[Possible non-side specific/both sides recruitable characters [with evidence]]

At first I thought the same, but the problem with this theory is that if the screenshot from that Nohr chapter isn't actually from the Nohr campaign, but instead one of the first six chapters, it kind of falls apart. Now that does look unlikely considering the number of units you have and the few clues that point to a fairly large map, but then again, the dancer seems to be in her normal outfit instead of the one that is generally thought to be tied to Nohr(that could very well be for a different reason though), and Felicia(if that really is her, although I'm fairly sure that's the case as well) is featured on the Hoshido cover of the game, so being able to use her in the Nohr campaign would be a bit surprising. As for that cavalier, despite being from Nohr, he may actually always switch sides at the beginning of the game and be completely absent from Nohr's campaign.

So I don't know, I still feel like we can't be sure with just that, though I'd love to be proven wrong on this one.

Edit: In any case, this has made me very interested in that cavalier guy, whom has been featured nowhere, and yet seems to defect from Nohr fairly early in the game(considering Kazahana and that thief's stats in that screenshot)for some reason. If he actually did that just to follow Kamui, he must be a pretty important character, like one of his best friends or something.

[What do you guys think of Takumi(?)?]

But... this face though.

[Tsubaki, the man flying a horse. And the status of sex locked classes.]

If he's male, maybe he's just an abnormally purely hearted guy... that's what's stopping men from riding a pegasus right?

Or just, you know... it's a different world, with different rules. So maybe pegasi aren't so picky in this one. _{Pegasus brothers, incoming}

[Will there be French Italian German localized script as well?]

Do you know if other FE games contained EU language options? Or is FEA the first FE game to do so?

Every Fire Emblem that got released outside of Japan did, as far as I know. So that's six of them including Awakening.

[Anna]

I don't think she'll be playable, and I sure hope that's how it goes. Getting her as a unit once was a nice surprise, but I don't want that to become a staple. The less I see her name, as well as Marth's and Tiki's mentioned in the FE games to come, the better.

[Tsubaki, the man flying a horse. And the status of sex locked classes.]

Though this brings up the question: instead of gender-specific classes, is it possible that there will be Hoshida-specific classes vs Nohr-specific classes? Afterall, in the first trailer we only see Nohr units on horseback, and we only see Hoshidan units utilizing pegasus related classes (if I'm wrong please correct me on this). While I doubt this is the case, it's certainly interesting to think on.

Actually, that really does seem to be the case... Wyverns, black magic, horseback units and bow-using thieves seem tied to Nohr, while Hoshido has myrmidons, pegasus knights, and ninjas. Doesn't mean that any one campaign will keep any of that from you, though.

In fact I'm lying, that sounds very likely to me, just not all of it.

[Tsubaki, the man flying a horse. And the status of sex locked classes.]

He sounds like Inigo.

We can also see him fight in the japanese nintendo direct, after the trailer. Considering his figure and his voice in this as well... I'm pretty sure that's a man.

[April 2015 Nintendo Direct hype thread]

That's interesting. I would've thought that Swords would've been preferred for their class, or maybe daggers if they brought them back(I doubt it though.) So now they're just Archers. With different stats.

I'm not sure how happy I am to hear this.

Well,

Who knows. I don't see a throwing star being classified as a sword, and knives had many 1-2 options, so...

[Kamui's stats and returning of skills (now can hold 6 skills)]

That's what I'm wondering too. The trailers clearly showed that dual guard was returning. It will probably be one of the stats shown before starting a battle.

The text box of the supporting units both read as "attack!", so maybe, just maybe, you have to choose between attack/guard/something else this time around?

Or something completely different. But that text box intrigues me.

[Team Hoshidan or Team Nohr?]

Nohr I guess, but I get the feeling that the only acceptable choice will be "both". Plus the trailer really makes it seem like some classes will be faction exclusive, and if that's correct, I can see ninjas being Hoshido only coming from a mile away. I'm definitely not missing out on ninjas.

Unless, you know, they're just the new assassins, but I hope there's more to them than that.

[Should Casual Return?]

Ugh no. This isnt how it works.

Say FE is a restaurant. You've been going to that restaurant for a while. You always order the steak. The steak is amazing. That steak is why you keep going to the restaurant. Theres others who like that steak too, but their numbers arent hella large. So the restaurant is having troubles cuz they keep selling this steak, but no new customers are coming in and they are losing money. The restaurant says they are going to go out of business. Before they go out of business, they decide to make a new menu as sort of a "Going out of business bang". That new menu brings in a huge influx of customers. However, the steak you love is still on that menu and even the restaurant is putting it on their specials marquee every day. The restaurant wants the new customers to try the steak too. However, they realize that the new menu is making people happy and giving them business. So they decide to NOT go out of business and keep that new menu. Business for them is steady.

The steak is still on the fucking menu. No one is stopping the steak from being made. No one. If you cannot share your space with people who arent ordering the steak, that is your problem,

And yet, by no action of yours, the steak tastes worse. You no longer feel at home in that little restaurant. People around you blame you for being selfish and stubborn when you state that you liked it better before. Even though you've done no wrong, even though you're just being sincere. You start to despise these people. One night you take a knife and...

... hm, so yeah. Also the inclusion of casual makes classic into a self-inflicted challenge, so one could say it does negatively affect classic in a way. Doesn't matter much but eh, that's something.

Still, I think that casual should stay, or be replaced by something better that achieves the same result, even though I'm not too fond of it to say the least. I also like the idea of giving an incentive to play classic over casual that people who have never played classic can relate to. Nothing too big though. A Farina would be fine.

[Mechanics that you want]

I had thought of an idea for an item, for now I will call it the "Specialty Card". It would be an piece of equipment that allows the holder to use a Prf weapon that isn't "compatible" with them as long as they have the highest rank possible in that weapon type. For some examples, if Mia had SS Swords and this item she could use Ragnell, Ettard, Caladbolg or Florete, if Hardin had A Lances and this item he could use the Wing Spear and if Rath had S Bows and this item he could use a Longbow.

Of course, I think it's a nifty idea but I'm not sure it's a very good one. If it was implemented wrongly it could really devalue the characters who has personal weapons. If it were to be used it'd have to be in a lategame Gaiden or something.

Well, this doesn't seem like a bad idea, but I hardly see the difference of taking individuality of characters through their personnal weapons rather than through their personnal skills. And you guys were completely against the latter when we discussed skills management some time ago.

Or it can be skl/2 before hit goes over 100 and then additional hitrates over 100 gets turned into additional crit. Hell, that's how I interpreted it the first time.

As a matter of fact, so did I... Ditching the skill/2 crit formula seems too harsh, and would hardly even help skill units; it would rather effectively make crits accessible to some classes only, and to player units only, as well. Which... is kinda boring. And effectively makes critical avoidance completely useless.

[Mechanics that you want]

I had an interesting thought on buffing skill: adjust critical so that each point of hit you have over 100 is turned into crit (replacing the normal Skill/2 bonus). Potentially, you could get 2 crit for each additional point of skill, making it quite potent in the hands of a sword user.

I guess it would weaken units that are supposed to be inaccurate and critty, like Berserkers.

That's interesting indeed. I can't see any major drawback with this idea, if it's balanced right(or rather, if everything is balanced right around it). That could buff quite a few unit types in need besides SMs, like light magic users, archers and assassins. And it'd buff luck, too. Seems pretty good to me.

Edit: The reason I suggested standardizing the weapons is simple. Even if the mixture of enemies in regards to weapon usage was to become even, you're going to have the problem of accuracy vs. power. When accuracy is common, having more of it becomes redundant thusly making power more valuable. However, if accuracy is not common enough, then people will opt for the chance to hit over the increased damage.

My problem here is that you are asking for more balance(which is good), but at the detriment of variety(which is not).

WoW found this out the hard way when they introduced the hit stat. Instead of providing a chance for people to choose between hitting a foe more reliably or possibly dealing more damage, people jumped right onto the hit boat maxing it out ASAP because even the slight chance of missing was too big a detraction to raids to account for. The only real reason it stayed around was because in PvP you didn't have to deal with misses, so it caused a gear-rift between PvE and PvP players where PvP players would miss in PvE raids and PvE players would have loads of a useless PvP stat (this was likely their goal though, to help differentiate between PvP and PvE).

Once again, your example's a bit off, because iirc, the choice in WoW wasn't like "hit chance or damage" to begin with. It was more like "hit chance vs crit chance vs casting/attack speed". Because no equipment had all three at once, but every single of them had damage. Then again, that's when I left the game years ago, so maybe they changed it by now. But at the time hit chance was introduced, that's how it worked.

[Mechanics that you want]

I would assume that almost anyone who has video games has internet.

And you'd most certainly be correct. However.

almost

Is where it's at. This is no argument; the fact is not everyone has the internet, so you shouldn't NEED it to get this kind of information if you want to know about it.

Should I even mention that any decent FE player knows about growths and plays largely according to them?

Okay, that was a bit harsh. The emphasis really wasn't meant to be on "any decent player". Sorry if you felt insulted.

I'll rephrase then. In my opinion(which can perfectly be wrong), most of the decent players end up refering to growth for many things, from the very moment they know about them. Because this is very important information, and one of the core mechanics of these games.

That doesn't mean you'll know them perfectly, and that doesn't mean you'll make every single one of your choices(like will I ditch that unit even tough I like it) based on them alone either.

[Mechanics that you want]

Yeah tell me about it. I've been trying to find fellow Calvinball players for years but there aren't any where I live.

To have this post contribute something to the topic, I have to agree with dondon and Othin about how growth rates being shown isn't necessarily a good idea. As Othin said, the game shouldn't just provide you with the growths since the game shouldn't tell you "ok this unit is going to end up like this."

Plus it seems to me like this whole idea was started and agreed with because people are butthurt about having to look up the growth rates on the internet. Seriously guys, it takes like, 2 minutes at the most to get what you're looking for. Do you really not have 2 minutes to spare?

Not everyone has access to the internet. And this is information relevant enough to how the game works so that you should be able to see it in-game without having to resort to hacking. Should I even mention that any decent FE player knows about growths and plays largely according to them?

[Classes?]

Ninjas!!

Or not.

[Mechanics that you want]

Ooookay... So what I've seen there is someone giving a fairly bad idea, and people disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing for about one full page of comments, leading to an endless debate.

To be fair, seeing growth wouldn't bother most of us in games we've already completed, but I still agree that you shouldn't force this information on people who don't care about it.

Moreover, I am part of those who know what growth rates are, and definitely wouldn't want/be able to ignore them if they were shown to me from the very beginning. This would completely change my way of playing, with the game basically telling me "use this unit, don't use that one".

While this might happen in some cases(on a normal playtrough, lords are units you'll mostly be using, while jeigans are not, ie. there also are classes plain better than others), you'd end up knowing from the moment you get them if units are worth it or not, and basically we would all react the same way; bad unit we ditch, good unit we use.

The very first playthrough of a Fire Emblem game shouldn't look like that. Everyone using the very same units and not even bothering training the others because they already know how they will turn out is completely uninteresting. It's information given to the player that he MUST not have. The very fact that you'd ask for it makes me think turncounts/tier lists/whatever slowly made you guys forget that numbers aren't everything in this series.

And no need to tell me that the game already gives you hints on who's gonna be good or bad, because making something bad worst just because, after all,"it's already bad" is no argument whatsoever.

However, there are definitely people who would want to see them in game, and telling them "go browse the internet", don't take it personnaly, is completely stupid. This is the kind of thing that you should be able to see in game if you want to. Plus, some people don't have the internet at all. A game shouldn't be incomplete if you don't hack it.

So, very simply, add an option to display them, or not. BUT only after clearing the game at least once. Because the first time through a game should be about discovering it, being surprised, being disappointed. No offense, but if you no longer think that's any fun, you might have lost something.

So, yes, an option on second playthrough onward. Seems about the best way to please everyone, to me. Or to displease everyone, probably. Meh.

[/opinions]

[Mechanics that you want]

As I said earlier, luck would probably be fixed if it gave a really low amount of crit. It would be quite handy, while staying logical(if you can evade, hit, and lower your odds of taking a critical hit in the face because of luck, I really don't see how landing a critical hit thanks to luck wouldn't fit).

Critical avoidance seems very important to me, in a game where dead characters won't ever come back. Because if arena abusing taught me something, it's that a 1%(well, even lower thanks to double rng, but still)chance of losing a character is already pretty huge.

40 level-ups(basically going from 1 to 20/20

That would be 38 level-ups, actually:3

By the way, I'd really like to see trial maps coming back in FE13. I liked those.

[Mechanics that you want]

You only get one hero weapon of each type in most FE games, and they're overpowered if you attack 4 times or attack twice with double ATK.

Well, hero weapons are imbalanced anyway, I can't argue that. But they have rather low might, so they rely on the user's strength(or battle skills) quite a lot more than any other good weapon. Basically, you'd be attacking twice before the ennemy can do anything at double strength, which means if your unit as enough strength, you could kill about anyone if you attack first, without ever getting hit. And I don't even want to imagine putting vantage in the mix... This is quite a lot better than hitting four times for lower overall damage(most of the time) and taking a counter. That would effectively make it into the absolute best 1-range weapon, while before it was not.

the point was to pose a suggestion that would increase the value of skl as a combat parameter and to aid classes who are traditionally unable to double attack with the current trends in unit design.

Okay, sorry for bringing that up again. Just seemed that everyone thought it was perfectly balanced, which I believe is wrong. Not really asking anyone to balance it, just pointing out the problems.

Not really. I agree that it doesn't really make sense for a character to forget a skill and then a scroll appears in the convoy to give to someone else. Maybe if the game also had a few "Skill Rings": equippable items that would provide a certain skill in the style of FE4. That way, some skills would be transferrable and others wouldn't. In fact, overall, rings are probably a better system than scrolls. They retain the strategic effect of getting to choose who the skill goes on in each chapter, but character who had them "innate" wouldn't have that individuality taken away from them.

Well, rings would be cool too. I merely mentionned having a very small and restrictive way of taking one's innate, because otherwise you're basically losing those of every character you're not using.

...But I guess that would completely destroy the possibility of giving a mediocre unit a good innate skill to balance it... You'd just take his/her innate as soon as you can and ditch him/her.

Probably would be fine with balanced and appropriate innate skills for everyone, plus rings, then.

[Mechanics that you want]

And with x2 strength, using hero weapons would be... Hm? No one is listening? Well, okay then.

I'm not against keeping innate skills locked on their users, but then we need everyone to have at least one innate, and preferably something they can use. Like someone said, cancel on Leonardo was kinda meh, and some characters didn't even have innate skills.

Well in fact, I did like how skills were handled trough FE10 more than in FE9. Even if for the sake of balance, something FE9-like is a better choice, I think giving like a handfull of special scrolls allowing you to take an innate skill from someone, to put onto someone else, once per scroll AND per character, would be pretty neat and avoid actually going backward with the skill system.

[Mechanics that you want]

I don't see how +4 skill is low. It's the same requirement for SPD with doubling, and depending on how your weapons might compares to the enemies defense, could actually do less damage than a double attack.

Well in fact, after thinking a little about it, not only is +4 skill far too low, considering it happens even more often trough the game than having +4 speed, but giving anyone the ability to deal so much damage without getting counter attacked in the process(opposite of double attacking)on a 100% basis, even by sacrificing the ability to double, seems blatantly overpowered. And about ennemies defenses, the only ennemies were doubling would have the edge(but needs to take a counter to deal full damage)is those with high hp but next to no def; these ennemies are pretty rare, and quite a joke anyway. Against any ennemy hard to defeat(like with tons of defense), double strength would clearly own. While different, FE4 and FE5's critical hit system really showed this.

And I don't know if you thought about mages too(like 2x magic at +4 skill), but siege tomes.

So I still think it's not a bad idea, but it clearly needs to be something that activates less easily, and deals less additionnal damage. Or it needs to be dancer exclusive.

[Mechanics that you want]

I think it would be cool idea if some classes did not have the ability to double but instead had to ability to attack with 2x str if their skl was +4 over the enemy's.

I guess it'd be a little like one of those BS skills that Othin was talking about.

Decent idea. Beware of huge crits though, not to mention ennemies have generally low skill so you can evade their attacks. But this isn't a bad idea by any means, maybe +4 skill is just a little low.

Luck is the scrappy-stat ATM.

That's true, but I don't think you should invert luck and speed when it comes to avoidance. There clearly are things that aren't logical in FE, but it's no reason to modify those which are if you can do otherwise. And in my view, luck should simply raise critical rate as well, maybe at about +1 crit every three or four luck points. I don't even know why it doesn't work that way right now, tbh.

[Alternate 3-E(spoilers)]

taking an discussion about an alternative endgame to childish "i did not" "you did too" fights.

you boys make me proud of our fanbase.

on topic, i figure the map would have Crimea on the front lines while The Griel Mercenary's in back(due to level differences) and the Hawk and Beast tribes stay in their respective areas not moving less anything gets into range.

if its overkill then we could limit the GM's to Soren, Oscar, Boyd, Rolf, Rhys, and Mist. and limit Crimea to Kieran, Makalov, Astrid, Cali, Marcia, and Devdan(or whatever he is)

Must admit that I didn't think about Crimea. Their presence would make things a bit overwhelming... But as they aren't there in our actual 3-E, and Ike tells Elincia to stay out of the battle so she can act as a mediator, it would probably be best not to let them in.

[Mechanics that you want]

Enemies seem to have a priority order for when to move their units, although I'm not sure it holds in all circumstances. That said, with that combined with knowing how many units the enemy will move and when, it's about as predictable as the standard FE turn system.

This system seems interesting, but it mustn't be forgotten that one of the main strenghts of Fire Emblem is how simple a system it has, yet how hard the game is in spite of this. This is the complete opposite of most S-rpgs I've played; pretty complicated(yet I might add exploitable)systems but way too easy games in the end. Felt like they needed to make them pretty simple for the player not to be overwhelmed. Which would probably happen if they didn't. Long story short, I prefer the opposite.

And most good games work like this: easy to play, but challenging.

Seriously, has anyone here ever tried to calculate how much damage your character'll do before attacking, in Disgaea? This is pointlessly hard. And you'll probably end up with the wrong number anyway. So in the end, you stop trying to know things like this. You simply attack and hope the opponent will die. And while I enjoyed Disgaea, this is not how a good S-rpg should be. That's how a good RPG should be.

And while Berwick saga may be different, what you describe feels like it'd need way too much planning. Is it a hard game?

[Its too bad there's still no archer lord]

Malleability is precisely the thing that allows discussions like this one and the "Mechanics that you want" thread to function. Your standpoint has been that a suggestion would never work because recent games have had Battle Saves (which is largely a non sequitur, but that's hardly relevant to the current point), but what about a suggestion that Battle Saves be removed from future games, either in isolation or paired with the previous suggestion? Would you also dismiss that one, simply because Battle Saves were present in the recent games, even in spite of their absence from FE5-9? For that is what you are doing by dismissing the possibility without it being explicitly suggested. That would be as absurd as dismissing a suggestion for Rescuing to be brought back simply because 11 and 12 did not have any stat to correspond to Bld or Con.

Thinking that the series can never change more than the tiniest increment is the mindset that has set the FE series in the death spiral it has been in ever since Kaga left.

Ok, guess I misunderstood then. Your point stands, as I have no proof that battle saves will end up being in the next FE.

So, to fix my mistake, a growth rate on range for archers only would imply the possibility to have a handful of archers clearing the whole game for you(because even an 1% growth rate is still 1% chance of +1 range every level). I have argued how giving them 3-range at the beginning would be a mistake, I can hardly see how giving them the possibility of having even more would be any better. Range is probably the worst stat in the game to put a growth rate onto, as even getting +1 even once trough all 38 levels up a basic level 1 unit gets would be an incredible blessing, and make the unit that much above the others. It's even worse than move, as in the end, your units average move in any FE game would be around 7, so getting +1 is increasing an unit's move by roughly 14%. Range's average, though, is around 1,5(0+ average weapon's range). So increasing it by one single point would mean getting a 66% average upgrade. +14% average move doesn't equal +66% average range, ever. And we saw how 14% average move was incredibly good in FE5. Then, making it class-exclusive would make it even worse.

Finally, I don't think fixing archer's problem can go through giving them an extremely low growth on such an important stat, as growth are largely abusable by those wo whant to(effectively making low turncounts completely uninteresting to watch), and those who don't want to abuse them would end up with archers as bad as always.

I could have told that to him. Fact is, though, in my view it seemed obvious that nobody would answer him(and nobody else did in the end, but that could be because of me), that I did; not saying that's what everybody else should do, that's just how I, personally, act. And it didn't seem polite to mash such a wall of text on the head of somebody who was simply making a suggestion. So battle saves seemed good enough in this case. Well, they still do.