lot of enemies. The viability gap becomes massive, since Florina is now dealing a lot of damage with not a lot of drawback, while Dorcas durability drops rather significantly unless he equips a weaker weapon. So it's pretty clear that in the context of FE7, CON is balanced rather well.

In reverse, if we introduced CON/WT to Fates, and gave Arthur high CON, and Camilla lower CON to suffer ~5 SPD from a Steel Axe (while Arthur would not) then their base SPD difference suddenly becomes less prominent since they aren't playing by the same rules anymore with certain weapons. This diversifies weapon usage between these two units by making Arthur uniquely more viable with steel weapons (so he only needs to worry about HIT) while still giving the unit with higher SPD (or stats in general) a drawback for being innately stronger. What this accomplishes is having two units with very different SPD values that are closer in effectiveness based on weapon availability. Since high SPD is universally a powerful thing, this balances this out effectively. And that's really all the CON system is.

The best way to summarise CON/WT is that it enables an actual (situational) penalty to having high SPD while allows you diversify SPD values (and weapon usage) without giving more heavy drawbacks to those latter units (like horrible STR, survivability or utility). Whether you feel that say, Florina's penalty with Steels or Canas with Nosferatu is too high is besides the point (helping to diversify units and/or tone down the prominence of SPD). Florina is allowed to have decent STR or other stats (while retaining high SPD as well) because of the drawback of CON. If CON didn't exist and her STR was lowered instead, then she'd be really weak with Slim/Iron just for the sole purpose of being 'balanced' with Steels, while Dorcas would need the opposite treatment; buffed SPD so Steel Axe isn't such a risk... which would just homogenise unit stats or make them uncharacteristic. Dorcas is specifically designed so that the only drawback of a Steel Axe is losing HIT, so he is encouraged to use the stronger weapon to hit hard (since he only attacks once even with a lighter weapon -- unlike Florina he gets minimal benefit).

Of course, the exact numerical stats of each unit's CON or weapon WT can be debated as to what's too strong or weak (including for enemies), but that's got nothing to do with the pros/cons of the system itself. Especially when compared to flat SPD penalties which only cripple lower SPD units (especially in games where enemies are faster).

 

That pretty much covers everything as to why I believe the mechanic is a positive one. How you agree is up to you; as to whether SPD diversity between units can be made more interesting. The doubling mechanic in FE could potentially be reworked altogether but with how the system has always functioned in the past (I don't see it changing much) then CON/WT has been the best system so far to counterbalance the stat the most effectively. Fates is second best, what with some weapons like Javelin disabling doubling to benefit slower units better.

[SavageVolug]

Dunal, I've enjoyed your thoughts on the topic of Constitution and Weapon Weight. You've brought things to my attention that I never thought of, and overall I enjoyed reading your input on the topic. I just wanted to say very well articulated sir! I just would like to add that I like it when a realistic factor can be put into a game through mechanics. Which is why I like Weapon Weight and Constitution, weapons have a certain amount of weight to them, differant people are of differant sizes. And I have always enjoyed that being reflected through the Constitutuion Stat and the Weapon Weight. Again very well articulated, I enjoyed reading what you had to say about this mechanic.

[HappyHawlucha.]

I really hope that Edelgard's Legendary Axe has a relatively low weight because I want it to actually be viable on her in late game.

[colossus86]

34 minutes ago, HappyHawlucha. said:

I really hope that Edelgard's Legendary Axe has a relatively low weight because I want it to actually be viable on her in late game.

Lol i can totally imagine it being a Durandal type situation where it's impossibly heavy and just used to one shot people

[Ivy Wife Supremacy]

3 hours ago, HappyHawlucha. said:

I really hope that Edelgard's Legendary Axe has a relatively low weight because I want it to actually be viable on her in late game.

Same plus have a great sleek regal design!

[Sage of the Mist]

On 6/27/2018 at 10:53 PM, redtutel said:

She was the Ninian to Corrin’s Eliwood. Maybe even the Robin to Corrin’s Chrom.

Hardly, Ninian was the "mysterious dancer" done right, she isn't mysterious just for the sake of being mysterious like Azura is, who is vague and conveniently  withholds information just to suit the plot. Ninian witholds information and keeps secret because of her guilt and inner turmoil, as well as the fact that her secrets have real world ramifications. Furthermore Azura soley exists to service Corrin she is barely  seen without them in game where as Ninian interacts with other members of the party and has a very close relationship with her brother. I get the jest of what you are trying to say but comparing a flat, dull, exposition bot to a character who is given much more screen time and involvement  doesn't exactly strengthen your argument

[Icelerate]

On 27/06/2018 at 1:32 AM, Tenzen12 said:

I love you sense for humor. Though it would be less funny if I had to hear it second time, so let's not do that.

I wasn't being funny at all. I guess you aren't bright enough to see that considering your previous post. Either that or you're simply a joker. In either case, not worth having a serious discussion with. 

[eclipse]

ITT: Every single other FE game is Three Houses.  Guys, please.

[redtutel]

1 hour ago, Sage of the Mist said:

she isn't mysterious just for the sake of being mysterious like Azura is, who is vague and conveniently  withholds information just to suit the plot. Ninian witholds information and keeps secret because of her guilt and inner turmoil, as well as the fact that her secrets have real world ramifications

And Azura withholds information in order to not have the same fate as her mother.

 

1 hour ago, Sage of the Mist said:

. Furthermore Azura soley exists to service Corrin she is barely  seen without them in game where as Ninian interacts with other members of the party and has a very close relationship with her brother.

From what I can recall, Azura interacts with the other lords about as much as Ninian interacts with Lyn and Hector, in Eliwood's story at least.

 

I personally like Azura more, but I don't want to argue.

[Slumber]

4 hours ago, eclipse said:

ITT: Every single other FE game is Three Houses.  Guys, please.

Three Houses is also Langrisser and Persona. 

And it's a game made after 2013, so it's also The Last of Us. 

[Tenzen12]

11 hours ago, Icelerate said:

I wasn't being funny at all. I guess you aren't bright enough to see that considering your previous post. Either that or you're simply a joker. In either case, not worth having a serious discussion with. 

I thought so. I just hoped to make you sound like having good sense for humor rather then being plainly wrong and this is how you pay me back for my consideration...

[L'arachel]

If CON does return, I hope they take steps to not repeat what I consider one of the dumbest flaws of the GBA games: Most girls have less constitution than their male counterparts, and quite a few of them suffer for it. Thankfully, the ones who suffer for it would likely suck regardless, so it isn't too damning, but it's still irksome that Marisa's incredibly slight speed advantage over Joshua is completely nullified by her CON. as a Myrmidon, she gets weighed down by a Killing Edge while he does not. And then as Swordmasters, she gets weighed down by Audhulma, he does not. Basically any sword stronger than Iron will affect her more adversely than him. Neimi and Innes are in a similar boat. Amelia doesn't get any CON from promoting to a Paladin for some reason, and a significant amount less than Franz, Forde, and Kyle would when promoting to a Great Knight. 

 

The most jarring example would be Isadora, one of the most worthless prepromotes I've ever seen. A 20/1 Sain, on average, should have 1-2 less speed than Isadora does when you first get her. Of course, keep in mind a 20/1 Sain will also have 11 CON compared to her 6, and a fair amount more attack. Even a simple Iron Lance has 8 weight, equaling their speed. 20/1 Kent doesn't even need the CON difference to outspeed her, but it certainly helps widen the gap all the more when it comes to wielding anything heavier. Even Lowen will have higher effective speed when it comes to wielding anything heavier than an Iron Lance. Hope you weren't planning on giving her a Javelin, or anything at all, really. 

[SavageVolug]

Con as I understand it reflects the physical size of a given unit. And given that in real life guys usually are larger than girls (not counting situations like a tall girl vs a short guy) I have never been bothered by the guy characters of certain classes having more con than a girl in the same class. Now there are instances where I think the difference is overdone but overall I see nothing wrong with the guys having more con. For Example if Fates had the con system Benny should have the highest con of anybody except maybe mounts and fliers, not only is he an armor unit he is also suppossed to be a really big guy, his con should be somewhat higher than Effie (now Effie should also have a lot of con/build but I don't think they should have the same amount). At the same time if you take say Henry from Awakening he should have less con than someone like Cherche, Sully, Flavia, Kjelle etc and probably have a similar amount of con to Tharja. I realize neither of these games have con in them these were just the examples that popped into mind first.

[Modamy]

The argument than con is a “sexist” mechanic always seemed kind of ridiculous to me. It was all about balance with male units having higher con but lower speed growths and caps while female units get higher growths and caps. This just balances them and gives them there own strengths and weaknesses. Males can use heavier weapons with little penalty and females can double more reliably with lighter weapons with the greater potential to double with heavy weapons down the line. I was surprised to find so many people disliked con and found it even more surprising people found it weighted against female units since I thought the balancing done to compensate for it was more in favor of the female units.

It certainly doesn’t work as well as it should in FE7 and sacred stones since the enemies are weak and using heavy weapons so males with low speed can still double with heavy weapons. I personally found that as more a testament to those games not be as well balanced as people gave them credit for. After reading Dunal’s arguments for it I’d prefer to see it make a comeback.

[Sage of the Mist]

1 hour ago, Modamy said:

The argument than con is a “sexist” mechanic always seemed kind of ridiculous to me. It was all about balance with male units having higher con but lower speed growths and caps while female units get higher growths and caps. This just balances them and gives them there own strengths and weaknesses. Males can use heavier weapons with little penalty and females can double more reliably with lighter weapons with the greater potential to double with heavy weapons down the line. I was surprised to find so many people disliked con and found it even more surprising people found it weighted against female units since I thought the balancing done to compensate for it was more in favor of the female units.

 

This...whole thing... just...the whole thing.

In theory yes, it sounds balanced, but in practice it is most definitely not the case, con has always been very much in favor of male units. Let's look at the facts. In FE 7 , con is almost universally favors any male unit of a non gender specific class and whether or not it was intentional or not, men have higher con implies the regressive, harmful notion of "women aren't built for fighting" so yes, con is a stat completely biased in the male units favor. First  let's look at the total con of all male units vs female units

Females: 70 (there is literally one female in the game with a con above ten, that being Vaida)

Males: 279

and that's not even counting merlinus massive 25 con or promotions  either.

 already there is a massive discrepancy in con based on gender,

secondly the averages for con based on gender are

females: 5.3

Males: 9

(again calculations were made based on base stats without promotional gains taken into account)

that's a difference of roughly 4 con, and that's more than enough to slow the majority of females what with fe 7s weapons being as heavily as they are. So essentially males get off scot free using stronger heavier weapons and potentially doubling with them versus female units  essentially being forced by the game to use lighter weaker weapons and subsequently doing less damage.

 

Again it sounds balanced in theory, but in practice its still biased towards males and the whole notion of "females can double later on because of their higher speed growth and caps" is, from a statistical point of view, false.

As @l'arachel already mentioned, Isadora gets completely screwed over by her con being so low and her speed growth and cap do little to salvage that. Let's look at Sean and Kent's speed growth and cap in the game as well as their AS with a Steel lance for comparison

Isadora:

con: 6

Average speed at Level 20: 25

growth: 50%

AS: 18

 

Kent

con: 11

Average speed at level 20: 24

Growth: 45%

AS: 22

 

Sain

Con: 11

Average speed at level 20: 22

growth: 40%

AS: 20

 

In the end, Isadora's better speed growth and cap do jack squat for her when compared to Kent and Sain who both have lower speed growths and caps than her. So with this info taken into account, if Isadora wants to double consistently she has to wield ethier a slim or iron lance and consequently she's not doing as much damage as them ether. Not to mention that both of male paladins have better def so she does'nt really offer any advantages over the other two, which means she's probably going to get benched. In short, con is heavy biased towards males and ends of screwing many females in the same class, and weather or not the game was designed to be this way or if it's an unfortunate mistake, that facts still stand  and the statistics don't lie.

Edited July 11, 2018 by Sage of the Mist
fixed gramatical error

[Modamy]

@Sage of the Mist When I made my post I wasn't doing it to say Isadora is a better unit than Kent or Sain I was only saying that the con system was a good idea for balancing speeds. When I said I found it ridiculous that people call con "sexist" it was because people are closed off to the idea of the mechanic because they actually think of it as a way to say women are worse that men at things and I just see it as a poorly realized implementation of a good idea. When it comes to what con they gave to male and female units I do think it needs to be tweaked since there is no reason why a male mage has more con than a female cavalier. I like the idea that slower classes like armors can maintain their AS while utilizing heavy weapons while faster classes like pegasus knights lose AS as a way to stop one class type from completely dominating the others in terms of speed. There needs to be balances to bases, growths, caps, con and weapon stats themselves for it all to work well. I just found con to be a better idea than a flat speed loss that punishes everyone, and the strength balancing that becomes irrelevant late game.

[eclipse]

1 hour ago, Modamy said:

@Sage of the Mist When I made my post I wasn't doing it to say Isadora is a better unit than Kent or Sain I was only saying that the con system was a good idea for balancing speeds. When I said I found it ridiculous that people call con "sexist" it was because people are closed off to the idea of the mechanic because they actually think of it as a way to say women are worse that men at things and I just see it as a poorly realized implementation of a good idea. When it comes to what con they gave to male and female units I do think it needs to be tweaked since there is no reason why a male mage has more con than a female cavalier. I like the idea that slower classes like armors can maintain their AS while utilizing heavy weapons while faster classes like pegasus knights lose AS as a way to stop one class type from completely dominating the others in terms of speed. There needs to be balances to bases, growths, caps, con and weapon stats themselves for it all to work well. I just found con to be a better idea than a flat speed loss that punishes everyone, and the strength balancing that becomes irrelevant late game.

It might've worked if female units had something like a +3 speed cap over their male counterparts.

[Shadow Mir]

On 6/29/2018 at 11:14 AM, Dunal said:

I don't see how that's any different that saying "low STR is nothing but a handicap". Yes, having a low amount of something is a drawback of a unit. That's kind of the point. But it's a counterbalance to the SPD stat itself, which is inherently one of the most important or game-breaking aspects of FE (doubling your damage output or dodge tanking ad-infinitum it it's high enough).

You're still focusing on the individual balancing (most of which you discussed) rather than the system itself, and the pros and cons of it. Florina is one of the most extreme examples when using a Steel Weapon (and it's arguable as to whether that actual numbers should be different) but it's counterbalanced by her SPD or other attributes like class/utility/availability. And using steels to secure kills is incredibly useful early on -- and when that's no longer needed to avoid damage, she can double a fair amount of enemies with it anyway (shortly past promotion and/or being a decent body ring candidate) mostly because FE7 enemies are slow. So despite being weighed down by a Steel, it's useful especially since it's barely more expensive than other cheap/common options. Slim Lance is also situational because it's weak, but might be her only option to double in some cases. Or Javelin similarly weighs her down a lot, but often having a 1-2 range equipped is better than not. Silver is "situational" because it's expensive -- same with Killer/Brave/Reaver which are limited in quantity. 

Either way, it doesn't take her long at all to mostly avoid being doubled with a Steel, so the trade-off is merely hitting harder for not doubling. Which is completely fair. What else would you expect in this case? Again, steel isn't a premium weapon like Killer or Silver, so a cheap/powerful option to double most enemies wouldn't be interesting. All it accomplishes is a buff to Florina... which is unnecessary. So what do you do? Nerf her STR to be balanced around doubling with a steel consistently? Nerf SPD to counteract the lower SPD loss? Nerf the HIT of steel weapon even further to still give it a legitimate drawback etc... Keep in mind that relative to enemy SPD and Florina's own SPD long-term, the numerical loss isn't even that detrimental, nor is it a bad thing that it often situational early on (like Iron, Steel is cheap and unlimited; this isn't a Silver Weapon situation like in Fates).

However, that's still ignoring the point of the mechanic's existence. The advantage of the system is that low SPD units are not further penalised for already having a serious flaw (which is exactly what happens when weapons have a flat SPD penalty) which high SPD units (generally the better units in FE on average) have drawbacks in taking advantage of their SPD in terms of stronger weapon usage. That mitigates the huge power difference of unit archetypes of low/high SPD. Dorcas and Florina in the early/mid game usually have around the same AS when using a Steel Axe or Lance respectfully, but Florina still has the upper hand of being faster when using a different weapon like Iron or Silver (and since her SPD growth is higher, the gap in AS increases as the game goes on when using Steel). 

Meanwhile, if Florina and Dorcas both lost SPD on a steel weapon (let's say a flat -4), then Dorcas would then get doubled by a huge amount of enemies (he would have ~4 AS) in the mid game (Dracos can have 8-9 AS, Mercs with Steels would start doubling him as well). While Florina would have 12-14 AS and still double a lot of enemies. The viability gap becomes massive, since Florina is now dealing a lot of damage with not a lot of drawback, while Dorcas durability drops rather significantly unless he equips a weaker weapon. So it's pretty clear that in the context of FE7, CON is balanced rather well.

In reverse, if we introduced CON/WT to Fates, and gave Arthur high CON, and Camilla lower CON to suffer ~5 SPD from a Steel Axe (while Arthur would not) then their base SPD difference suddenly becomes less prominent since they aren't playing by the same rules anymore with certain weapons. This diversifies weapon usage between these two units by making Arthur uniquely more viable with steel weapons (so he only needs to worry about HIT) while still giving the unit with higher SPD (or stats in general) a drawback for being innately stronger. What this accomplishes is having two units with very different SPD values that are closer in effectiveness based on weapon availability. Since high SPD is universally a powerful thing, this balances this out effectively. And that's really all the CON system is.

The best way to summarise CON/WT is that it enables an actual (situational) penalty to having high SPD while allows you diversify SPD values (and weapon usage) without giving more heavy drawbacks to those latter units (like horrible STR, survivability or utility). Whether you feel that say, Florina's penalty with Steels or Canas with Nosferatu is too high is besides the point (helping to diversify units and/or tone down the prominence of SPD). Florina is allowed to have decent STR or other stats (while retaining high SPD as well) because of the drawback of CON. If CON didn't exist and her STR was lowered instead, then she'd be really weak with Slim/Iron just for the sole purpose of being 'balanced' with Steels, while Dorcas would need the opposite treatment; buffed SPD so Steel Axe isn't such a risk... which would just homogenise unit stats or make them uncharacteristic. Dorcas is specifically designed so that the only drawback of a Steel Axe is losing HIT, so he is encouraged to use the stronger weapon to hit hard (since he only attacks once even with a lighter weapon -- unlike Florina he gets minimal benefit).

Of course, the exact numerical stats of each unit's CON or weapon WT can be debated as to what's too strong or weak (including for enemies), but that's got nothing to do with the pros/cons of the system itself. Especially when compared to flat SPD penalties which only cripple lower SPD units (especially in games where enemies are faster).

 

That pretty much covers everything as to why I believe the mechanic is a positive one. How you agree is up to you; as to whether SPD diversity between units can be made more interesting. The doubling mechanic in FE could potentially be reworked altogether but with how the system has always functioned in the past (I don't see it changing much) then CON/WT has been the best system so far to counterbalance the stat the most effectively. Fates is second best, what with some weapons like Javelin disabling doubling to benefit slower units better.

Bullshit. Low Strength can be worked around by using stronger weapons. Low Con, not so much - in fact, it often requires the inverse to get around it. How are these even comparable???

And yet the supposed pros are a drop in the bucket compared to the cons. I would rather not see more Durandal/Sol Katti situations in the future, thank you very much. 

That's bull, considering that GBA weapons tend to be rather heavy in comparison to weapons in Mystery of the Emblem, which was the last game to use flat speed penalties (I'm purposely ignoring Genealogy because it's an unbalanced mess). For it to be balanced rather well, you'd have to give females like a speed cap 4 points higher to compensate for their lower con. As is, Rebecca and Louise are about the only ones who come out better than their male counterpart. And they're the exception, not the rule.

In theory, it would, except for the part where Arthur, being Arthur, really cannot risk leaving anything alive to counter... so giving him a steel axe does no good whatsoever for his case.

That would be true... in theory. In actual practice, however? It's heavily biased towards males since they're generally have higher con such that it offsets the speed advantage females tend to have. FFS, only one female in FE7 actually has the con to handle heavier weapons well, that being Vaida.

I would agree if I thought your points had some truth to them... which I do not.

[Dunal]

15 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:

Bullshit. Low Strength can be worked around by using stronger weapons. Low Con, not so much - in fact, it often requires the inverse to get around it. How are these even comparable???

Low CON is worked around by having higher SPD as a counterbalance (when tuned appropriately). Or selectively targeting slower enemies. Or securing kills with the stronger weapon (is it really the end of the world if a unit doesn't double with a particular weapon or against certain enemies?)

Honestly the whole idea that units need to double to be good/useful has always been questionable design when it comes to FE (it's removing additional nuance or decision making while making low SPD units generally worse off). And saying that a mechanic is assumed to be flawed because it helps balance low SPD units vs. high SPD units (which is entirely what CON does) isn't really true either.

Low CON doesn't need to be "worked around". It's like arguing that lower movement units cannot "work around" their lower movement compared to cavalry or fliers (when preferably there would be enough draw backs to having higher movement... not usually the case in GBA FE but that's discussing balance). Low CON units generally have high SPD + growth (and high SPD growth widens the gap between low SPD units as the game goes on, regardless of weapon usage -- Florina's AS with a Steel Lance widens compared to Dorcas with a Steel Axe for example, since the penalties remain almost static but her base AS increases much faster). 

16 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:

And yet the supposed pros are a drop in the bucket compared to the cons. I would rather not see more Durandal/Sol Katti situations in the future, thank you very much. 

Focusing on the balancing (for very specific weaponry) is still missing the point of why the mechanic exists in the first place. Those weapons are tied to individual units however so they don't have anything to do with how certain weapons effect units in regards to balancing SPD. Durandal might as well have the description "lower SPD by 7" because it's specific to Eliwood. Doesn't really have anything to do with CON or why the mechanic is there (nerfing high SPD).

16 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:

That's bull, considering that GBA weapons tend to be rather heavy in comparison to weapons in Mystery of the Emblem, which was the last game to use flat speed penalties (I'm purposely ignoring Genealogy because it's an unbalanced mess). For it to be balanced rather well, you'd have to give females like a speed cap 4 points higher to compensate for their lower con. As is, Rebecca and Louise are about the only ones who come out better than their male counterpart. And they're the exception, not the rule.

Wait, what? In Mystery of the Emblem a Steel Axe had a flat SPD penalty of -9 or Javelin had -20. I am speaking in the context of the -4 AS penalty I mentioned (for steels, in the example I gave which is pretty reasonable for FE7) should flat penalties exist once more. Under that context, the example I gave with Florina and Dorcas holds true. Dorcas becomes worse and Florina becomes a lot better. All flat penalties do is benefit high SPD units (since they also affect enemies keep in mind), while CON actually manages to even out the power level between both types of units by making slower units innately better with stronger weapons (this helps slower units be good outside of over-tuning their other stats). Florina is still a much better unit than Dorcas despite their CON because the mechanic is rather well balanced as a whole, with Florina still benefiting from using steels to finish off enemies on player phase or occasionally doubling slower units especially later on.

Low CON obviously doesn't "screw over a unit" at all. In fact, lower movement is a far worse trait if we go by most games.

I also don't understand how stat caps have much relevance in terms of balance when, if they are reached, are fairly overkill especially when it comes to SPD in FE7 (and only ever apply strictly in the lategame). Base SPD + growth are pretty consistently in favour of low CON units which is the main factor.

16 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:

FFS, only one female in FE7 actually has the con to handle heavier weapons well, that being Vaida.

Because Vaida doesn't double with any weapon (for the most part) vs. much faster units who double with most weapons (does Florina really have a problem doubling a lot of enemies with a Javelin by the time Vaida joins? Not really).

[Sage of the Mist]

21 hours ago, Dunal said:

Low CON is worked around by having higher SPD as a counterbalance (when tuned appropriately). Or selectively targeting slower enemies. Or securing kills with the stronger weapon (is it really the end of the world if a unit doesn't double with a particular weapon or against certain enemies?)

Honestly the whole idea that units need to double to be good/useful has always been questionable design when it comes to FE (it's removing additional nuance or decision making while making low SPD units generally worse off). And saying that a mechanic is assumed to be flawed because it helps balance low SPD units vs. high SPD units (which is entirely what CON does) isn't really true either.

Low CON doesn't need to be "worked around". It's like arguing that lower movement units cannot "work around" their lower movement compared to cavalry or fliers (when preferably there would be enough draw backs to having higher movement... not usually the case in GBA FE but that's discussing balance). Low CON units generally have high SPD + growth (and high SPD growth widens the gap between low SPD units as the game goes on, regardless of weapon usage -- Florina's AS with a Steel Lance widens compared to Dorcas with a Steel Axe for example, since the penalties remain almost static but her base AS increases much faster). 

Focusing on the balancing (for very specific weaponry) is still missing the point of why the mechanic exists in the first place. Those weapons are tied to individual units however so they don't have anything to do with how certain weapons effect units in regards to balancing SPD. Durandal might as well have the description "lower SPD by 7" because it's specific to Eliwood. Doesn't really have anything to do with CON or why the mechanic is there (nerfing high SPD).

Wait, what? In Mystery of the Emblem a Steel Axe had a flat SPD penalty of -9 or Javelin had -20. I am speaking in the context of the -4 AS penalty I mentioned (for steels, in the example I gave which is pretty reasonable for FE7) should flat penalties exist once more. Under that context, the example I gave with Florina and Dorcas holds true. Dorcas becomes worse and Florina becomes a lot better. All flat penalties do is benefit high SPD units (since they also affect enemies keep in mind), while CON actually manages to even out the power level between both types of units by making slower units innately better with stronger weapons (this helps slower units be good outside of over-tuning their other stats). Florina is still a much better unit than Dorcas despite their CON because the mechanic is rather well balanced as a whole, with Florina still benefiting from using steels to finish off enemies on player phase or occasionally doubling slower units especially later on.

Low CON obviously doesn't "screw over a unit" at all. In fact, lower movement is a far worse trait if we go by most games.

I also don't understand how stat caps have much relevance in terms of balance when, if they are reached, are fairly overkill especially when it comes to SPD in FE7 (and only ever apply strictly in the lategame). Base SPD + growth are pretty consistently in favour of low CON units which is the main factor.

Because Vaida doesn't double with any weapon (for the most part) vs. much faster units who double with most weapons (does Florina really have a problem doubling a lot of enemies with a Javelin by the time Vaida joins? Not really).

Did you even read my previous post? This argument is so easy to debunk it's a wonder why people even try to defend con.

Except that......it doesn't, also comparing Dorcas, a character that will never double ANYTHING to a character that can double ( It   depends on her weapon since pretty much anything but a slim lance weighs her down....) is a false comparison. What I was saying in my first post is that when compared to males of the same class they have a huge advantage over their female counterparts when it come to doubling and welding better weapons with less penalty.

Again, why are you bother to compare tow units that have zero in common, especially when one of them is one of the worst units in the game. Doesn't do a whole lot for your argument. Further more peg is female exclusive, so there is no male counterpart to compare them to which was the crux of my argument, being that males ultimately benefit a whole lot more form higher con than higher speed growth and caps. 

As previously mentioned this is a false comparison since the main argument is that it so that   males of a certain class have a biased, unfair upper hand on their female counterparts.

See my previous post, statistics don't lie. Promoted Florina has 5 con, a javelin has a weight of 11 meaning thats -6, thats a big deal.

This again? growths and caps don't mean squat if all but one or two  weapons kill that advantage, (see my previous post regarding the 3 main paladins AS with a steel lance and you'll see what I mean)

 

 

 

 

 

[Dunal]

3 hours ago, Sage of the Mist said:

Did you even read my previous post? This argument is so easy to debunk it's a wonder why people even try to defend con.

All really based on individual balancing rather than arguing against the purpose for why CON exists or the benefits it inherently provides. Whether females are treated unfairly is besides the point (and often times untrue in the first place, because it counterbalances other statistics or is meant to -- IS didn't arbitrarily give units low CON without balancing other factors, with Florina being a good example). Most females are also statistically treated unfairly when it comes to STR or DEF as well (on average), but that isn't an inherit flaw with STR/DEF itself.

And for the most part they're not. Units like Rebecca aren't bad because of her CON, but because her base SPD doesn't make up for it (only her growth does in the long term). Nino's higher SPD to make up for her CON is negated by her poor availability. Isadora vs. Marcus is a case of availability (where otherwise her SPD would counterbalance her CON really well).

Florina vs. Heath may be a better example, but class doesn't matter in the context of the doubling mechanic and how weaponry effects that. Making low SPD units more viable is exactly what CON helps to accomplish, especially when tuned well (and don't get me wrong, CON/WT on each unit/weapon is not tuned perfectly, which is entirely what you're focusing on rather than the core of the mechanic). It helps them specialize in stronger weaponry without gutting their durability.

The entire purpose of CON is exactly the same as flat weight except that it doesn't make slow units even slower (while also making weapon selection variable between each unit). You can argue as to whether you think females are treated unfairly, or Florina's CON is too low, or Heath's is too high, or X weapon is too heavy etc etc... And some of those may not necessarily be untrue (though still highly debatable since Florina is the better unit in the grand scheme of things)... but that's an entirely different debate.

If you look at Awakening or Tellius, slower units are often bad because faster units can use literally any weapon they want and still double. Offensively, your faster units are much better as a result, and defensively your slower units get the short end of the stick because fast enemies with strong weapons will double them (keep in mind that CON affects enemies as well).

CON was/is a rather elegant solution in making slower units comparatively viable by normalizing offense and durability (since AS affects both) by virtue of weapon selection. Fates had the next best solution by making some weapons impossible to double with (which only benefits slower units) but didn't have the nuance that CON could have with its design/balancing (not to say the execution was perfect in that regard). Fates was also still flawed in that "heavy" weapons (like steel weapons) punished slower units equally to faster ones. CON's objective on the other hand was to differentiate that (if ideally tuned).

And CON isn't exactly perfect. A hard cap of -5 SPD would probably be fine. And lowering only AS (as opposed to avoid as well) might also work. Are there ways to improve it? Sure. But don't discredit the entire mechanic just because some units are affected more than others from it (which is often just part of their design). It's less of a punishment of faster units (since flat weight like FE3 or Echoes would affect them the same way more or less), but more of a boon to slower units (it doesn't crush their already low AS). However, slower units would still have the drawback of not being able to double with lighter weapons (meaning there's still obviously an advantage to having high SPD no matter what your CON is), making those more suited to faster units.

3 hours ago, Sage of the Mist said:

See my previous post, statistics don't lie. Promoted Florina has 5 con, a javelin has a weight of 11 meaning thats -6, thats a big deal.

Not when enemies are also weighed down a lot and Florina's SPD is so much higher than the average enemy where she'll still double most of them. And it's not a bad thing if she doesn't double all of them. Again, why is not doubling in some cases inherently bad design? Just because a unit doesn't double everything with a heavier weapon, doesn't make the system bad. Flat SPD penalities would do the exact same thing as well, just that the slower (but higher CON) units aren't screwed over by using the same weapon. Keep in mind that the difference here is that fast units being weighed down usually only effects their offense. While slow units being weighed down affects their durability.

Now... you could argue "why not just buff the slower units" or even "why do slow units exist in the first place?" because A) It over-emphasises on how important SPD generally tends to be and B) It homogenises the design of each unit. Sure, you could just balance low AS units by giving ridiculous stats in other areas but that's a messy way of doing it. CON isn't necessarily the perfect solution at all, but it was a reasonably effective one, if not executed perfectly.

Edited July 13, 2018 by Dunal

[Shadow Mir]

On 7/12/2018 at 2:13 PM, Dunal said:

Low CON is worked around by having higher SPD as a counterbalance (when tuned appropriately). Or selectively targeting slower enemies. Or securing kills with the stronger weapon (is it really the end of the world if a unit doesn't double with a particular weapon or against certain enemies?)

Honestly the whole idea that units need to double to be good/useful has always been questionable design when it comes to FE (it's removing additional nuance or decision making while making low SPD units generally worse off). And saying that a mechanic is assumed to be flawed because it helps balance low SPD units vs. high SPD units (which is entirely what CON does) isn't really true either.

Low CON doesn't need to be "worked around". It's like arguing that lower movement units cannot "work around" their lower movement compared to cavalry or fliers (when preferably there would be enough draw backs to having higher movement... not usually the case in GBA FE but that's discussing balance). Low CON units generally have high SPD + growth (and high SPD growth widens the gap between low SPD units as the game goes on, regardless of weapon usage -- Florina's AS with a Steel Lance widens compared to Dorcas with a Steel Axe for example, since the penalties remain almost static but her base AS increases much faster). 

Why in the name of Anankos do you repeat this? This has been debunked so thoroughly it's a wonder you think it's still viable.

Perhaps, but it still shafts female units relative to males in the same class. Especially with the ridic weights of most GBA weapons that aren't swords or bows. Or do I have to pound Isadora's plight into your head???

Except if really doesn't. Also, you're comparing someone who's highly dependent on her weapon to double because of her low con against someone who (1) is in a male exclusive class, and (2) is super slow. Which really doesn't do your argument any favours. Try looking at female units compared to males in the same class. Like the aforementioned Isadora.

On 7/12/2018 at 2:13 PM, Dunal said:

Wait, what? In Mystery of the Emblem a Steel Axe had a flat SPD penalty of -9 or Javelin had -20. I am speaking in the context of the -4 AS penalty I mentioned (for steels, in the example I gave which is pretty reasonable for FE7) should flat penalties exist once more. Under that context, the example I gave with Florina and Dorcas holds true. Dorcas becomes worse and Florina becomes a lot better. All flat penalties do is benefit high SPD units (since they also affect enemies keep in mind), while CON actually manages to even out the power level between both types of units by making slower units innately better with stronger weapons (this helps slower units be good outside of over-tuning their other stats). Florina is still a much better unit than Dorcas despite their CON because the mechanic is rather well balanced as a whole, with Florina still benefiting from using steels to finish off enemies on player phase or occasionally doubling slower units especially later on.

Low CON obviously doesn't "screw over a unit" at all. In fact, lower movement is a far worse trait if we go by most games.

I also don't understand how stat caps have much relevance in terms of balance when, if they are reached, are fairly overkill especially when it comes to SPD in FE7 (and only ever apply strictly in the lategame). Base SPD + growth are pretty consistently in favour of low CON units which is the main factor.

And in GBA, we have 13 weight Steel Lances and 15 weight Steel Axes - which are almost, if not at least, double the con of most female units. And, once again, your using Florina and Dorcas is apples and oranges. Going back to Mystery, outside of Javelins, the only particularly heavy weapons were some spells. And dragon breath, but that ignored defense unless the enemy was also a dragon, so I would imagine that was warranted.

Perhaps not, but it sure as hell doesn't help. Case in point: Isadora. It's bad enough that she's fragile and doesn't compare to the men stat wise, but she has to have low con, which guts her durability if she tries to use anything like a javelin? Not to mention she can't use axes since they all give hefty speed penalties thanks to her shit con. That's insane, and is highly likely to result in her getting benched.

Bolded: On paper, yes. But in practice, that might not even manifest, unlike the higher con part, which tends to hold true. Try again.

[Dunal]

@Shadow Mir Read my previous post... Hard focusing on the actual balance isn't really discussing the benefits of the mechanic (and/or the main factor to discredit it). And the only reason why I compared Florina/Dorcas is completely under the context of the slower unit not being made worse by heavy weaponry (allowing such units to exist in the first place -- Dorcas isn't a great unit, but he'd be so much worse in a game with no AS penalties). Whether it's him, or Heath, or Oswin etc... Is besides the point. The system isn't there to specifically penalize someone like Florina, it's more to make low SPD units better (by allowing them to use strong weaponry without them being doubled). Whether that was perfectly balanced in FE7 (it wasn't) isn't factoring why the system is there. Only that it's "unfair".

Honestly, flat SPD penalties would work just the same if they worked like Steel Weapons in Fates. Where they only reduce your doubling capability rather than increasing the enemy's capability to double. It didn't technically reduce your SPD. CON works the same way in practice (or how it's intentionally designed).

 

Isadora isn't exactly a good example since she's a perfectly decent unit that is actually rather well designed for a mounted (and/or prepromoted) unit. She's the worst Paladin (not really saying much due to the inherent quality of them) but that's only because of her availability. Her base SPD of 16 is +5 on Marcus while he has +5 CON. If it weren't for her availability (being the reason she's worse than others, especially Marcus) having +5 SPD is strictly better because it means she has higher AS with lighter weapons, but (at worst) the same AS with heavier weaponry (with her higher SPD growth creating a gap with heavier weaponry later on). Which is really the whole idea behind CON (stronger weapons being normalized between faster/slower units... with the faster units having the option to have often more offence with lighter weaponry, in return for potential retaliation damage on player phase...). Still, she's an above average unit so I really don't think her CON is a design flaw. It's more that the other paladins don't sacrifice enough to be mounted.

[Sage of the Mist]

54 minutes ago, Dunal said:

All really based on individual balancing rather than arguing against the purpose for why CON exists or the benefits it inherently provides. Whether females are treated unfairly is besides the point (and often times untrue in the first place, because it counterbalances other statistics or is meant to -- IS didn't arbitrarily give units low CON without balancing other factors, with Florina being a good example). Most females are also statistically treated unfairly when it comes to STR or DEF as well (on average), but that isn't an inherit flaw with STR/DEF itself.

And for the most part they're not. Units like Rebecca aren't bad because of her CON, but because her base SPD doesn't make up for it (only her growth does in the long term). Nino's higher SPD to make up for her CON is negated by her poor availability. Isadora vs. Marcus is a case of availability (where otherwise her SPD would counterbalance her CON really well).

Florina vs. Heath may be a better example, but class doesn't matter in the context of the doubling mechanic and how weaponry effects that. Making low SPD units more viable is exactly what CON helps to accomplish, especially when tuned well (and don't get me wrong, CON/WT on each unit/weapon is not tuned perfectly, which is entirely what you're focusing on rather than the core of the mechanic). It helps them specialize in stronger weaponry without gutting their durability.

The entire purpose of CON is exactly the same as flat weight except that it doesn't make slow units even slower (while also making weapon selection variable between each unit). You can argue as to whether you think females are treated unfairly, or Florina's CON is too low, or Heath's is too high, or X weapon is too heavy etc etc... And some of those may not necessarily be untrue (though still highly debatable since Florina is the better unit in the grand scheme of things)... but that's an entirely different debate.

If you look at Awakening or Tellius, slower units are often bad because faster units can use literally any weapon they want and still double. Offensively, your faster units are much better as a result, and defensively your slower units get the short end of the stick because fast enemies with strong weapons will double them (keep in mind that CON affects enemies as well).

CON was/is a rather elegant solution in making slower units comparatively viable by normalizing offense and durability (since AS affects both) by virtue of weapon selection. Fates had the next best solution by making some weapons impossible to double with (which only benefits slower units) but didn't have the nuance that CON could have with its design/balancing (not to say the execution was perfect in that regard). Fates was also still flawed in that "heavy" weapons (like steel weapons) punished slower units equally to faster ones. CON's objective on the other hand was to differentiate that (if ideally tuned).

And CON isn't exactly perfect. A hard cap of -5 SPD would probably be fine. And lowering only AS (as opposed to avoid as well) might also work. Are there ways to improve it? Sure. But don't discredit the entire mechanic just because some units are affected more than others from it (which is often just part of their design). It's less of a punishment of faster units (since flat weight like FE3 or Echoes would affect them the same way more or less), but more of a boon to slower units (it doesn't crush their already low AS). However, slower units would still have the drawback of not being able to double with lighter weapons (meaning there's still obviously an advantage to having high SPD no matter what your CON is), making those more suited to faster units.

Not when enemies are also weighed down a lot and Florina's SPD is so much higher than the average enemy where she'll still double most of them. And it's not a bad thing if she doesn't double all of them. Again, why is not doubling in some cases inherently bad design? Just because a unit doesn't double everything with a heavier weapon, doesn't make the system bad. Flat SPD penalities would do the exact same thing as well, just that the slower (but higher CON) units aren't screwed over by using the same weapon. Keep in mind that the difference here is that fast units being weighed down usually only effects their offense. While slow units being weighed down affects their durability.

Now... you could argue "why not just buff the slower units" or even "why do slow units exist in the first place?" because A) It over-emphasises on how important SPD generally tends to be and B) It homogenises the design of each unit. Sure, you could just balance low AS units by giving ridiculous stats in other areas but that's a messy way of doing it. CON isn't necessarily the perfect solution at all, but it was a reasonably effective one, if not executed perfectly.

Meant to being the key word there but in practice they failed to balance it out properly so what we end up getting are units who are unfairly outclassed because the devs couldn't so simple math/ realize the implications of the system they made and the effect it would end up having. Let me make this as clear as day, my problem with con  is that is a mechanic biased in male units favor, it allows them to double with better weapons while females are forced to use weaker weapons if they don't want to lose AS. Forcing certain units based on a variable (in this case con ) to suffer while other units without that problem to supersede their allies of the same class. That is NOT balanced design.

Not much to argue seeing as that the stats back me up on that.

the implication of this being that weapons with weights of 15 and up is balanced design.

I consider fates approach far more balanced as it effects all units equally instead of selectively  punishing certain units

if a unit is already slow as a snail they literally have nothing to gain from con ether, they will still be doubled by pretty much everything under the sun so no con does not improve their durability.

.........(screams internally)......... Actually that right there seems like a PERFECT reason to discredit and write off con as a bullshit mechanic because there is literally ZERO downside to having low con (aside from rescue)  and ALL upside to having high con, and that right there is bias, con is a mechanic that screws over female units and the devs did nothing to compensate for it. As i've already said, higher speed growths and caps don't mean a damn thing when your AS plummets over 7 points from using a weapon that a male unit can double with soley thanks to con.. (see my example of this with Isadora,  Kent and Sain. there's a reason @Shadow Mir and I keep bringing her up, she's the perfect example of the evident bias towards males of a unisex class and the inherent unfairness of con ) It screws over characters and makes them inferior to other units of the same class (usually males) and that right there is terrible, biased design.

not if your doing 5 or less damage per hit.

Too bad the statistics don't agree with you on that one. Seriously how can people argue that con is balanced when the info that disproves that is on this site and very readily available.  I literally posted the stats here. on this page. that clearly indicated that faster units with less con suffer far more than units with lower speed and higher con if that wasn't evidence enough for you you can look the stats up yourself  on the main site under the "average stats tab" on the blazing sword page.

 

As a side note we may have to just create a separate topic for this if this debate is going to last much longer.

 

[Dunal]

52 minutes ago, Sage of the Mist said:

As a side note we may have to just create a separate topic for this if this debate is going to last much longer.

Well then let's just agree to disagree since 'balance' and 'unfairness' are really not what I'm contesting at all. It wasn't perfectly balanced in FE7 and I'm not deputing that. I however wouldn't say it's intended to be 'unfair' either (and the core of its design) and it's missing the point I'm trying to make. I suppose the best way to summarize it was that heavy weapons were not designed to double on most units (without crippling slower units even more). While lighter weapons are only designed to double in the hands of high SPD units. Does that explain it?

It's not "unfair" in that context since the intended design would be:

Spoiler

 

(In this example, the enemy has the same AS as Heath)

Florina + light weapon = Doubling.

Florina + heavy weapon = Not Doubling.

Heath + lighter weapon = Not Doubling.

Heath + heavy weapon = Not Doubling (his AS doesn't really change).

Florina has around +5 SPD over Heath throughout the game. While Heath has +5 CON.

The game isn't being unfair towards Florina here since their AS is the exact same when using a heavy weapon like steel (both would be weighed down to the same value). However Florina has better AS when using the lighter weapon.

What the mechanic is essentially doing here is making the SPD stat more situational by only making it relevant on lighter weaponry. Again, this isn't being unfair to Florina necessarily, but preventing Heath from being doubled by the enemy should he have been weighed down by the heavy weapon. It has the best of both worlds by preventing the fast unit being too strong with the heavy weapon, while also not crippling the slower unit as well. This was exactly how CON was intended to function and that's all I'm discussing. 

 

What I am saying is that the mechanic was well designed (when balanced correctly) especially if undergone some further refining/tuning. It's intended design had good purpose. I have yet to see you really comment on its benefits or deputing that as opposed to picking apart specific balancing. In which, I'm not denying that those exist in some cases, but basing your entire argument on that is a bit short-sighted. I'm trying to look at both sides here (as in, I'm not denying it could use improvement) rather than discrediting it completely. If Three Houses chooses to adapt on it then that could be interesting assuming its balanced well. 

I'm just of the mind that the mechanic had its pros/cons and that it was well intentioned in order to boost slower units (regarding weapons that units are not typically meant to double with). Fates also had some good ideas to help resolve this, but by forcing slowing units to suffer the same penalties (such as someone like Arthur losing 5 AS with a Hand Axe, often causing him to be doubled). The more I think of it, the steel weapon model Fates used was really good though, and should have been used more. I wouldn't mind that mechanic being the entire basis for WT on weapons (reducing capability to double but not susceptibility to being doubled).

Is that a fair assessment?

 

 

The reason to bring this up is because Three Houses has the possibility of bringing the mechanic back. It's definitely worth discussing how the mechanic worked well in some cases instead of writing it off as objectively bad. It definitely was designed with a purpose -- not to be randomly "unfair" without any further context.

Edited July 13, 2018 by Dunal