Player Phase and Enemy Phase Games

[PeaceRibbon]

So recently when floating around the Fire Emblem community I noticed a new (to me, at least) dichotomy being thrown around to define different games. To sum up very briefly, some say that some FE games are played around the player's turn and involve proactively taking out enemy troops to avoid being overrun, while others are played around setting up a position and letting the enemy come to you.

I wished to get some opinions on whether others think there's some credibility to this categorizing of the games, and if so which games do you think demonstrate the properties of each category. I myself think there's likely some truth to this idea, but I'm not certain whether you can define entire games based on a single strategy, or if there are any dead giveaways to which strategy you should use other than trial and error.

Edited January 30, 2021 by PeaceRibbon

[Interdimensional Observer]

There is a list of defining factors useful for determine whether a game is oriented towards player phase or enemy phase.:

• Enemy density. The denser enemies are, the more combat there will be seen on enemy phases.
• Enemy quality. The weaker enemies are relative to the heroes, the easier it is to survive and kill them on the enemy phase.
• The availability and quality of 1-2 Range attacks. The more available and stronger this is, the better it is for counterattacking heavily on the enemy phase.
• The existence of Combat Arts. These are solely capable of being used on the player phase, their absence denies the player phase a bonus to compete with the enemy phase.

The inverse of what is stated for the above traits equates to a stronger player phase orientation.

To define some games as definite player-phase or enemy-phase:

• Blazing Blade- Enemy phase. Enemies are numerous, weak, and Javelins and Hand Axes are strong.
• Path of Radiance- Same as the above.
• Radiant Dawn- ""
• Awakening- Even on Lunatic, it is largely possible to stay strong enough to overcome the gigantic stats enemies receive and enemy phase through the very end of the story. Enemies density is very high, and although Javelins and Hand Axes were toned down, they can still suffice and Tomes are unchecked.
• Shadow Dragon- Player phase. Enemy density is low, and your units are weak compared to the enemy on the higher difficulties.
• New Mystery- Not entirely sure, but absurd Lunatic enemy stats can match yours, add in ambush spawns of equal caliber, and this is most likely player phase.
• Shadows of Valentia- Player phase. Low enemy density. Combat Arts exist for once. Physical 1-2 range is limited to mediocre Javelins and hamstrung Levin Swords, while Mages are fragile. Mire's 1-3 Range and the upwards of 1-5 Range from Bow units provide plentiful outranged situations limiting 1-2 countering.

 

Should a game be oriented towards the player phase or the enemy phase? Ideally, both should be viable options, depending on what your units, their equipment, and the circumstances of the individual map permit. That maximizes the possibility of strategy.

However, if a game should lean one way or another, it should be towards the player phase. Excessive enemy phase orientation is, more likely than player phase excessiveness, a signal the game is tactically broken, not good. If your units have become true unstoppable gods, who sweep aside all who approach them without the slightest fear of death, then they should be happy to be so strong, but tactics have ceased to matter.

Edited January 30, 2021 by Interdimensional Observer

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

To be honest it might as well say "FE12/FE11 and pretty much the rest of the series" even then FE12/FE11 had their enemy phase stuff. Just SIGNIFICANTLY less than other games.

 

Its based on how due to a lot of factors, the most effective way to tackle most things in New Mystery is to set up  a good enemy phase with strong player phase - this honestly is all FE, but you can notice it if you have played 12. Trying to enemy phase in FE12 the way you did in other games would just get you fucking killed, most of the time(stuff like Swordmaster in some stages of the game works, and Nosfeatu is super super broken in this game so EP with them is sometimes your answer)

Edited January 30, 2021 by JSND Alter Dragon Boner

[kradeelav]

I'm not sure Radiant Dawn counts as enemy phase (or at least NA: Hard).  Sure Haar is made to be a EP hand-axe tank likewise hilarious Sanaki Flare/Resolve shenanigans in P4, but when you've got chapters like the Dawn Brigade bits and somebody sneezing on Micaiah means a Game Over ...  gonna call that one a Player Phase one.  Especially also since you don't have the whole game to train broken units.

3H depends on if you're playing Maddening or not.  Same deal as FE12 where if you play a tank role, you'll get creamed pretty quickly, but the easier modes are a cakewalk.

(Interesting idea!)

[lenticular]

It's not so much a dichotomy as a continuum. There isn't some fundamental difference, but rather a whole host of different factors which skew games one way or the other. I also think that most games fall somewhere in the middle rather than being exclusively one or the other.

In addition to what others have mentioned, another factor that contributes to how heavily a game leans towards enemy or player phase is skills. Some skills, like Vantage, are oriented towards or exclusive to enemy phase, while others, like the "Blow" skills from Fates and Three Houses are for player phase. How prevalent and viable each type of skill is can shift the dominant phase a lot.

[Punished Dayni]

Could you make a sliding scale on this? I realise we'd have to define this with one big thing: the difficulties used and if we count the more ludicrous ones.

NMotE LR would be a definite PP priority for instance, but some strats in games like Conquest Luna, Awakening Lunatic+ or 3H maddening (Obviously some more than others) are able to use certain things to make enemy phase more viable. Some difficulties are built to be brutal and need that PP focus, but others are able to be walled with a couple of sufficiently tanky units throughout.

On the other hand, even as enemy phase as Genealogy is, would anyone want to risk tanking Ishtar unless they've got Foresti? Does the sliding scale account for how often those fringe situations occur?

(Course Berwick is a PP based game but phases are also less defined there)

[xigbar7]

Basically comes down to whether or not it is more efficient in a given game to set up situations where lower power enemies dogpile  a stat monster who kills them (enemy phase) or you have to coordinate assaults on stronger enemies to prevent them from targeting your units in multiples.

 

Most of the earlier games especially the GBA era have you outnumbered 3 or 4 to 1 but enemies stats scale slow and your units can be very powerful if you feel like training them up. So it’s more efficient to jam a well trained unit or two in the middle of enemies and let them wipe themselves out.

 

Some games especially newer ones on higher difficulties maybe don’t outnumber you as much but have better enemy stats and more strategic positioning and even just two or three of them attacking one of your units costs a character. So, thoughtlessly putting even tankier units can be dangerous. 

[Axie]

player phase FEs: gaiden/echoes, shadow dragon, new mystery, fates, apparently three houses

in-between (aka mostly enemy phase FEs but you have to be player phase smart about it lol): thracia 776, binding blade, radiant dawn

enemy phase FEs: original SD, mystery, genealogy, blazing blade, sacred stones, path of radiance, awakening

[Stones]

9 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

The existence of Combat Arts. These are solely capable of being used on the player phase, their absence denies the player phase a bonus to compete with the enemy phase.

I would say it's less about Combat Arts specifically and more about the options you have on PP that aren't available on EP. Combat Arts count, but so do PP skills (like Death Blow, but even something like FE4 Wrath), staves, Rescue, gambits and ranged chip, all of which can't be done on EP.

I think some games can be both. For example, Thracia has extremely potent staves so making the most out of them on Player Phase is important, but most enemies are mowed down on Enemy Phase because they are so weak, Radiant Dawn has the PP Dawn Brigade bits, which are designed differently to the EP Greil Mercenary bits, and 3 Houses is definitely PP based but you can make use of certain skill combinations to focus on EP (I imagine Conquest is like that too).

[vanguard333]

I'd say it's something of a spectrum, with different games leaning more towards being player-phase or enemy-phase.

The Tellius games (Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn) definitely lean more towards enemy phase, though Radiant Dawn less so than Path of Radiance due to part 4 becoming more player-phase-focused especially towards the endgame chapters as your units are all 3rd tier and the missions become more about defeating bosses. The Tellius games have enemies in abundance, maps are rarely wide-open with lots of chokepoints, enemies are in abundance, and they all have a number of chapters framed around defense rather than offense. 

By contrast, most games since Awakening have been very player-phase-focused. 

Personally, while I like having a lot of options on player phase, I tend to prefer when FE games are more enemy-phase focused because it makes the enemy phase less boring, it makes where you place your units more meaningful, and it can make defensive units like knights and generals more useful. 

 

6 hours ago, Stones said:

I would say it's less about Combat Arts specifically and more about the options you have on PP that aren't available on EP. Combat Arts count, but so do PP skills (like Death Blow, but even something like FE4 Wrath), staves, Rescue, gambits and ranged chip, all of which can't be done on EP.

I agree about this; the more pp-exclusive options that have been added to recent FE games is definitely a large factor, and combat arts are definitely one of them. In the Tellius games for example, special attacks like Sol, Luna and Aether activated not by player choice but by chance, and while this meant victories could come down to RNG, it also meant these abilities could activate on enemy phase. One reason (not the main reason, but a reason) Ike is a one-man army among FE lords is that Aether activates frequently, deals huge amounts of damage and also heals him, so even if an enemy does hurt him on enemy phase, he will in all likelihood barely have a scratch on him when player phase begins. 

Combat arts removed the element of chance, which was very welcome, but they can only activate during player phase.

 

6 hours ago, Stones said:

I think some games can be both. For example, Thracia has extremely potent staves so making the most out of them on Player Phase is important, but most enemies are mowed down on Enemy Phase because they are so weak, Radiant Dawn has the PP Dawn Brigade bits, which are designed differently to the EP Greil Mercenary bits, and 3 Houses is definitely PP based but you can make use of certain skill combinations to focus on EP (I imagine Conquest is like that too).

I wouldn't know about Thracia. As for Radiant Dawn, though I would likely have to play the game again, I wouldn't describe the Dawn Brigade chapters as player-phase focused; you could argue that for the tutorial and chapter 1, but after that, not really. I'd say that Radiant Dawn starts very ep-focused, and gradually becomes more pp-focused when you get to part 4. 

[Shrimpica]

Player Phase - Conquest, New Mystery, Berwick, Three Houses

In between - Radiant Dawn

Enemy Phase - The rest

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

5 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

The Tellius games (Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn) definitely lean more towards enemy phase, though Radiant Dawn less so than Path of Radiance due to part 4 becoming more player-phase-focused especially towards the endgame chapters as your units are all 3rd tier and the missions become more about defeating bosses. The Tellius games have enemies in abundance, maps are rarely wide-open with lots of chokepoints, enemies are in abundance, and they all have a number of chapters framed around defense rather than offense. 

While I agree that Radiant Dawn is a "both phases" game, albeit leaning more enemy-phase, this rationale doesn't make any sense. In part IV, the Prologue and Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4 are all "Rout the Enemy". They're notable not just for throwing a ton of enemies at you, but also for warping in reinforcements (some of which force you to return to the start of the map). This part of the game (save for IV-5) feels much more like an EP-slog than most of the game before it.

Anyway, I would say Three Houses, Conquest, and Echoes most heavily emphasize Player-Phase; FE7, Sacred Stones, and Awakening are much more Enemy-Phase; and the remaining games sit at various points in-between.

[vanguard333]

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

While I agree that Radiant Dawn is a "both phases" game, albeit leaning more enemy-phase, this rationale doesn't make any sense. In part IV, the Prologue and Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4 are all "Rout the Enemy". They're notable not just for throwing a ton of enemies at you, but also for warping in reinforcements (some of which force you to return to the start of the map). This part of the game (save for IV-5) feels much more like an EP-slog than most of the game before it.

I did say, "towards the endgame" didn't I? I meant that the endgame chapters are focused more on the player phase; one of the endgame chapters even has it, if you use only two particular units, not a single enemy will attack back; not even the boss, and it doesn't get any more pp-focused than that. I didn't delete the "towards"; my bad. 

As for the rest of part 4, I get your point, and I agree that they're definitely still ep-focused as far as Fire Emblem chapters go overall. I just think they're slightly less so than previous chapters, which had defend missions among other things. The last mission before the endgame, where you fight Izuka, definitely starts off as ep-focused, as it is a swamp mission with huge volumes of feral ones, but once the number starts to go down  enough, the chapter becomes a game of "hunt down the mad scientist". 

[Quell]

While there are certainly some truth as you pointed out I feel like this matter is an end unto itself as you said. Most of it really comes down to play style, some maps might even be hybrid of the 2 concept or be conceived to be played in both ways with different results. I feel like all the FE games strike that balance, as even games heavy on low quality enemy spam like FE7 might have strong foes that you need to actively take on, or as games focused on player phase combat like FE6 have some chapters were it's easier to just let them come.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Quell