Topazd

Their katakana readings are more akin to Himmler/Zhukov than Heimmler/Zharov. The localizers of Shadow Dragon just went with the latter names, for rather obvious reasons.

Coherence is really my only wish at this point, I don't have any larger expectations regarding the plot. Characterization and world-building take precedence in my books, tbh. Speaking of character names, I kind of liked what they with some bosses did in FE1. Perhaps they're more memorable only because of pure shock value, but it's always fun to find guys like Himmler, Zhukov and Moses just chilling around. Obviously they wouldn't get through the localizers unchanged if something similar was attempted with FE14, but oh well.

One could argue that the game is more tedious than difficult, haha. I personally enjoy it a fair amount, though. It's hard to objectively rank difficulties, but it certainly isn't among the hardest in the series.

If FE3 Book 1 is counted as its own separate game, it's the easiest in my mind by far. Otherwise I'm going to have to go with FE9. Assuming they are judged by their hardest difficulties, of course.

I always try to come up with creative names but in the end just resort to something really terrible like Reb Brown. Hence I often just give up and leave the names as they are.

Casual was actually renamed to 'Newcomer' in the European version.

I don't have much interest to take larger part in the thread since it's mostly been just a rerun of the prior thread with mostly the same points being made as then (from which we can pretty safely conclude that no one is going to change their stance on the matter), but I will say that the Paragon/Casual analogy was silly at best.

I honestly always saw weapon weight as a means of diversifying weaponry, rather than units.

I remember just spamming Tarukaja and defeating the Diamond Realm bosses that way before they could really do much. Haha, that's basically SMT1 in a nutshell. The bosses can be a real breeze-through, but you could have around 5 Beriths appear in the next random encounter and be utterly destroyed.

There are variances on the exact behavior of luck, so I'd advise you to seek out the 'Calculations' sections on the SF main site to see its game-specific functions.

It doesn't hurt to make a quick search before you make a new topic. There has been a gargantuan (as of now) 29 pages long topic in the FEif section on this very subject. But I guess no rules were violated, so eh. My answer was no, will refrain from elaborating to avoid excessive redundancy.

I'm not entirely certain of the information's comprehensiveness, but this list seems to include all the people involved. Seems like Tsujiyoko was only the sound supervisor this time around.

I'm not ardent to get into any debates here, but I do think this was a pretty cogent definition for atheism. (0:28 - 1:22)

Altogether I prefer the FE1/3/4/TRS system (speed - weapon wt = as) since it will stay relevant throughout the game. In the case that con were to be implemented, I'd be in favor of its FE5 incarnation, to give the units lacking in con some chance of attaining it. BrightBow made a really good post regarding the subject a while back, but I can't remember in which thread (+ am too lazy to search) and thus can't refer to it. Regardless, to condense what he said: there's much more that you need to do with weapons besides adding weight if you seek to diversify them.

With a +8mt ridersbane he could OHKO even Camus at base, so I wouldn't imagine any trouble being present.

Atlus has different teams dedicated to specific kinds of projects (P-Studio for Persona, etc.) and that is how the company in general functions. They aren't artificially splitting any existing teams to get more games released and hence sacrifice quality, if that's what you're getting at.

I guess what was intended to be illustrated by that line was that Naga is not omnipotent, since there are quite a few ways people define the term 'god'. I'm fairly positive (though not 100%) that the entities with whom the crusaders blood-bonded were referred to as deities in FE4. EDIT Yeah, and the very fact alone that they were worshiped does make them gods in a fashion, like Jotari pointed out.

Apparently the one I have (also from SF) doesn't have Ending 2 at all, so I'd assume the issue lies somewhere there. Perhaps slightly OT, but aren't the functions of FE1 luck listed here?

In all honesty, I do think support conversations constitute the majority of character development (bar the main characters) whenever they are present. Awakening's bloated amount of convos resulted in a mostly uninspired mess, something I think not worth doing just because the gameplay necessitates such. So in that sense I'd be willing to go with the option of separating support convos and the gameplay bonuses in the case that pair up returns, even if I didn't particularly enjoy the system. Of course I'd still want PoR supports to be the norm, but hopes akin to such are rather utopistic at this point.

The inclusion of an ironman mode would make such a staff a myriad times more useful, so if that were to happen, I'd be more than happy. Otherwise, I'm not particularly leaning on either side of the debate. @Levant I agree with your claims regarding the general uselessness of the staves, though the FE4 usage restrictions aren't as significant as you make them out to be. Either way, it's not going to see any more use in FE4 than a resurrection staff would in any other FE, unless you happened to be ironmanning or temporarily sacrificed someone to shave off turns.

I actually liked the FE9/10/12 method of raising support ranks the most. Other than that I'm going to have to sign the sentiment that less is in fact more - have less supports for each character, so that the convos themselves are more personal and inspired. It's also desirable to have not all male-female supports end in marriage. The same also applies for the avatar, if one exists.

Magic triangle is something I wouldn't mind returning, though I have to say that it's execution prior hasn't exactly been optimal. In Jugdral, for instance, the triangle didn't impact much since wind was still by far the strongest of the elements, other than perhaps slightly hindering the reliability of killing Arvis with Forseti, which you probably weren't intent on doing anyways. I'm all for an anima/dark/light triangle returning, as long as the WTA/WTD buffs/nerfs aren't insignificant and/or identical for every magic type, as they (iirc) have been in the past. The buffs/nerfs could be different depending on the respective magic type.

True, I guess in most cases it's only discouraged in the earlygame. Perhaps I shouldn't have brought the low-manning argument up at all since it can really be executed regardless of the volume of the growths, my bad. EDIT Yeah, a very impulsive post on my part. I hadn't really considered how much pair up might have to do with the issue.

Additionally, higher growths/benchmarks tend to encourage low-manning, which you may interpret how you wish, but I don't think is a good thing. Though I personally consider FE12's benchmarks to be reasonable enough to advocate somewhat larger teams than in FE13, if a bit demanding still.

Miriel's gimmick was always so prominent that, for me, she got obnoxious the quickest out of all the game's characters. Ironically, Laurent is one of my favorites since he was a better execution of the trope, I feel. Vaike is also pretty horrible.