Can Fire Emblem games with the Turnwheel still be challenging?

[Alastor15243]

7 minutes ago, Etheus said:

I don't think you're being charitable. I think you're placing your own mindset on the development team. I don't pretend to assume their intentions, and I don't think there is any value in that. You're imagining a hypothetical game and assigning motive to the fact that the game we have is in some way different from the hypothetical. And with a game as large in scope and new mechanics as this one, I don't think that such is entirely fair.

Then I have two questions for you:

1: Why do you think this game has such a problem with first-playthrough "gotcha" moments and luck-based elements, including new problems no other game in the series has ever had?

2: Why would you even care if I got my wish and rewinds were made optional? How would that affect you in any way? And if it wouldn't, what are you arguing against?

Edited August 28, 2019 by Alastor15243

[Flere210]

You are assuming that not using the turnwheel is an intended way to play the game, wich is most likely not the case.

Some people hate change and other people may be againist a certain change in particular, but i don't think a game should cater to such toughts. New mechanics should be attempted to prevent stagnation and abbandoned if they don't work  but is foolish to introduce them and make them optional because traditionalist players may not like them. 

If you want to play whit self imposed chalenges and blind, you can't blame the devolopers if you met a roadblock. It's like trying awakening lunatic+ 0%growth before asking around if the stats inflate too much or not. 

[Alastor15243]

9 minutes ago, Flere210 said:

You are assuming that not using the turnwheel is an intended way to play the game, wich is most likely not the case.

Some people hate change and other people may be againist a certain change in particular, but i don't think a game should cater to such toughts. New mechanics should be attempted to prevent stagnation and abbandoned if they don't work  but is foolish to introduce them and make them optional because traditionalist players may not like them. 

If you want to play whit self imposed chalenges and blind, you can't blame the devolopers if you met a roadblock. It's like trying awakening lunatic+ 0%growth before asking around if the stats inflate too much or not. 

The issue is that the playstyles they're not catering to are the playstyles that make the series' signature and defining feature, one of the very few things all the previous games in the series had in common, relevant.

Permadeath. Whether you're playing ironman or just reset classic, this informs almost everything you do. The idea that you have to make smart choices or else, and that if you screw up, you have to deal with the consequences, either by moving on, or restarting, using the occasional and extremely restricted resurrection options, or something that keeps the pressure on and stops you from ever getting too complacent.

Making the turnwheel a standard part of the game destroys that entire experience, and I just can't agree with the idea that it's perfectly acceptable for future games to throw that in the trash and "evolve" past it.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Alastor15243

[Fabulously Olivier]

13 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

Then I have two questions for you:

1: Why do you think this game has such a problem with first-playthrough "gotcha" moments and luck-based elements, including new problems no other game in the series has ever had?

2: Why would you even care if I got my wish and rewinds were made optional? How would that affect you in any way? And if it wouldn't, what are you arguing against?

1. Because the game has a different programming team and is experimenting with wildly new mechanics across the board.

 

2. You already have what you want. You have the option to not use that rewind and accept the game over or the unit death. What you actually want is for me to lose my choice. We are arguing about something nebulous, and that is whether the game was designed around the mechanic rather than designed around standard play. And that is something that... we just don't know. We likely never will unless a developer interview sheds light on that.

[Flere210]

Permadeath is only cancelled by the turnwheel if the game is easy. If the game is thracia tier difficulty the possibility of running out of even 12 uses is very real for average players. 

And 24x would actually be doable whit the turnwheel lol.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

I do not use them. 

If a character dies, then I let it die, or I replay the map all over again. That is how to face the consequences of permadeath. 

FE10's battle save was a better way to handle it since you can save at critical points, but have to take the consequence, if still someone should die. 

[Fabulously Olivier]

One thing I will add is that the turnwheel is fundamentally different than casual mode or phoenix mode.

 

If you lose a unit in casual mode, the game slaps you on the wrist, and then nothing happens. You messed up, and you don't have to change anything. You just win, and while there is nothing wrong with that, it means that there are no stakes at all.

 

With the turnwheel, if you lose a unit, the game slaps you on the wrist. You then have a choice. Accept the consequences or change the strategy. But if you use the turnwheel, there IS a change in strategy. Maybe it's a single action. Maybe it's an entire turn. Maybe you want to re-evaluate your approach going back multiple turns because your core strategy is that severely flawed. But regardless, with the turn wheel, you do have to adapt and change; you just don't lose half an hour or more of your life over it. I LIKE that.

[Alastor15243]

7 minutes ago, Flere210 said:

Permadeath is only cancelled by the turnwheel if the game is easy. If the game is thracia tier difficulty the possibility of running out of even 12 uses is very real for average players. 

And 24x would actually be doable whit the turnwheel lol.

The problem, as I said before, is that the game has to be hard in entirely different ways than it is now. A game I would still find satisfyingly difficult even if I could fix 12 of my mistakes would be completely and totally unrecognizable as a Fire Emblem game, and in the best case scenario would look more like Invisible, inc.

This is because, the way the games are designed, you don't have to try something to know it was a stupid idea. The games give you everything you need to know that beforehand, and if you make the mistake anyway, either you miscalculated, or you just didn't know or care to check. A game where dying 12 times is perfectly reasonable even for someone with a full grasp of the game's mechanics would have to conceal an obscene amount of information from the player, AND be procedurally generated in some way so the challenge isn't ruined by playing it a second time.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Alastor15243

[Flere210]

How do you feel about Thracia trap tiles? Do they belong in a normal fire emblem game?

[Alastor15243]

Just now, Flere210 said:

How do you feel about Thracia trap tiles? Do they belong in a normal fire emblem game?

I haven't played that game yet, so I can't say. I'm currently doing a marathon and will probably get to play it in a few months.

[Interdimensional Observer]

I'd express preference for Shadow Dragon/New Mystery's two save points per map (one for the earlier maps). 

It's limited to only two uses. And they tend to be placed far enough apart to align for a save for a separate "stage" of the battle. That's fair enough to me. You proved you could make it past the first part of the fight, you don't need to prove it again if you fail the second part.

It's like checkpoints in platformers, which nowadays can be just as optional- see Shovel Knight and Azure Striker Gunvolt. And in those two cases, if you play for score, you want to skip the checkpoints. I wouldn't mind a meagre 1000 Gold per unused save point in FE if IS decided to do that.

 

6 minutes ago, Flere210 said:

How do you feel about Thracia trap tiles? Do they belong in a normal fire emblem game?

They don't belong, ever. They have no signs of being different from any other tile, and recovering from them is hard. Thracia Remake better give a subtle clue which are warp spaces.

Fortunately, it's only on one map (well there is 16 Shannam, but those while still invisible aren't so bad), which is otherwise bearable once you Torch it up and see what you must get to and what you must destroy. It's the penultimate map, so it's expected to be hard anyhow, and you're free to use up most of your good stuff.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Interdimensional Observer

[Flere210]

My point is ghat FE sometimes whithold information, whit thracia 24x being by far the worst offender. I honestly don't know how people do that shit whitout save states.

A thurnweel whit a fair number of uses (imo between 2 and 4 is the sweet spot) would open up the map design to things like traps,fow ambushes, squad of swordmasters whit killing rdges and so on. Those thing are just bullshit in a fire emblem whitout the turnwheel, and turn those batlles into an excercise of memorizzation.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Flere210

[Alastor15243]

1 minute ago, Flere210 said:

My point is ghat FE sometimes whithold information, whit thracia 24x being by far the worst offender. I honestly don't know how people do that shit whitout save states.

A thurnweel whit a fair number of uses (imo between 2 and 4 is the sweet spot) would open up the map design to things like traps,fow ambushes, squad of swordmasters whit killing rdges and so on. Those thing are just bullshit in a fire emblem whitout the turnwheel, and turn those batles into an excercise of memorizzation.

That would be like a platformer game adding in extra lives and then using it as an excuse to just randomly kill you, just to mix things up. If this is the kind of gameplay we can look forward to in order to justify the turnwheel, holy cow count me out. Like, forever.

I'll repeat what I said before: the games give you the means to recognize, in advance, 90% of all mistakes people reset over. if you change the game so much that the turnwheel still isn't game-breaking even for people who know what they're doing, that game won't look anything like Fire Emblem anymore. It will have so many unpredictable mechanics that it'd be completely different, and it would probably also have to be procedurally generated if you wanted the game to be challenging more than once.

[Florete]

1 hour ago, Alastor15243 said:

In Three Houses the game will set enemies as immobile, and then a flag can trigger that makes them mobile, but even if you activate it on your turn, the game waits until enemy phase to change it.

I am pretty certain this is false.

[Fabulously Olivier]

Just now, Alastor15243 said:

That would be like a platformer game adding in extra lives and then using it as an excuse to just randomly kill you, just to mix things up. If this is the kind of gameplay we can look forward to in order to justify the turnwheel, holy cow count me out. Like, forever.

I'll repeat what I said before: the games give you the means to recognize, in advance, 90% of all mistakes people reset over. if you change the game so much that the turnwheel still isn't game-breaking even for people who know what they're doing, that game won't look anything like Fire Emblem anymore. It will have so many unpredictable mechanics that it'd be completely different, and it would probably also have to be procedurally generated if you wanted the game to be challenging more than once.

I mean, I'd argue that old school platformers often did that without extra lives in the name of being hard.

 

There is always opposition to games adding new convenience and difficulty options. Always. And it's usually baseless and unreasonable. I for one am thankful for such innovations, and don't wish to go back to games with 1 difficulty setting in which 1 hit = death and 1 death = game over. We moved past that because that was garbage.

[Alastor15243]

1 minute ago, Florete said:

I am pretty certain this is false.

I assure you it happens. Black Eagles route. Cornelia map. The knights that were marked with 0 mov arbitrarily were given their movement back on the enemy phase and nearly killed Dorothea.

Just now, Etheus said:

There is always opposition to games adding new convenience and difficulty options. Always. And it's usually baseless and unreasonable. I for one am thankful for such innovations, and don't wish to go back to games with 1 difficulty setting in which 1 hit = death and 1 death = game over. We moved past that because that was garbage.

Yes, but they found something better before they made games actively hostile to old ways of playing. And usually they didn't make games actively hostile to the old way of playing at all.

[Armagon]

2 hours ago, Fire Brand said:

Firstly, it takes away the whole point of permadeath. Units are supposed to die. Part of the fun of Fire Emblem is adapting your team to fill the holes left by unit deaths. I believe Kaga himself said he designed the games to be played in this way. If you're resetting or rewinding for every unit death, then you may as well be playing on casual mode. It's the same thing.

And Sakurai designed Smash to not be played as a competitive game but look where it is now.

In the end, it's up to the player to decide how they want to play the game, unless they're forced to play a certain way. That is assuming the game is single player.

_____________________________

Anyway my take it is that if you have to use the Turnwheel, you've already lost. In 3H, if the Lord dies and you get the rewind prompt, you cannot progress past that point. You're only options are to rewind or accept total defeat and start over. For all intents and purposes, you have lost.

As for rewinding to save other units, i still see it as a loss because you're losing the progress that you made. Maybe it's by 1 turn, maybe it's by 10 but you're still losing progress.

I will say that 12 uses max is too much. 3 is fine, if you're gonna let me upgrade that count, make it like 5 or 6 uses max.

[Interdimensional Observer]

18 minutes ago, Flere210 said:

My point is ghat FE sometimes whithold information, whit thracia 24x being by far the worst offender. I honestly don't know how people do that shit whitout save states.

Warpskip silly!😄

Spoiler

Turn 1: Torch. 2x Silences or Sleeps for the enemy Warpers. Warp Leif. Rewarp Sara. Warp or Rewarp Boss Killer. Two Others Do Whatever (bring only 8 units).

*On enemy phase, most or all in the boss room should die*

Turn 2- Use Sara. Use Leif. Warp, Rewarp, or Rescue everyone you can into the boss room and kill any stragglers. Kill any threatening Rewarped foes.

Turn 3- Finish getting everyone into the boss chamber to escape. Kill any Rewarped threats.

Turn 4- If you have everyone in the boss room, have them escape now. If not, get them in there!

Turn 5- Finish making everyone escape.

All you need is Rewarp, Warp and Rescue! And 2 charges Silence or Sleep or 1 of each. 1 Torch. And somebody who can survive a room of Hel via dodgetanking or Nosferatu. Stamina Drinks would be appreciated if some of your Staffers were fatigued after the last fight putting the eastern Loptian monastery out of submission.

But you still have a strong 🥃 point about going this map the old-fashioned way.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Interdimensional Observer

[Stroud]

Welp, reminds me almost of Mario Maker with some trial and Error Shenanigan like leap of faith. How I love those levels.

The way I see it Thurnwheel is intended as a quality of life. Because Insys just knows there are those kind of players who do not take iron man runs. And if they ever lose a unit they will reset. In this case, yeah you could almost question if they shouldn't be playing casual.

On one of the interviews I read it came a bit to me, that fire emblem has to cater at least 2 type of gamers. RPG fans and Strategy fans (Of course you cannot totally divide them, but these is a line for the game itself) , they also saying themself that you can actually play the game with less RPG (Grinding for example) and get more into the strategic aspects. And some RPG players tend to want to have a "perfect" savestat, which includes having Classic and all units. This may be a bad habit for them out of other games. Its not rare to reset the game to a certain point in RPG,s because something was missed.

I mean there is no clear line, but its some kind of an orientation they had while making the game. And it can be true, while testing the game I could imagine that they developers also relied on Thurnwheel and did not test too much how you can get through the game without it, so there may be some flaws thanks to the thurnwheel. 

I still think most of the time you have can have your own decision. And players who need to rely a lot on the thurnwheel should know where they stand. 

Overall I want to add, there are always players who play in a different way and maybe a way you do not expect. And its difficult to take all into consideration. For the Thurnwheel I see that they thought quite much about the frustration which some players go through, even if its on their own choice. Redoing the maps. 

[Fabulously Olivier]

2 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

I assure you it happens. Black Eagles route. Cornelia map. The knights that were marked with 0 mov arbitrarily were given their movement back on the enemy phase and nearly killed Dorothea.

Yes, but they found something better before they made games actively hostile to old ways of playing. And usually they didn't make games actively hostile to the old way of playing at all.

I am curious about that. There must have been some trigger that was non-arbitrary (like flipping a switch or something).

 

I can't say that I consider what happened there to be the game's fault either. You were "ambushed" by 4 mov enemies that could have very easily been mowed down from a distance by half of your team, Dorothea included, and that particular level applies so little pressure that there was basically no reason said armor units should have been alive to do so.

[Alastor15243]

1 minute ago, Etheus said:

I am curious about that. There must have been some trigger that was non-arbitrary (like flipping a switch or something).

I can't say that I consider what happened there to be the game's fault either. You were "ambushed" by 4 mov enemies that could have very easily been mowed down from a distance by half of your team, Dorothea included, and that particular level applies so little pressure that there was basically no reason said armor units should have been alive to do so.

Arbitrary might not have been the right word, it probably was a trigger, but the point was that the trigger was invisible, and most crucially, the game told me those enemies wouldn't move right up until the point where it was too late to do anything about it.

Avoiding situations like that doesn't take skill. It's just takes being extremely paranoid. I was having an unbelievably shitty time with this game by the end of it, because any semblance of trust had been broken. The game had established that nothing was sacred, and for all I knew it could change any rule it wanted, at any time, for any reason, without caring if the resulting situation would be a challenge or an unwinnable deathtrap. I was terrified to split up my party, terrified to even move any of my units too far ahead of the pack, terrified to do anything, because it was physically impossible to know the rules of the game I was playing from the mere act of playing it. And my only available options weren't fun. They weren't smart. They were just paranoid.

[Armagon]

5 minutes ago, Etheus said:

I am curious about that. There must have been some trigger that was non-arbitrary (like flipping a switch or something).

Usually, the trigger is attacking the enemy. The final boss of the Golden Deer route also has zero movement until you attack him in which case he gets to move. So it's kinda like an aggro thing.

There's another similar example in Crimson Flower Ch.17 where generic enemies would transform into Beasts. Ironically enough, these enemies on Hard mode don't move at all pre-transformation (they do on Normal) so you can tell which ones are the ones that will transform and potentially kill them before they can.

[Fabulously Olivier]

Also, Three Houses isn't the first game to employ such. A particular example from my favorite game, Path of Radiance, had a boss on the boats level that was stationary until he would arbitrarily move on a certain turn. This was a Sniper boss with a longbow, and thus had a large threat radius and could easily kill any frail units in that large range. 

 

And that was far more arbitrary, because it only happens on Normal and Hard difficulty. It's disabled on the lowest difficulty that would actually inform/teach a new player how to play the game.

[Alastor15243]

1 minute ago, Etheus said:

Also, Three Houses isn't the first game to employ such. A particular example from my favorite game, Path of Radiance, had a boss on the boats level that was stationary until he would arbitrarily move on a certain turn. This was a Sniper boss with a longbow, and thus had a large threat radius and could easily kill any frail units in that large range. 

 

And that was far more arbitrary, because it only happens on Normal and Hard difficulty. It's disabled on the lowest difficulty that would actually inform/teach a new player how to play the game.

The difference is that that was before the game marked units that don't move with 0 movement and showed their actual movement and attack range. Until that point, stationary units were still shown to be able to move, there were just situations where they chose not to. This game, by contrast, actively tells you units physically can't move, and then changes its mind without warning.

[Fabulously Olivier]

6 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

The difference is that that was before the game marked units that don't move with 0 movement and showed their actual movement and attack range. Until that point, stationary units were still shown to be able to move, there were just situations where they chose not to. This game, by contrast, actively tells you units physically can't move, and then changes its mind without warning.

This is often done as a form of communication. If I am not mistaken, those knights have no move because they are located next to trap tiles that lower move. If those trap tiles are disabled, they should be able to move.

 

 

Spoiler

It's also used in the battle against Dmitri to communicate clearly to the player which enemy soldiers can become beasts. There are other communication issues with that map, but this isn't one of them.

 

Edited August 28, 2019 by Etheus