Nerfing mounts.

[The Void]

Another topic got to the point of mounts, I made this thread.

Now, I'm sure we can all agree that mounts don't really have enough disadvantages to make up for having close enough (if not better) stats then foot units with their higher mobility (and in several cases, weapon access). There haven't been enough enemies who can do effective damage on mounts, and Archers/Hunters/Snipers aren't enough either when it comes to flying mounts.

Any suggestions?

[Jedi]

Another topic got to the point of mounts, I made this thread.

Now, I'm sure we can all agree that mounts don't really have enough disadvantages to make up for having close enough (if not better) stats then foot units with their higher mobility (and in several cases, weapon access). There haven't been enough enemies who can do effective damage on mounts, and Archers/Hunters/Snipers aren't enough either when it comes to flying mounts.

Any suggestions?

Bring back dismount and alot of indoor maps. Thats my solution, either that or limit how many mounts you can take, via making them more unit slots then other units. 2 for horses, 3 for flyers. Or something like that

Edit: It could also be as simple as them not giving you nearly as many as they do. Elieson had a point with this http://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=42164&p=2548378

Edit 2: Also I could see something like making a dual battlefield, a battle with only foot units inside like a castle siege, think like an FE4 remake where when Sigurd seizes a castle this is merely the beginning and he has to throw his foot units inside to take it but he must stay on the field to fight enemies on mounts and whatever foot units are outside. You can have both on the outside as well but foot would be the only type to be able to go inside castles to fight. It would work like Advanced Wars dual strike kind of except you'd control both battlefields, granted it would probably work better in a new game then a FE4 remake but that was an example.

Edited August 11, 2013 by Folgore Red II

[Knight]

Re-introduce roads and make it so infantry have the same move on roads as mounts do. Indoor chapters should either have significant move reduction or dismount.

[Jedi]

Re-introduce roads and make it so infantry have the same move on roads as mounts do. Indoor chapters should either have significant move reduction or dismount.

Roads would be a tricky thing to bring back considering they used to give movement to mounts too so how would you explain them not? I know it would be a decent way for foots to keep up with mounts but.. It would be quite frankly strange, would you keep the evasion decrease as well?

Then again, i'm trying to speak logically about a series with magic and many other oddities for some reason. I probably shouldn't do that lol.

Edited August 11, 2013 by Folgore Red II

[dondon151]

classic option is dismounting

another fair idea is to never let mounted units double

and one other idea that i just came up with is to let infantry "pair up" with each other for bonuses, whereas mounted units can never "pair up" with other mounted units and receive stat penalties when paired up with infantry (basically rescuing). mounted units also always must be the lead unit in a pair (again, basically rescuing).

essentially it's a hybrid of the pair up and rescue mechanics. mounted units can only rescue infantry whereas infantry can pair up with other infantry.

[Refa]

Wow, that would actually be really neat. 'Course, I have no clue about how pair up bonuses are calculated, but it seems like a nice way to buff some infantry units.

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

If its not as stupid as FE13 Pair Up bonus, its actually pretty cool

Maybe only give +1 - 2 Bonus?

[Tables]

I think a good first step would be to not give Cavs two weapon types. It's silly that Cavs have good stats, good movement AND are the only basic class to have two weapon types (excluding FE9-10). Then nerf their stats a little, and you're probably good. Like FE4 was kind of a good step - mounted units had worse stats than (most) unmounted units but of course, movement was everything in that game. I liked having four types of unpromoted mounted unit, and that's something that could be bought back. They could also promote to different things, such as Bow Mounts promote to Rangers (/Bow Knights) or Bow/Axe paladin-type, Sword Mounts to Rangers or Paladins, Axe mounts to Great Knights (Axe/Lance) or Bow/Axe paladin-type, Lance Mounts to Paladins or Great Knights. That might work quite nicely, maybe.

[Knight]

Map design tends to be a big part of this as well, if maps are designed to divide your units then all your units can be pretty useful, unlike a game like FE4, which was mostly linear maps, probably the reason cavalry were so dominating (and that the maps were too f***ing big)

[LeaderR Elliot]

Give them some negative bases.

[charlie_]

Give them some negative bases.

didn't stop kent and sain

[Espinosa]

"Foot units" (Rutger) can be good in a game where they have the necessary qualities that the mounted ones lack. A str-blessed Rutger in FE6 can be seen as preferable to Percival in some maps. In FE9-10 mounted units cannot be carried so by providing map objectives that encourage a second unit in assisting the rout, only a foot unit can be carried by the flier and not a mounted one (e.g. Haar can carry Boyd but not Titania).

[King Marth]

I agree with the Pair up vs. Rescue for mounts, although I never played FE13 so I'm not sure just how broken pair up is.

Also the idea of Lance mounts, Sword Mounts, Bow mounts, etc should definitely return in the next FE imo. I really liked the idea.

[Jedi]

I think a good first step would be to not give Cavs two weapon types. It's silly that Cavs have good stats, good movement AND are the only basic class to have two weapon types (excluding FE9-10). Then nerf their stats a little, and you're probably good. Like FE4 was kind of a good step - mounted units had worse stats than (most) unmounted units but of course, movement was everything in that game. I liked having four types of unpromoted mounted unit, and that's something that could be bought back. They could also promote to different things, such as Bow Mounts promote to Rangers (/Bow Knights) or Bow/Axe paladin-type, Sword Mounts to Rangers or Paladins, Axe mounts to Great Knights (Axe/Lance) or Bow/Axe paladin-type, Lance Mounts to Paladins or Great Knights. That might work quite nicely, maybe.

"How to balance mounts"

"Re-add more types of mounts so they completely nullify foot units still"

Mounts have too much as is and you want to give them more? I'd actually think less mounted classes and variety would make them more evened out with the rest, along with only getting 2 to 4 of them a game. Unless the idea of dismount was reintroduced and enforced.

Edited August 11, 2013 by Folgore Red II

[Snowy_One]

Make bows effective against mounts.

Increase the number of anti-mount weapons.

Make more anti-mount terrain.

Make them gain weapon-ranks slower, especially than single-weapon classes.

[General Horace]

"How to balance mounts"

"Re-add more types of mounts so they completely nullify foot units still"

Mounts have too much as is and you want to give them more? I'd actually think less mounted classes and variety would make them more evened out with the rest, along with only getting 2 to 4 of them a game. Unless the idea of dismount was reintroduced and enforced.

its not really adding more persay, but like take fe8

he's suggesting like, Franz become a Sword Knight, Kyle and Axe Knight, and hey isn't this like FE9?

but yeah not having wta would help a little bit but yeah mounts op

[Jedi]

its not really adding more persay, but like take fe8

he's suggesting like, Franz become a Sword Knight, Kyle and Axe Knight, and hey isn't this like FE9?

but yeah not having wta would help a little bit but yeah mounts op

Yeah, I'm also saying if they are like they are in fe9. It would make all the foot units who have those same mono weapons effectively not as good.

[General Horace]

but if Cavaliers have two weapons, they make two classes obelete by that reasoning

[Narga_Rocks]

Is it bad to say when I first saw the thread title I thought snowy made it?

Anyway, you could just make half the chapters desert, but that'd be kinda rude I guess.

[Jedi]

but if Cavaliers have two weapons, they make two classes obelete by that reasoning

True.. Hmm, there seems to be no really simple way to go about this other then alot of dismount or desert.

[BBM]

It is simple, just give them bad stats. The Cavalier class, for some reason, had some of the highest base stats, at least in the GBA games. Nerf that, and nerf the growths of the actual cavaliers themselves, and you're fine. Then mounted units vs non-mounted units becomes movement vs every other stat, rather than movement vs nothing. It kind of worked in FE4 Gen 1, except the maps were huge and there was no rescuing, so even if the mounted units 2RKOd while the foot units ORKOd, the mounts would get there so much earlier that they were still better. And then Sigurd could solo anyways so lol.

[charlie_]

make enemies tougher so mounts can't constantly abuse their full movement

[Anouleth]

Map design tends to be a big part of this as well, if maps are designed to divide your units then all your units can be pretty useful, unlike a game like FE4, which was mostly linear maps, probably the reason cavalry were so dominating (and that the maps were too f***ing big)

I don't think that's really true. Take a map like Chapter 3-3 in FE10 or Chapter 18 in FE8. They're extremely non-linear with multiple objectives spread out, and mounted units are still just as strong.

[King Marth]

Maybe cavaliers' OPness just comes from the fact that they're available so early and, in comparison to your other crappy foot units, seem like the only reasonable choice for a long term member. I think that delaying the introduction to mounted units until maybe 6~7 chapters in will give your foot units more time to become somewhat useable and give you less of a reason to kick someone out in favor of a mount. To use FE6 as an example (The game I just happen to be playing through), I never really saw Noah/treck as game breaking units in comparison to alance.

[Phoenix Wright]

Maybe cavaliers' OPness just comes from the fact that they're available so early and, in comparison to your other crappy foot units, seem like the only reasonable choice for a long term member. I think that delaying the introduction to mounted units until maybe 6~7 chapters in will give your foot units more time to become somewhat useable and give you less of a reason to kick someone out in favor of a mount. To use FE6 as an example (The game I just happen to be playing through), I never really saw Noah/treck as game breaking units in comparison to alance.

isn't this because they're inferior, though? all lowen had going for him over sain and kent was HP and DEF, right? so maybe introduce the good ones in ch. 6~7

i really like dondon's ideas, though. but perhaps instead of never doubling, make it the need to have +8 AS over the enemy instead of +4.

to make pair-up less broken, too, i was thinking limit the bonuses the unit gets to a MAXIMUM of +3 to a stat, and when a unit is paired up with a mount, the mounted unit gets -1 mov. horses travel less distance with more weight. also the rescue mechanic being mounts/flyers only seems cool.