Jump to content

Three Houses has now been out for one year! How have your opinions on it changed since release?


Recommended Posts

played the game at launch. played VW, then AM. Was totally burnt out after my second playthrough and haven't picked up the game again.

Reflecting back on the game a year later, I'm def in the same boat with some other folks where where I've become more critical over 3H. Agree with everyone's criticisms here. There's been other rpgs I've played where I will reflect back to it, and realize the criticisms kinda out weight all the things I liked about it. When it comes to that, I'm kinda torn between 3H or Persona 5. Folks regard Persona 5 has some masterpiece/best JRPG to ever exist in past years, but I had many issues with it. Yet I'd probably be more likely to go play Persona 5 Royal before picking up 3H again.

That's because I have little to no desire to play the Crimson Flower route. I just can't see myself siding with Edelgard. I know I should form my own opinion, but I would go to this forum and read through all the Edelgard-related threads of folks discussing her character. After reading through all the crazy-in depth discourse folks had over her, I still I don't think I could ever like her and take her side. 

I think the biggest sore spot is how TWSITD had to be implemented into the story, and Edelgard having to rely on them for her route. TWSITD really needed to not be in the game whatsoever. They were so poorly implemented into the story. and I KNOW they are allegedly taken out in the Crimson Flower route if you do certain paired endings that mentions them being eliminated, but that doesn't count. That's just lazy writing

That and the thought of having to go through the monastery/pre-war phase for a 3rd time just makes me lose interest in replaying the game. The only slight incentive for me to play Crimson Flower would be because of Jeritiza. Since he was a free DLC. I'm still super salty that male Byleth only got one dude to romance, Lindhardt, who I was pretty lukewarm to when it came to their romance/s support. In my VW playthrough I played as male Byleth and recruited Lindhardt to s support him. Yet I had to really force myself to enjoy their romance, which was hardly there.

Not making Claude and Dimitri bi and romanceable for male Byleth as an s support is something I'll forever be bitter about. I tried my hardest to like female Byleth when I played AM so I could romance Dimitri...but I just couldn't. I didn't like male Bylth all that much better, or like Byleth that much as an mc in general honestly. The romances with Byleth and the characters just felt so..meh. 

On the topic of the Cindered Shadows DLC, if it still wasn't $25, that would be another incentive for me to pick up 3H again. The story and characters of the Ashen Wolves piqued my interest, but not enough to drop $25 on. Plus, to get the full advantage/experience of them, you'd have to replay the VW and AM routes again due to the supports with Claude and Dimitri

And yeah, I still consider 3H to be a good game, and don't regret my time with it. Maybe someday I'll go back to it. Be nice in the DLC went on sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, xchickengirlx said:

played the game at launch. played VW, then AM. Was totally burnt out after my second playthrough and haven't picked up the game again.

Reflecting back on the game a year later, I'm def in the same boat with some other folks where where I've become more critical over 3H. Agree with everyone's criticisms here. There's been other rpgs I've played where I will reflect back to it, and realize the criticisms kinda out weight all the things I liked about it. When it comes to that, I'm kinda torn between 3H or Persona 5. Folks regard Persona 5 has some masterpiece/best JRPG to ever exist in past years, but I had many issues with it. Yet I'd probably be more likely to go play Persona 5 Royal before picking up 3H again.

That's because I have little to no desire to play the Crimson Flower route. I just can't see myself siding with Edelgard. I know I should form my own opinion, but I would go to this forum and read through all the Edelgard-related threads of folks discussing her character. After reading through all the crazy-in depth discourse folks had over her, I still I don't think I could ever like her and take her side.

What about going Silver Snow instead? For all intents and purposes, SS being the default route for BE means you can choose the Black Eagles and the start and not have to support Edelgard's shenanigans (heck, unlike the other lords, her backstory isn't even part of the plot!). Regardless of what you might've heard of that route's content and how similar it is to VW, I still think you don't lose much by trying it at least once, and it can even help you get a more complete opinion of the game as a whole.

Edited by Moltz23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the past year, I've only played Verdant Wind twice because I love the Golden Deer so much and I can't see myself ever fighting Claude and Hilda. I started a Blue Lions file a few weeks ago, but it's so hard for me to get through part one because I personally find it boring. I really want to see how the Azure Moon and eventually Crimson Flower turn out, though, if I ever manage to get through part one again.

When the game was first released, I thought it was a bit silly that gender-locked classes were back again. I would've liked to have Claude pick up Darting Blow or to have Lysithea become a Dark Bishop, but I found that Barbarossa and Dark Flier were good for them too.

The only opinions of mine that have really changed are what I thought about each of the characters. Prior to release, I thought I would like Dimitri more because I like his design, but he just seems like a really boring person to me. And I don't like his voice or time-skip appearance at all. On the other hand, I really liked Edelgard after playing through the game for the first time (and specifically after chapter 11). Of course, I was playing through Claude's route, so I couldn't choose to side with her but I completely agree with her decision to go against the church and wish I wasn't forced to go against her. I also didn't really have an opinion on Caspar at first, but now I really like him because I like his time-skip appearance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, xchickengirlx said:

That's because I have little to no desire to play the Crimson Flower route. I just can't see myself siding with Edelgard. I know I should form my own opinion, but I would go to this forum and read through all the Edelgard-related threads of folks discussing her character. After reading through all the crazy-in depth discourse folks had over her, I still I don't think I could ever like her and take her side. 

While I have not played nor read about the Red House storyline, one can infer from the reactions of numerous players that, at some point, Edelgard takes a darker path.
Ironically, this darker side is the one reason why I would be interested in playing Edelgard's route. I do not know how it is handled, but that is certainly a path that I would love to explore.

I however did not like the gameplay as a whole, and did not fancy most of Edelgard's mates: I said that I hated Stripper Hat since Day 1, and I still do. Ferdinand and Petra interest me, but that is it. And, as far as I know, one cannot kill most mates and replace them with members from other houses early in the game.

Edited by starburst
Please do not spoil me about Edelgard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before release, I actually suspected that the Three Houses would burn players out when they play other paths. Not only are there more paths than in Fates, but the teaching aspect and calendar-driven progression ensures that there will be lots of downtime between battles. I'm on my sixth playthrough right now, and I'm really starting to feel the repetition right now. I've beaten all paths except Blue Lions, where I got stuck on the final chapter on maddening NG, and I'm having another go on the route on maddening NG+.

I enjoy the gameplay, and see it as a marriage between the quirks from Gaiden/Echoes and classical FE. The map reuse is an unfortunate flaw of the game, but I feel that the enemy layout, and other quirks like capture points to stop reinforcements allow each battle to feel fresh. Despite this, TH does not fall off into Fates' gimmicky maps, and the gimmicks that do exist feel more natural as a result.

As for the story, I'm a bit disappointed that IS made the empire the 'villain faction' again. In the timeskip, it was more or less the Empire vs everyone else, rather than a more intricate free for all between the factions. And while TH has one of the better stories in the series, it still drops the ball on certain aspects due to it being divided into four routes.

Also, this game has too many menus. Not only is weapon durability back and weapon management being a thing again, but there's also Combat Arts (that characters gain at a decent pace), Abilities (that are also gained at a decent pace, I never had to open the skill menu in Fates but I constantly do in TH), and Battalions, and all of these have their own menus. I hope the next entry dials back on these additions a bit (and has better handheld performance)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One month later I still put Three Houses my in top five Fire Emblem games. A lot of what makes Awakening works for me also applies to 3H. The sandbox design where there is a good amount of experimentation with classes, skills and weapons. A strong 1st act to the world that makes me invested. In the past I never paid much attention the lords having my attentions to the supporting cast. But Dimitri changed that.

Performance wise, 3H is a bit rough around the edges. Some texture work are from a sloppy ps2 game. i know the Switch isn't a powerful console but more of an effort can be made. Playing the gamw on tablet mode makes me wish I had a pair of glasses.

What holds it back for me is the amount of repetition. After completing Azure Moon first I didn't know that I have experienced roughly 80% of the game had to offer. Playing part 1 again and again with little thing changing other that the lord in focus gets dull. Three houses has about 4-5 ideas that are enough for a full fledged game crammed together with little room to breathe. So not all the story beats lead to a satisfying conclusion, or answers found within the game.  No saying that everything needs a feel length explanation, but game is too vague about important details. From the Nabateas to Edelgard's family; details are difficult to come by.

Overall I see 3H as an experimental title for the next game. Hopefully IS and KT can see what works and expand upon that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think like a lot of people my opinion has gone from "one of the best ever" to "significantly flawed but still really enjoyable." If nothing else I would still rank it among my favorites in the series because it's really ambitious and pulls off a number of things well.

I think there are two things that are pretty much unambiguous negatives, which get worse on subsequent playthroughs and prevent it from reaching its full potential. The Agarthans are pretty underdeveloped and while it would be forgivable to the extent that they still needed a faction to kickstart a lot of the backstory and status quo, they're never entertaining or intimidating enough to make the confrontations with them all that memorable. It's why, imo, the last few chapters of Verdant Wind feel really out of left field. The second one is the map reuse. My personal conspiracy theory is that it was because of the "zoom in" feature the maps were too resource-intensive to make a lot of, which is why White Clouds and the first halves of non-CF routes are so similar. Because of that, all of the routes are much more homogeneous than they should have been.  

On the subject of Three Houses' potential influence on future entries, I do think that Three Houses is kind of a culmination of design trends in recent titles, like leaning into RPG/social sim stuff like S supports or having to chose between multiple campaigns. I think the next game should distinguish itself by at least not doing the multiple campaigns thing because both Fates and Three Houses suffered from overstretch because of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because Three Houses is usually pretty decent in its story and presentation some scenes did come off as fairly shocking in how clumsy they were.

Grondor is an obvious example with how Claude and Dimitri are fighting because the writers wanted a three way battle rather than because it made much sense. But there's also Edelgard and Thales meeting right in the middle of the Monastery so Dimitri can walk in on them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Because Three Houses is usually pretty decent in its story and presentation some scenes did come off as fairly shocking in how clumsy they were.

Grondor is an obvious example with how Claude and Dimitri are fighting because the writers wanted a three way battle rather than because it made much sense. But there's also Edelgard and Thales meeting right in the middle of the Monastery so Dimitri can walk in on them. 

Or how AM has to forcibly make it so that Edelgard cannot speak of the greater plot, because AM is about Dimitri, not the world.

Or how Claude chooses to oppose Edelgard in CF, rather than support her, since that would end the war too quick. They need Edelgard and Claude to fight despite their compatible goals.

Also frankly, the Divine Pulse was stupid. If you can reverse time, it defeats the issues. Would have been better if they went with the original idea that Edelgard would have been able to block or interfere in it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, omegaxis1 said:

Or how Claude chooses to oppose Edelgard in CF, rather than support her, since that would end the war too quick. They need Edelgard and Claude to fight despite their compatible goals.

I don't think that's too problematic. House Riegan is always presented as the anti imperial force within the Alliance. There's also some reason to assume strife between these two. Edelgard isn't a tyrant but she is vaguely authoritarian which clashes with the governmental system the Alliance already has and against Claude's more laid back sensibilities. Sure their goals aren't mutually exclusive but I don't think Claude would support Edelgard's aggression or consolation of power. There's also Edelgard not trusting and perhaps even slightly fearing Claude. She seems to think he's talented enough to disrupt her plans and even uses that as justification for killing him. 

Also isn't the Empire the one that declares the war in CF rather than Claude. The narration says Riegan is leading the anti imperial faction but that the Alliance itself is striving for neutrality to avoid internal strife. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Etrurian emperor said:

I don't think that's too problematic. House Riegan is always presented as the anti imperial force within the Alliance. There's also some reason to assume strife between these two. Edelgard isn't a tyrant but she is vaguely authoritarian which clashes with the governmental system the Alliance already has and against Claude's more laid back sensibilities. Sure their goals aren't mutually exclusive but I don't think Claude would support Edelgard's aggression or consolation of power. There's also Edelgard not trusting and perhaps even slightly fearing Claude. She seems to think he's talented enough to disrupt her plans and even uses that as justification for killing him. 

Also isn't the Empire the one that declares the war in CF rather than Claude. The narration says Riegan is leading the anti imperial faction but that the Alliance itself is striving for neutrality to avoid internal strife. 

In non-CF routes, the Empire is more extreme and strongarms Gloucestor to push for Imperial control, so bviously Claude would have issues with the Empire. But Edelgard in CF forgoes such tactics, and left the Alliance alone for five years. Claude even prepared to expose his Almyran lineage to Edelgard, planning to let her take over cause he does believe she can do it, so there was already a level of trust that Claude had for Edelgard.

In fact, for him that seeks to help others for self-interests as he admitted, there was pure logic behind aiding the Empire. The war would end faster, and Claude would be aware that Edelgard would be okay with opening borders to help end racism. 

Yet just to push for conflict, Claude had to be an enemy that Edelgard had to topple. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

In non-CF routes, the Empire is more extreme and strongarms Gloucestor to push for Imperial control, so bviously Claude would have issues with the Empire. But Edelgard in CF forgoes such tactics, and left the Alliance alone for five years. Claude even prepared to expose his Almyran lineage to Edelgard, planning to let her take over cause he does believe she can do it, so there was already a level of trust that Claude had for Edelgard.

In fact, for him that seeks to help others for self-interests as he admitted, there was pure logic behind aiding the Empire. The war would end faster, and Claude would be aware that Edelgard would be okay with opening borders to help end racism. 

Yet just to push for conflict, Claude had to be an enemy that Edelgard had to topple. 

Claude unambiguously states in his route he's against forcing change through violence, so ultimately I can't imagine him and Edelgard working together even if their ideals can coexist to an extent.

"Claude: Honestly, I believe Edelgard is probably hoping to achieve something very similar. But her methods require too much bloodshed. That's not something the world can get behind.".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Moltz23 said:

Claude unambiguously states in his route he's against forcing change through violence, so ultimately I can't imagine him and Edelgard working together even if their ideals can coexist to an extent.

"Claude: Honestly, I believe Edelgard is probably hoping to achieve something very similar. But her methods require too much bloodshed. That's not something the world can get behind.".

That's not even accurate to the original line. The original line says something else:

Quote

Claude: With her methods, so many people end up dead. Not many would be willing to do that.

This line would mean that her war will get people dead, but it's not him being against that, but rather saying that people wouldn't have the courage to take that step. The localization makes it seem like it goes completely against her, when it's not like that at all. 

Treehouse altered and changed the meaning of many lines for characters. Like making Dimitri extremely polite and nice, or removing a lot of ominous details about Claude, and then the many things they did with Edelgard. 

Also, the thing is, Claude even opposing Edelgard rather than joining her only ensures more bloodshed by having to fight her. All Claude did was mitigate the bloodshed in CF, but he would have avoided bloodshed entirely by siding with her. And then it would have been easy to defeat Faerghus. All Claude did was ensure that there was a prolonged war and more bloodshed involved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Moltz23 said:

Claude unambiguously states in his route he's against forcing change through violence, so ultimately I can't imagine him and Edelgard working together even if their ideals can coexist to an extent.

In fairness, Claude is decently confident that he can protect Leicester at this point in VW, with the Church, Byleth and the Deer behind him. In CF, there aren't as many options open to him, especially once he realises Byleth has re-entered the fray against him. So after the Great Bridge of Myrddin had fallen (leaving the Alliance wide open to attack and Judith being dead), there was probably no need to make a last stand at Derdriu.

That being said, I liked Claude inviting the Almyran navy to help fight off Edelgard in CF, and it was one of those world building things I really wish 3H would have utilised more. There would have surely been all kinds of political consequences if Claude had actually managed to defend Derdriu, and while Edelgard's paralogue does touch on it, Almyra remains a frustratingly loose thread/source of material in most endings of the game.

3H is really dense with mythological/historical references (like with Almyra), which was one of the things that kept me excited about the game, but a decent amount of those references now feel disconnected and disparate, like they were shoved in simply to make the game feel bigger, even though there was no chance they would get fleshed out. I guess that's another change in my opinion on 3H.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, haarhaarhaar said:

In fairness, Claude is decently confident that he can protect Leicester at this point in VW, with the Church, Byleth and the Deer behind him. In CF, there aren't as many options open to him, especially once he realises Byleth has re-entered the fray against him. So after the Great Bridge of Myrddin had fallen (leaving the Alliance wide open to attack and Judith being dead), there was probably no need to make a last stand at Derdriu.

That being said, I liked Claude inviting the Almyran navy to help fight off Edelgard in CF, and it was one of those world building things I really wish 3H would have utilised more. There would have surely been all kinds of political consequences if Claude had actually managed to defend Derdriu, and while Edelgard's paralogue does touch on it, Almyra remains a frustratingly loose thread/source of material in most endings of the game.

3H is really dense with mythological/historical references (like with Almyra), which was one of the things that kept me excited about the game, but a decent amount of those references now feel disconnected and disparate, like they were shoved in simply to make the game feel bigger, even though there was no chance they would get fleshed out. I guess that's another change in my opinion on 3H.

Man I totally forgot about the Almyrans. That's how inconsequential they were to the story lol. I mean I guess...in VW they help out Claude and co. on that one map where you are taking down the Empire's fortress. My memory is a little fuzzy, but I feel like the story wouldn't have been any different if they hadn't helped at all. And unless i'm forgetting something else, that's pretty much all Almrya contributes to VW's story.

In AM, there is that one chapter where Claude needs aid and if you play your cards right on the map, you can save all his allies. I never played CF or SS, but I briefly looked through a walkthough for CF, and you pretty much kill off Claude and end the last shred of fighting power the Alliance/Leicester had in one chapter right? I know you can choose to spare Claude, but even if you do, he vanishes from the rest of the story.

Which makes more sense in CF since he looses control of the Alliance/Leicester, and all his allies are dead(unless you recruited all the GD characters cept Hilda of course)once the Empire takes over. It makes less sense in AM when Claude just....peaces out from the story...I was kind of annoyed by that. It's just briefly mentioned in some lines of exposition that the Alliance agrees to side with Dimitri/Fargheaus. But I guess that's because the AM story was so narrowly set on it being all about Dimitri vs. Edelgard... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, xchickengirlx said:

In AM, there is that one chapter where Claude needs aid and if you play your cards right on the map, you can save all his allies. I never played CF or SS, but I briefly looked through a walkthough for CF, and you pretty much kill off Claude and end the last shred of fighting power the Alliance/Leicester had in one chapter right? I know you can choose to spare Claude, but even if you do, he vanishes from the rest of the story.

It isn;t about how much Claude contributes to the story, it's about seeing what Claude does in CF. I'll be honest, he's shown to be more skilled and scheming in CF than he does in the other routes, apart from maybe VW. You should actually look through just giving it a glance. 

But overall, yeah, Claude really doesn't do much. He's an outsider, both nationwise and storywise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm more confused about disbanding the whole Alliance than Claude peacing out to Almyra; I don't think there was ever a point where Dimitri expressed he wanted to take over anything other than Faerghus and had a more positive relationship with Claude, so after beating back the Empire they could have just co-existed as respective ruler bros and the Alliance didn't have to once again submit to a king.

But nah, I guess?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prefer Shadows of Valentia over it. Always have, always will.

If Three Houses lived up to all of the potential it offered... Boy oh boy, it probably would've blown out my favorite game and easily become my new favorite.

But after the DLC narrative easily being worse than Rise of the Deliverance and the Abyss + Yuri being horridly wasted along with TH blatantly needing a LOT more time in development. Three Houses dropped a spot or two. 

 

1. Echoes.

2. Mystery of the Emblem

3. Shadow Dragon

4. Three Houses

5. Genealogy of the Holy War


Easy top 5.

Edited by Seazas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still love the game, and consider it my second-favorite in the series (after Radiant Dawn). Love the characters, customization, worldbuilding, weapon system, battalions... it all works for me. That said... it's a long game to play. I did my first playthrough (VW) over the course of about 6 weeks, and that kind of pace is nigh-unthinkable to me now. I'm in the post-skip of SS now, and nearing 500 hours of playtime. I definitely have more playthroughs in mind, but I'm kind of looking forward to setting it down for a long while.

On 8/11/2020 at 8:44 PM, Crysta said:

I'm more confused about disbanding the whole Alliance than Claude peacing out to Almyra; I don't think there was ever a point where Dimitri expressed he wanted to take over anything other than Faerghus and had a more positive relationship with Claude, so after beating back the Empire they could have just co-existed as respective ruler bros and the Alliance didn't have to once again submit to a king.

But nah, I guess?

Yeah, it's never clarified why the Alliance leaders change their mind and say "WTF I love monarchy now". It would have made more sense for House Gloucester to take over as the Alliance's "lead house", whatever that means. I think the decision that "Fodlan should become united in all endings" was a mistake of designing this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im a little miffed. The game isn’t bad but I hate the time pulse since it removes the consequences of your poor thinking. The avatar shouldn’t be a thing anymore. I’m mean since Robin the avatar had a too big of an impact or importance on the narrative. Robin was the human puppet of a Evil Dragon. Corrin was a Demi-God and Byleth becomes one.However im not one to criticize without offering a solution that’s too easy. 1: Avatar revamp: Make the Avatar Fully customizable in physical Appearance and Class such has mercenary or or myrmidon. 2: Avatar SHOULDN’T BE IMPORTANT: they should be a random mute commoner in your army. If they die and it’s a game over it’s because your avatar died not your allies.So for all intents and purposes they beaten the final boss you just weren’t there since you died. 3 : Avatar/ Dialogue: they should be mute and a dialogue options that means different responses and course of actions.  4: Story : thing just happen cause there’s no way otherwise for it to happen. Sorry Edelgard dropping her Axe for that dagger against Kostas for Byleth to Learn Divine Pulse is BS. 5: DLC : Costumes are okay but 50$ for a season pass like 3houses one is BS. A couple paralogues and the sauna with the cats and dogs supposed to be be IN THE MAIN GAME SND HAVING TO PAY FOR IT IS A D’´K MOVE IS. Abyss is good but Alfric the final boss of that side story  shouldn’t be walking around when he supposed to be dead. 

Edited by NaotoUzumaki
Misspelled
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2020 at 6:23 PM, xchickengirlx said:

I never played CF or SS, but I briefly looked through a walkthough for CF, and you pretty much kill off Claude and end the last shred of fighting power the Alliance/Leicester had in one chapter right?

If we count the bridge of Myrdin then it takes two chapters for Edelgard to fully conquer the Alliance. That's far too pitiful. There really needed to be a chapter after crossing the bridge and before arriving at Derdriu. A battle in Gloucester territory would have done the trick. There could be a neat little mechanic where the Gloucester army defects to your side after completing certain objectives. 

However Dimitri doesn't perform any better in Crimson Flower. He dies within two chapters after starting the conflict with Edelgard too. Like with the Alliance Fearghus really needed an additional chapter to conquer. It might also have been more effective if Kingdom troops were present in other chapters. Dimitri and the Kingdom are pretty much the ace up Rhea's sleeve but if Edelgard isn't attacking them directly they just spend the entire war sitting on their ass. 

Both Dimittri and Claude come off as a bunch of wimps in Crimson Flower which is a shame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Both Dimittri and Claude come off as a bunch of wimps in Crimson Flower which is a shame. 

I very much disagree here. 

Spoiler

 

Claude actually shows more of a scheming side here with the use of Almyrans and the battle strategy to win the Empire over by defeating Edelgard or losing to her and letting the Alliance merge with the Empire. It's an actual scheme that's pretty brilliant, especially since the Almyrans was a trump card to get Edelgard to spare him. 

Dimitri doesn't die immediately after being away, but has been actively fighting against the Empire in a war, and actually shows a more manipulative side where he lies to Rhea by saying that she will flank the Empire, when really, he intended to use her as bait so that he could flank Edelgard.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

I very much disagree here. 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Claude actually shows more of a scheming side here with the use of Almyrans and the battle strategy to win the Empire over by defeating Edelgard or losing to her and letting the Alliance merge with the Empire. It's an actual scheme that's pretty brilliant, especially since the Almyrans was a trump card to get Edelgard to spare him. 

Dimitri doesn't die immediately after being away, but has been actively fighting against the Empire in a war, and actually shows a more manipulative side where he lies to Rhea by saying that she will flank the Empire, when really, he intended to use her as bait so that he could flank Edelgard.

 

 

Oh they have their moments to be sure. But still its only two battles and both nations are finished. Three for Faerghus if we count Rhea's last stand as a moment for the Kingdom. Its essentially one big victory march with neither the Alliance nor the Kingdom giving her setbacks to speak off. 

With the Alliance Edelgard crosses the bridge and can immediately take on Derdriu after which the Alliance is finished. 

For the Kingdom its similar. Edelgards takes the Ahrienrhod and then its one more battle until Dimitri is dead as a doornail. Now there might have been more clashes between Edelgard and Dimitri before that but we never get to see any of that. Dimitri takes the field only once as far as we know and loses. 

The campaign to conquer both nations only takes two chapters each and goes off without a hitch. If the house leaders come up with a tactic Edelgard still beats them. The fighting is brief and Edelgard never really struggles. The siege of the monastery after Edelgard returns from Derdriu is the only time where things seem to be going wrong and in that battle Dimitri isn't even involved. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Oh they have their moments to be sure. But still its only two battles and both nations are finished. Three for Faerghus if we count Rhea's last stand as a moment for the Kingdom. Its essentially one big victory march with neither the Alliance nor the Kingdom giving her setbacks to speak off. 

With the Alliance Edelgard crosses the bridge and can immediately take on Derdriu after which the Alliance is finished. 

For the Kingdom its similar. Edelgards takes the Ahrienrhod and then its one more battle until Dimitri is dead as a doornail. Now there might have been more clashes between Edelgard and Dimitri before that but we never get to see any of that. Dimitri takes the field only once as far as we know and loses. 

The campaign to conquer both nations only takes two chapters each and goes off without a hitch. If the house leaders come up with a tactic Edelgard still beats them. The fighting is brief and Edelgard never really struggles. The siege of the monastery after Edelgard returns from Derdriu is the only time where things seem to be going wrong and in that battle Dimitri isn't even involved. 

 

Pacing with the war is an issue that exists in all routes. I mean, look how quickly it took Dimitri to liberate Faerghus after Gronder. A single chapter. Then there's how quickly it was to take down the Empire after you cross into their territory. After Fort Merceus, it's just Enbarr straight from there in the two chapter back to back conquest. 

We have to remember that unlike other FE games, that has the war spanning 15-20 chapters, 3H has the war spanning 10 chapters at best. 

Of course Edelgard would have the least problems in her route. Her route has Byleth with her. Remember that in non-CF routes, Byleth opposes her, and it's only because of Byleth that Edelgard is defeated. Here, Byleth is with her, which is why Edelgard has little issue in her battles. Or how in that route, the group aren't scattered to the wind, but rather they all stick together. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...