Dark Holy Elf
-
Posts
3,615 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Dark Holy Elf
-
-
1 hour ago, Jotari said:
Oh yeah it's perfectly understandable that he just wasn't invented yet. Not saying his lack of inclusion ruins the story, just that it would have been nice. And Path of Radiance in particular was a game very much doing stuff like that. Zelgius's role in it is pretty much a cameo too (Kurthnaga a little bit too). Though Path of Radiance does mention a handful of Crimeian nobles we never see or get any information on when Lucia first shows up. They could have used the Ludveck character concept for General Tagio, Silok or Marquis Mitnala. I don't think Radiant Dawn gives us any indication as to what Ludveck was actually doing during the war, nor do I think Path of Radiance gives us any information on his territory Felirae.
Yeah, that makes sense, and I agree.
-
6 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:
I've seen a lot of people use Alcryst in their runs, but his performance was almost always lackluster, with him generally doing shit damage without Luna. On his personal, that's fair, but to me it's like "Big deal. Adding 2 to a small number still gets you a small number. Whoopee." Doesn't help that it's not made clear as to precisely how it works, because when I think of "one turn" I think it's gonna wear off once that enemy phase ends.
What about adding 3 to a small number? Because that's the difference between Etie and Alcryst for strength at Alcryst's base level (assuming Etie is even at that level when he joins).
As for the second part, well, it's fine that you made that mistake once, but even the most basic observation should correct you; you check Alcryst's stats or observe his damage and notice that yes, it's 2 higher the next turn. Though I can't blame you for assuming his personal might just be useless, as so many are in this game (including Etie's).
8 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:I tried Warrior Panette, but her performance was, to be blunt, shit. So much so she didn't even level up before I pulled the rip cord and put her into something else (Great Knight, to be specific). Despite Warrior supposedly being a good class, I found she only shined when she was OUT of it.
You should be aware that this is an extremely uncommon personal experience. I, and many, many others, found Warrior Panette extremely good. Maybe you had some RNG weirdness.
-
As others have mentioned there are certainly (flavour-wise) armoured mages in the series, from barons in FE4 (and Arvis) to dark knights in the more recent games. I don't think the game adopts a "mages can't wear armour" philosophy. However, whether it's due to the casual influence of D&D or other things, armoured mages aren't a very common trope in most media, including FE.
Early FE had a particular design in mind for mages, robe-wearing infantry. Games have slowly expanded what a mage can be, with FE4 adding a few (the cavalry stuck around, the armour mostly didn't), and eventually fliers as well. But I imagine the devs are a little worried about overtuning magic (with 1-2 range and better stats than javelins/hand axes in most games, it has the potential to run wild), so that limits some of the class options it gets.
-
Gameplay: my thoughts basically mirror @Shanty Pete's 1st Mate. Good, fun defence map, which rewards pushing forward well. Going for a quick boss kill feels deeply anticlimactic to me (as it basically always does on defence maps that allow the option) but I don't think it's bad that the option for players who want (even if it makes unit rating conversations more annoying).
On story: I think both Elincia and Ludveck wanting to not have their clash in Melior does in fact make sense? From the point of view of both, it spares the citizenry of the city to have their clash at a military location. And from the point of view of Ludveck... it depends. If the people of Melior would welcome him with open arms, then yeah it would make sense just to head straight to Melior and crown himself king. But if he fears popular resistance should he do that, it does make more sense for him to capture Elincia and force her to abdicate the throne, forestalling any possibility of Crimeans rallying arround her as queen-in-exile. Especially since at this point he has Lucia as a trump card to try to force this abdication whatever the outcome of their battle.
I do agree that Bastian's plan to let the rebellion come to a head is completely reckless.
20 hours ago, Jotari said:On this narrative side, much like Lang in Mystery of the Emblem, I would have really liked it if Ludveck was even a token character in Path of Radiance, much like how Izuka is.
It'd have been cool, but it's okay that he's not. If you've ever written anything you know that stories evolve in the telling, and sometimes you conceive of characters or arcs mid-storytelling, especially for longer stories like the PoR-RD duology. I imagine the specifics of Ludveck weren't ironed out until PoR was near release, or perhaps even later. Same with Jarod. I do appreciate the cameos of Izuka and Lekain though.
-
45 minutes ago, Barren said:
Him being able to take more than one hit is what’s in it for me personally. To be fair, archers shouldn’t get hit at all but if I can’t avoid it at least Alcryst can take at least one at full hp.
While it's not really fair for a comparison (since it's before Alcryst even joins), I definitely found it frustrating that Etie couldn't take a hit from the boss of Chapter 5.
-
36 minutes ago, Barren said:
I’ve had Alcryst trigger Luna like crazy for me when I was playing this on hard mode. Though I will give Etie a shot and see how she does. She only got 1 HP on her first level up so not exactly a great start for her. Plus Alcryst has a better passive than Etie so that is in his favor.
While I don't think he's so much better that personal preference can't swing things, I do think Alcryst is the better of the two overall. The speed gap (in Alcryst's favour) is larger than the strength gap (in Etie's favour) even before factoring in that Alcryst frequently has +2 str due to his personal, and of course any time a Luna proc occurs Alcryst will win damage too. He's also more able to take hits, which may not matter too much if you're keeping both in Sniper/Tireur but will come into play if you make a switch to Warrior, for instance.
-
It's a solid team, but at 14 units it's definitely larger than it needs to be. You never have more than 12 deployment slots until very late, at which point it makes more sense just to use Mauvier and Veyle in filler roles (or even Lindon/Saphir if you really want to use someone different and/or someone dies), rather than training and rotating at every point before then.
To be clear you can definitely still use 14 units if you want, but your team will be a bit weaker as a result.
-
11 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:
I already called BS on that claim about Brom. More to the point, if they're willing to say stuff like that, I'm well within my rights to be skeptical of ANYTHING they say.
You are free to doubt whatever you want. However, merely making a post say "I AM DOUBTING THIS" is useless (as well as rude). If your goal is to convince other people, be it the person you are responding to, or other people in the thread, the onus is on you to provide some sort of reason for why you have doubts. Otherwise, the assertion that Jill has more physical durability than Marcia given equal treatment stands.
Even something as simple as a bit of personal experience elaboration would be helpful here. "When I used both Marcia and Jill, and gave them equal amounts of bonus exp, I found Jill was only able to take one or two extra physical hits"* would be an example of a statement which would state your skepticism in a way which actually pushes discussion forward; at that point the two of you could compare notes further or somebody could pull out enemy stats, etc.
*not saying this particular statement is a true one, just an example
-
51 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:
The part where it's coming from someone who thinks that Brom can get 12 levels in only three maps, one of which is timed. That's beyond ridiculous.
Then attack that claim, instead of the perfectly reasonable claim that Jill has more physical durability than Marcia.
-
At the risk of stating the obvious, Fire Emblem Heroes has titles for pretty much everyone (frequently overlapping with titles used in ending scrolls where those exist).
-
Interestingly Radiant Dawn Ike is a case for me of the game doing something I really respect. Ike as queer representation (you can debate what type, exactly) is very cool for a main protgonist in the 00's, especially since there's a tendency in Japanese media for queer men to be effeminate, and Ike is very much a traditionally masculine man. It also makes his full-throated support of Elincia extra effective because he undeniably does it with no expectation of romance in return (which would be less clear if Ike x Elincia was a possibility). Radiant Dawn clarifying this interpretation of Ike is something I really appreciated.
-
2 hours ago, Florete said:
Availability is overrated. That's both a response to this and potentially my "unpopular opinion" for the thread. I consider it much less than I used to, and probably less than many people online to this day do.
I partly agree. I think availability is overrated in cases like Clive, who aren't actually particularly impressive in their extra availability. I don't think it's overrated for cases like Marcus/Seth/Titania, who spend their extra availability compared to later-joiners being incredibly good.
1 hour ago, Newtype06 said:This is Shadows of Valentia, a game where most units take a bit of love to become really good.
Well, notably, Mathilda needs very little! She just shows up out of the box with, at least to my recollection, much better speed than Clive is likely to possess unless you baby him like mad, and similar stats otherwise. Like Florete I've only played this game once and don't discuss it much but I played on the highest difficulty and Mathilda was certainly capable of handling enemies right out of the gate with good mobility and never falls off, so she's at least pretty good.
-
I don't see a problem. You made a pedantic joke, and you earned a pedantic joke in response.
-
Why would that be hard to swallow? Jill has more physical durability; I haven't played Maniac but those numbers sound reasonable based on where I'd expect Maniac attack stats to be. Jill also has substantially higher strength so she'll obviously be better at 2HKOing things both double. Granted, Marcia definitely has an easier time doubling some enemies, and I'd rate forges as a less significant investment than Speedwings.
3 hours ago, samthedigital said:Technically speaking in an LTC we save turns by skipping Jill entirely since Marcia can solo the map before we have the opportunity to get Jill.
This is an excellent example of where LTC completely obfuscates the purpose of a tier list. Spending "turns" where this is no danger of death in order to recruit an excellent character is something any sensible player would do, so it should be considered (without attaching some sort of "turn cost"). I know you basically acknowledge this by using the word "technically" there but to me this really illustrates how silly pure-LTC-as-tiering-metric is.
Anyway on Hard at least, I consider Jill vs Marcia to be reasonably balanced and I generally feel they should be close together on any tier list. Marcia has a couple extra maps of being very good and has more RNG-proof speed, while Jill has a bit more physical bulk (Marcia's generally suffices for Hard, granted) and is less likely to need a forge to do what both can do.
-
I think it's pretty iffy to consider the crit bug at all, given that it was patched out in later versions of the game and the only reason to talk about it at all is because they also patched out Maniac Mode entirely.
That said, even if you disagree, I don't think that automatically makes Marcia better than Titania, for instance. Titania can do the same thing, she just can't fly. Now, is flying in Chapter 11 onwards worth more than being the best combat unit by a mile in Chapter 1-9, and not taking a giant amount of BExp? Maybe? But I don't think it's clearcut by any means.
-
8 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:
Well, this is precisely what I'm getting at: A byproduct of having to appease the fans. As a result, we might no longer see sequel works, for instance, because it'd mean having to stablish a hard canon to certain things that were left to choices. Three Hopes is a result of this, an AU spin-off that in itself branches off into its own paths, still avoiding having a hard canon. So once again, we can't expect a sequel work to Hopes.
Three Houses and Three Hopes are indeed very hard to make direct sequels to in a way that would feel authentic and enjoyable. Like, suppose IntSys had decided to make a sequel to Three Houses, in the sense that it's set after the events of the game. Either, (a) you'd have to be so vague about what happened in the War of 1181-1186 that there's bascially no point in being a sequel at all, or (b) you'd have to choose to set it after one route, angering the fans of the other routes. I don't think Three Houses was particularly sequel-rich for ideas, especially for something in the same genre (the best hook I've heard for a sequel involved a spy thriller rooting out Agarthan body doubles, as a visual novel), so weighed against the extra problems specific to the game's multiple routes, there was no way it was happening. Instead, the idea we did get was actually a rather rich one, exploring a what-if that many fans (including myself) had toyed with, "what would happen if Byleth hadn't showed up?", and since it's a what-if, we can still see different plot branches focusing on the different major players.
I don't think it's just about appeasing fans, but you can't directly anger a large portion of your fanbase, either. Or, rather, you can, but you'd better have a good reason for it, and/or be fine with your game not reviewing or selling well.
5 hours ago, Metal Flash said:I mean, if they really wanted to make a sequel to a game where pairings are player determined, they could have data transfered from the first entry determine the parentage of certain characters in the sequel. Might be complicated to do, but still possible.
Yep, in principle it's pretty straightforward, honestly? It depends on the nature of the sequel. You could have characters refer to their non-canon parents vaguely as "my mother" or "my father" by default, but with data imported, you could slip the actual name in there once or twice if it felt appropriate, or even unlock certain new scenes or a few extra lines of dialog.
-
I like the idea of canon pairings in FE, that are canon within the game they're introduced. Pent and Louise being already married, or Sigurd and Deirdre getting together regardless of the player's choices otherwise. That's fine and good. Though, they're gonna keep doing them in the future I hope we get some canon same-gender pairings in there, too.
On the other hand, I don't really like the idea of taking a previous game where player choice for pairings was a big factor and then canonizing them. As already stated by @AnonymousSpeed and others, that's just invalidating player choice. You could do it if the sequel story required it or benefitted from it, but without a good argument for such I'd prefer if they steered clear.
-
Most of my thoughts have been expressed by others, including the fact that I haven't played Maniac.
- I really think Titania should be in the highest tier. Actually I feel relatively strongly she should just be #1, but I can see arguments for others I suppose. But Titania is just your best unit by far for a third of the game, and never becomes bad. As mentioned it's unthinkable that any sort of efficient playthrough doesn't make use of her.
- Re Soren and Tormod, I think they're definitely too high for Hard Mode, but I've heard they're more useful on Maniac relatively. Can't attest for sure. Them being two tiers above Rhys/Mist seems weird to me though, given that staff use is the only reason to put them above Calill. I do agree with you that they're quite a bit better than Ilyana, who has all of their faults and then adds "has serious issues doubling mid-speed enemies" to the list.
- The Generals definitely seem way too high, you call their combat stats "stellar" and I can't see it. Like, compare base Brom to base Kieran, who conveniently joins at the same time... Kieran has +1 str, +5 speed, +3 move, canter, some minor wins in other stats (notably, 4 luck, pretty sure Brom faces dangerous crit rates from mages) all in exchange for just -3 defence. With better supports. Yes, Brom is 4 levels lower, but this barely matters: it takes 17 kills for the gap to close by even one level thanks to PoR's barely-curved exp formula. And yes, I know Kieran is a great unit, but still, you can't lose a comparison like that and claim to have stellar stats.
- Stefan has great base stats and is obviously better than Zihark.
- Later-joining laguz jump out as too high, Muarim and Ranulf in particular. They either have weak offence, no 1-2 range, and can only be used half the time... or they have terrible offence, no 1-2 range, and can be used all the time. Lethe and Mordecai are fine because they're around early. I might be underestimating Muarim a little (my kneejerk is the last time I'd use him is Chapter 17, but that's at least two decent maps of use before Tanith/Reyson come along) but Ranulf I think is just bad.
-
Tormod is pretty cleanly better than other mages with investment. I dunno if that investment is "worth it" or not but I don't think he's a bad unit or should be dismissed outright.
Personally, I think whether you consider Soren, Tormod, or Calill the best PoR mage will depend on what you prioritize. Tormod has the highest ceiling, but requires the most investment. Calill requires the least investment (has all the tome ranks she needs at base), but can't use staves. Soren's in the middle: Calill's move, Tormod's staves, and requires a moderate amount of investment to get past his weak earlygame.
I don't value staves that much so I tend to side with Calill but I think there's a reasonable case to be made for any of them.
-
Unit slots keep expanding in lategame Conquest, and you don't get many good units to fill them. Shura is one, and as mentioned he gives move on pairup anyway. Just from pure gameplay I'd probably favour him over Boots, but it's the other reasons that have me really siding towards spare.
-
Tauroneo in 3-12 is weird because he'll basically just fight his own little corner of the map (rather than helping out in the area that matters) but it says good things about him that he can do so very well, and his kills still contribute to the win condition. Past that, he's certainly solid in 3-13 (a map which doesn't really penalize low movement much), and then he's almost always good enough to see some use in Part 4. A very respectable unit, especially compared to his "Haar and Geoffrey basically match my only good stat am I doing this right" pathetic showing in PoR.
Actually every one of the three PoR Generals is a better unit in RD and honestly most of the gaps are not small, which says something about what a glowup the class has between the games.
-
I think class types are pretty cool and I'm fine with them not being super-experimental with them in the first game out. They serve their primary purpose well, which is to give infantry a niche besides "they're like mounted units, but can't move as far... and maybe their stats are marginally better".
Tying types to units instead of classes is an interesting idea but would be pretty radical, because there being an "armour class", "horse class", and "flying class" is just so core to the FE class list.
3 hours ago, Jotari said:backup is kind of objectively the best unit types, I think
I'd say it's flying still. But the fact that we can have this conversation is a good thing.
I definitely agree that the lord classes aren't nearly as interesting as they could be, aside from Ivy/Hortensia. The others are just slight modifications of an existing class (it's funny how you say Celine's is more interesting, I think of her swords as nearly irrelevant though I suppose there are some viable Sword Power builds you can do with her now that the well exists).
-
11 hours ago, Fire Emblem Fan said:
Nintendo has never been able to make up their minds about that. Cranky is the original Donkey Kong, the original Mario villain, but the DK we all know and love with the necktie? His relation to Crank seems to drift between being his son and his grandson. In the new movie, they made him Cranky's son, but in the original Donkey Kong Country they refer to him as Cranky's grandson. It keeps shifting between son and grandson, for some reason.
Nintendo seems to care very little about Mario canon in general, the exact relationship of the Koopalings to Bowser has changed as well. That said: Cranky Kong being the original Donkey Kong re-imagined, and DKC's hero being Donkey Kong Junior re-imagined always made the most sense to me.
Mario being a rival/enemy of the Kongs was pretty well-established by the 80's through early 90's before Donkey Kong Country kinda sawed the Kongs off into their own little sub-universe, so I do agree that a crossover playing that up seems a logical direction to go.
-
19 hours ago, Whisky said:
Wait, how does the two stat minimum work? I’ve calculated averages factoring in class bases and caps before but just ignored the two stats minimum because I didn’t know how it was calculated. Now I’m curious.
triabolical figured it out; you can read about it in this Serenes thread (some discussion/elaboration follows). The tl'dr is that ignoring the effect as you did is perfectly fair; the most it will do is maybe give Constance an extra point of magic by lategame.
Is there any reason why we shouldn't have magic users of every movement type?
in General Fire Emblem
Posted
I think one of the root causes here is that mages, as they were originally popularized (for instance, Merlin or Gandalf) were not members of a military whose job was to fight battles, but instead unusual, exceptional individuals who maybe ended up using their magic to fight on occasion, but it wasn't their primary purpose. Gandalf spends most of his time wandering the wilderness; armour would not have been particularly helpful to him.
Once you start making mages a common feature of armies (as FE does) and thus expected to have to deal with things like stray arrows, then yeah them wearing armour starts to make way more sense, but character design didn't really catch up with this.