Ertrick36

It was just a still from one of the end CGs in Birthright. Probably didn't work because I'm lazy and did a big oopsie hotlink instead of just using imgur; probably will edit and upload it properly in a bit. I think you'd be surprised how much slipped through the cracks in the localization. The studio that localized the game, Tree House, was pretty callous and arbitrary with how they went about their job. I'm not sure what the end cards say in the original Japanese version, but I have to assume they were careful not to accidentally create inconsistencies in the narrative. But again, it's more or less the same entry for Corrin in every ending. The only exceptions I'm aware of are when you marry female Corrin (specifically female Corrin) to Rhajat and when you marry male Corrin (again, specifically male Corrin) to Niles, as the homosexual pairs spawn unique paired endings in this game. Otherwise, they're basically the same. For instance, read this one between Corrin and Xander, and note the bolded part in particular: Notice how the bolded part is literally the exact same as the first two sentences in the ending you shared. This is what I mean by "copy-paste entries". And if you think that maybe this just applies to Corrin x important character, no, lemme share Corrin x Felicia: All that really changes is the placement of Corrin's entry, depending on if Corrin's male or female (because they give preference to males). Everyone technically has a "unique" paired ending with one another, but in reality paired endings are just formatted scripts that work as such: As unbelievable as it may be, they did this exact same thing with Corrin x Azura for some unfathomable reason. They went and made unique endings for the gay pairs, but couldn't be bothered to even make a slight change to the paired ending between two titular characters in the game. It is as ridiculous as it sounds, and the only reason I could think of for why they even bothered making unique endings for the gay pairs is because they couldn't get away with just doing the usual [male entry, female entry] format since, you know, both are the same gender.

I think the main reason the end card says what it says is that it's basically just a copy-paste job. Every paired ending for Corrin in Birthright and Conquest says that Corrin "worked alongside his/her spouse", no matter who it is Corrin pairs up with. It's the same deal with every other character's ending in the game if they're paired up - everyone just has a copy-paste entry for their paired endings. It's likely just an oversight where they didn't think about what if the player married certain characters. Seriously, look it up if you doubt me. Look for other paired endings for Corrin in Birthright or Conquest (because Corrin's ending in Revelation says something different than Corrin's ending in the other two paths) and look for any of Azura's other endings. They always say the same things for those particular characters. Corrin's ending in Birthright and Conquest always tells of Corrin working with their spouse to spread peace in the land and Azura's ending always says she's a historical mystery.

This comment irks me. Lay off that tone, okay? You may think this is a calm, rational thing to say to someone you're debating with, but it's condescending and presumptuous, as you're making the assumption that I was angry about what you said. I wasn't angry - maybe I was being a bit condescending myself, and I apologize for that, but I was not in the slightest bit angry. We've been on this point long enough that it's derailed from the original point of the topic, so I won't respond to the rest of what you said. But maybe have some more respect for the people you debate with, yeah? Because otherwise you will make people angry.

I'm gonna say it's not necessarily general raw strength, but rather a certain set of muscles and muscle memory. Thing is, it sounds like you're talking about using a spear with a grip that's a good ways away from the center of balance. If you try holding a broom by the very tip of the haft completely horizontal, of course it's gonna take a considerable amount of strength to hold it like that - that's just how physics work. But there are ways to hold a spear one-handed that won't require much strength at all, and in a resting position you should always carry it at the center of balance. The nice thing about spears compared to swords is that you can easily slide your hand up or down the haft, even with just one hand. It's a matter of knowing where to hold it at what times. And to further discuss, no, there isn't much need for strength in thrusting the weapon. You need good fitness/stamina to do that, but strength is of secondary or tertiary importance compared to other factors in this respect. I think it's not accurate to say it's "skill" so much as training and practice that makes for a good spearman. I take issue with all of these statements. This is not at all the reason why realism would bog down the game. Moreover I'm gonna take back what I said - realism can make for a fun game if used correctly, as games like Kingdom Come Deliverance and Mount and Blade are honestly quite entertaining games - it's just when you get too bogged down trying to craft the absolute most realistic game ever is when it becomes troublesome. Lords did take to the field to wage wars. Not all the time, as they would have to also ensure they're still around to issue commands to their troops, but they did. If they didn't then dukes and kings would not have died on the field of battle - we wouldn't have seen to the deaths of Charles the Bold or King Harold, two famous cases of higher-caste nobles dying on the battlefield. It really just depend, but lords did train for war and fight on the battlefield directly. If there was a time when they might not have, it'd probably have been post-Medieval period when all the noble families were firmly established and have become even more absurdly wealthy than they were before. But in Medieval times lords did indeed fight. Axemen would not be trash, or else axes would never have even been a type of weapon used on the battlefield. Spears would reign supreme on a battlefield, and swords are great for personal defense, but the advantage of axes is the force they can strike with. You can actually use them fairly nimbly, just not as nimbly as swords. Even taking into consideration they aren't quite as nimble, there are two ways to get around that. Either you get a shield or you get a bigger axe. Yes, seriously, I'm saying you get a bigger axe. Not fantasy bigger, where they make the axe head absurdly large for some reason, I mean you turn it into effectively a polearm like a Dane axe. The extended reach of a Dane axe means you can strike from a safe distance, but it also has more power meaning it's basically impossible to parry it with a one-handed sword. But the biggest advantage to using a weapon with lots of blunt force is dealing with armored foes. A slashing or piercing weapon simply cannot get through plate armor or good quality chain mail (I'm talking riveted, high-grade steel chain mail) - you can maybe get a bodkin arrow to get through the chain mail, but the only way you'll get through plate armor with an arrow is if you get lucky or if, in melee combat, you half-sword. But if you have a blunt-force weapon like a mace or an axe (axe isn't as good because its blade means its force is more easily deflected by the rounded plating of most 15th Century plate armor, but still) then you don't need to pierce the armor - you can jostle the wearer and the blunt force will transfer to wherever you strike without needing to pierce through the armor. Axes also do have a design that allows them to hook things, so you could use it to wrench a weapon from someone's hand (or simply push it aside) or you could grab at an enemy and pull them towards your formation, enabling your allies to easily swarm them. There are other uses for axes as well, but overall axes are not trash weapons in the real life. If you're talking about those dumb speedo-wearing buffoons called "fighters" in the games, yeah they'd suck, but it's because they use oversized axes and don't wear armor, not because axes are inherently a bad weapon. Most "combat classes" is a bit of a misnomer, but it is true that most troops would use spears or bows. Thing is, though, that most troops were not regular soldiers, but levied peasants who were given a measly wage if they were lucky, handed a weapon, and told to stick with their mates as they marched against what feels like an almost certain doom. It wasn't only because of spears generally being better for fighting in formation, but also because spears were exceedingly cheap to produce compared to swords, meaning they could be more easily mass-produced and given to every soldier in the army. You have to keep in mind that for much of the Medieval period there were no standing armies. You really just had three sources of soldiers - your few well-trained knights (who were nobles in their own right), your peasant levies, and mercenaries with questionable methods and allegiance. The last one is tricky because at times they would be willing to turncoat if offered better deals by the opposing side of a conflict, and they may end up turning on that side as well. There is also the fact that when they weren't fighting some nobleman's wars they'd be raiding the countryside and robbing merchants and peasants along the roads, and it might not be the smartest idea to give them funding to do that even more. At the same time though maybe you would want to keep them employed so that they won't pillage your subjects. Either way, not as reliable as your knights, your vassals, and your levies, as they're much less likely to turn on you or cause trouble. On the point about forces being mostly men, you mistake me when I say "realism". I don't necessarily mean the kind of historical realism you see in Mount and Blade where they attempt to accurately emulate Medieval society in a new world. I more mean in the sense of how fighting with swords, spears, axes, and other weapons is concerned, at least for the sake of this discussion. Or if you mean to imply that women can't fight, well, we can have all manners of discussions as to why we didn't see women as combatants as often as we've seen men historically, but women absolutely can fight - you can find women practicing HEMA and participating in HEMA tournaments, and they can do quite well. And of course you also have women in various military organizations in the real world, and you have women in history who've fought duels and battles. But of course, I'm not sure in what way you meant that women not being combatants was "realistic", so if you don't mean it in the latter way then don't take this as me thinking you think that way (though if you do then I'm not gonna cry, kick, and scream and say that you're sexist). They'd also have damage drop-off for the further away they shoot at enemies. When I made the comment about "unique advantages/disadvantages", I meant against certain kinds of weapons. They're no more powerful against a spear than they are against a sword, precisely because they're ranged weapons so all melee weapons have basically the same performance against them. In a fight between a dude with a sword, spear, or axe versus a dude with a bow, you'll want to be the guy with the bow every time. That is, unless the other guy has armor, in which case you'll want to run for the hills. Oh, and with how experience would work, could you just imagine how heavily favored the game would be towards anyone that uses a bow? Cavalry, too. LTCers would literally just use archers and knights. If there'd be a game that'd be appropriate for making bows OP, it'd be one that drew inspiration from Southeast Asian countries as they more strongly emphasized bows than western cultures did (though they still played a very strong role in Medieval combat there - they were strong everywhere). This reminds me of a game I really love, Fallout: New Vegas, and how the leader of one of the factions basically wants to recreate the old Roman Empire (he even calls himself "Caesar"). Mainly how for some reason they want to abandon firearms, but instead of opting to use bows they only use javelins. Like, they have basically their two pilums that they carry into battle as ranged weaponry, and they're fighting against people with high-powered .50 cal sniper rifles and machine guns. Not that bows would make it all that more fair for that little wannabe empire, but it'd be better than just expecting your raw muscles to stop bullets as you charge the enemy, lmao. Well, I'm just judging based off what's being fed to my eyeballs, not what they could be - and I'm just seeing them yeeting knives at samurai and mercenaries and those samurai and mercenaries falling instantly to such attacks. But I guess they'd have to give them combat viability to be useful. Still would probably be better if they used swords, but then there's less setting them apart from all the other classes that use swords, lmao.

Typo, yeah, it's meant to say it's not as easy, lmao. Well, to go further into depth, there are also anti-cavalry pole weapons (pikes, halberds, bills, and voulges) that you cannot use on horseback and are distinct from standard infantry spears which could be used with shields. Regular spears are kind of a tricky category, honestly. Somewhat off-topic, I recall someone tried to argue that Mipha using her trident with one-hand (or rather, holding it one-handed, because she'll use her second hand in some attacks) meant she was stronger than Link - using a spear with one or two hands is hardly a matter of strength, but rather of skill and preference. At the end of the day, there's a reason they keep this relatively simple. If you were to categorize every single kind of weapon there was, you'd either end up with classes using too many different kinds of weapons or weapon types being so restrictive that most units will probably only ever receive one weapon and the ability to carry different weapons would be mostly rendered moot. And honestly, if realism was applied to a T swordsmen would just not be a thing in battles because a sword is a self-defense weapon, not a primary battle weapon that you use in formation with a few dozen other soldiers (of course, this is barring the Romans during a certain period of their history, but they switched back to the spear because it was more effective overall on the battlefield).

I'm not sure what the weapon triangle is to Intelligent Systems (how they feel about it or whatever), but I'll give my opinion. I'll give two, based on gameplay and realism. From a gameplay standpoint, it depends. Some games are able to use the triangle to encourage you to use a wide variety of units. For example it's not as easy to beat the DS games using strictly sword users because many enemies will be wielding spears/lances. Other times it can prove too crippling for some units, such as in Fates how the already severely nerfed mages also have to contend with weapon disadvantage against armor knights and cavaliers. It really just depends on how they implement it and how balanced the game is overall, because the thing the weapon triangle will do is exaggerate the strengths and weaknesses of the wielders. On realism, there was a video made two years back by famous HEMA YouTuber Skallagrim on the topic. But to argue from my perspective, I can definitely see where they were going with it. Sword beats axe because sword is nimbler, spear beats sword because of reach, and axe beats spear because grappling is difficult to contend with for spears. The trouble comes when you consider how many different classes of weapon there are for each category, and take into consideration other tactics that can be employed. I'll also point to hidden weapons and bows being part of the weapon triangle in Fates as a colossally unrealistic situation - bows have no unique advantages or disadvantages against other types of weaponry as they're ranged weapons (no archer would be a total sitting duck when engaged in melee, though, they would brandish a sword and fight if it came to it), and you'd be a fool to use throwing knives and throwing stars as actual weapons meant to kill your foes. And just try to stab a skilled swordsman with a knife - the swordsman will laugh at you as they cut your knife-hand off. Magic in this regard is kinda whatever in terms of realism, but I doubt spells would throw off arrows any more than they'd throw off knives. There's also the magic triangle to talk about, but I'm not really a physicist or meteorologist so I have no goddamn clue if fire would beat wind - with what I know about fire it would depend on if it's a grease fire or not and whether there's any nearby kindle for the fire to catch on. Gameplay-wise I think it may complicate magic a bit too much. I like when magic is more a class of its own and has special properties, instead of when it's paralleled to the physical weapons or just kinda bullied into a corner like it is in Fates. All in all... I can see it continuing to have a place in the series, but I wouldn't exactly miss it if it were to disappear. I generally like it more if the weapons have stats to both balance and reflect their real-life parallels. For instance, cavalry lances having enough weight to almost guarantee they'll only strike a single time and swords being light enough to nearly always double. I'd also like it if they made axes better. Maybe whenever they get around to doing Skyrim Viking Emblem they could make axes strong. Yeah, I know vikings had swords and spears, but you know that'd be the setting where they'd make axes OP.

I don't really know. I kinda hate how the DS games handle difficulty, so I've barely played the hard modes in Shadow Dragon. I think Hard 1 is more or less just Normal except without the Prologue or any of the potential other units, and even on the lowest difficulty Marth's somewhat a liability (viable, but not great). Marth's averages in Strength, Speed, and Defense are all sub-20. It's real rough - he needs stat boosters to be useful in Shadow Dragon. Thankfully they tweaked him in New Mystery so that he isn't a humongous liability. He still has wretched stat caps, but at least he'll actually reach some of them without much aid. Hard 5 Medeus is still a pain to deal with in that game, though, 'cuz he still has 30 Speed on that difficulty. Just like with any other healer, only if you like her/want to form a team of mostly mages. She's definitely got good growths, but Bishop boosts everyone's Weapon Level and Speed stats up to 10 and 14, respectively, if they haven't reached those stats already. 10 Weapon Level is enough to use every tome and staff in the game, and 14 is really damn good speed. I'm not saying this makes her bad, but rather it makes her growths mostly redundant and pointless since the only way you're using her beyond as a staff bot is as a bishop so she'll automatically get that boost up to Speed 14, and no Weapon Level increase matters beyond the one the Bishop promotion typically provides. She'll get to 20 Speed with little effort, which may give her a slight edge over Wendell and Boah, but it doesn't even matter at all since 14 Speed is all that's needed to double a lot of enemies. And there's the matter of the other mages, Merric and Linde, likely hitting this cap as well, making Elice fairly redundant unless, again, you're going for a mages-only playthrough or just really want to use Elice for some other reason. If you're going for efficiency, she's best forgotten about unless you really gotta Aum staff someone back from the dead. And on the Switch version of the game it's silly to need to do that unless you are just inclined to not use rewind/are doing an iron man playthrough.

Kinda, yeah. Marth can keep from getting doubled on lower difficulties, but I think it's a pretty tight window. On the lowest difficulty Marth is only barely able to double Medeus with his speed maxed out, as Medeus has a speed stat of 21 and Marth's max speed stat is 25. In general Marth just has a rough time defeating Medeus, and it's generally preferable to use alternative warriors on higher difficulties. The Medeus dilemma is less of a critical flaw of Marth and more of a symbol for just how bad Marth is in Shadow Dragon because of how grossly unfavorable the game's mechanics are towards him.

I checked, and they are both fixed values, yes. I was thinking of Mystery of the Emblem, where strength modifies attack might and healing amount. Just like every error in judgment I make about this game, it's because I base my knowledge off of its vastly superior successor which honestly should've been the game that was localized, but it is what it is. Also, I still would love to see them localize New Mystery. I know it bombed in Japan, but I think if nothing else it would lead to better appreciation in the West for Marth's story. That was my suspicion. That means their speed and weapon level skyrockets to the point where they can use anything. Which is actually really, really good. They'll basically be other Wendells on the battlefield, meaning they'll more or less cook everything alive except bosses.

I mean, the stats that matter most are weapon level and speed when it comes to mages (mostly because they'll have jack for strength and defense, and the other stats are only passingly important). I don't know how promotions work in this game because I haven't gotten far yet, but Lena and Maria have... serviceable speed and weapon level - enough that they can chip at enemies. Problem is why would you use them when you're already using Merric and Linde, both of whom are likely to be reaching near max stats in weapon level and speed. And if you want to use them as simple staffbots and nothing more, then lemme give you a bit of a news flash: bishop promotion ain't gonna help them do that. Maybe Lena might need to promote to eek out a +1 to weapon level so that she can use literally every staff in the game except Aum (she only needs weapon level 8 to do so), but Maria is already at that point. No other stat is gonna affect how they perform as staffbots. I mean, strength will, but Wendell has the only non-zero growth in that regard and his growth is a hilariously pitiful 10%. In my opinion... they are hella not worth leveling up and promoting. They are barely worth deploying once you get good ol' Wendell. There's only one use for either of them, and it's when Lena is given the Hammerne staff, since it's exclusive for her. But if you were inclined to do a "magic units only" run, then... well, first you'll have to get the point where you even get a mage. Barring that, all mages is a viable run - you'll just have to watch out for the bosses, probably keep Lena and Maria away from them entirely.

I'm gonna lay out a list of good, solid units I think are worth using (or that you may want to consider, at least). These are my opinions, so feel free to contrast them with what other people say. Marth - You may think it's funny that I list Marth here given you're forced to use him, but here's the thing. In the DS game, Shadow Dragon, Marth is atrocious on the highest difficulty - no matter what, he'll even get doubled by the guy he's destined to kill, Medeus. So among western fans he's sorta become an example of what a bad lord might be like. But in the original game - in this particular version of the game - Marth is goddamn good. He won't be as fast as a cavalier and can only level up to level 20, but that just doesn't matter much because he wrecks house in this game. He has some of the most well-balanced stats any unit in this game has, and he becomes your best option for defeating Medeus - rather than how it is in Shadow Dragon Hard 5 where you would rather have Tiki or Nagi kill him instead. Cain/Abel - You can use one or both, it doesn't matter much. The thing is, you get a massive flood of mediocre cavaliers in this game - Matthis is just the icing on the cake (and really, people just meme about the guy because he has a lame personality, I think - he's not good, but he's not the absolute worst cavalier in the game). But Cain and Abel are both really good, solid units. It helps that they're extremely mobile (I think 9 movement was too generous, IS), but even if they weren't I'd say they were still solid. Abel is probably better due to better balanced stats, but you won't go wrong with either of them. Caeda - Her big, glaring issue is her strength - it's pitiful. This is mitigated by her weapon level, which is absolutely insane - infamously you can give Jegan's silver lance to her right from the start and she's immediately able to wield it. Her speed is also obviously good, so she's frequently gonna double most enemies even if she wields the silver lance. You may as well bring her along anyway because she'll be used to recruit a lot of units. Gordin - Honestly, he's not the most impressive archer ever, but he's probably the best you'll get in this game simply by virtue of him being able to promote, thus meaning he has the most room to gain stats. His weapon level growth is solid, though, so he's your best shot at gaining access to the legendary Parthia. Castor has better growths, but unfortunately he can't promote in this game, so really you're just gonna have to accept Gordin. Jagen - Use him only if you really are struggling, and don't let him use the silver lance he starts with. Jagen will be able to keep your units safe for a time, but you'll want to drop him eventually for better cavaliers. Ogma - They don't call him the crit wonder for no reason. This guy hits fast and hard, and he'll generally remain viable into end game. In this game he's not as impressive as his later incarnations, but he's still a good, solid unit. Navarre - Ogma's main rival, Navarre has a better strength growth, yet a substantially worse weapon level growth. The hilarious thing, however, is that the bad weapon level growth just doesn't matter because Navarre's weapon level is already good enough to use the highest level sword, the silver sword. The main trade off for his better strength growth is his base strength stat. But really, both Ogma and Navarre are likely to get fairly high strength stats by the end of the game, so it doesn't matter much - whether you use one, the other, or both, you probably won't be disappointed. Julian - Julian's a case where he's sorta limited by his weapon choice, yet the weapon choice doesn't hurt him too badly. He has a supremely jacked strength growth, yet a wonderful weapon level growth of absolutely nothing. The strange thing is that even with his weapon level stat of 3, he still has access to a nice suite of weapons. He can use an iron sword, a steel sword, the Devil Sword (with his fantastic luck he is probably the best option for this weapon), and an armor slayer. He won't be able to use the wyrmslayer, the levin sword, the killing edge, or a silver sword, but this isn't terrible - it just means he's probably not the best option for fighting dragons or wyvern riders. Lena - I can't really recommend any curate in the game in good faith. This is because the only way to level them - and thus the only way for them to gain stats - is to allow them to get attacked. Normally you'll only want to use curates until you get Wendel, but Lena's the exception because she has exclusive access to the Hammerne staff. But I wouldn't say this makes her worthwhile to level and use as anything more than a healer that you keep well out of danger. And she has pretty terrible growths, so what you see is likely what you get throughout the entire game, so... yeah. Personally I'd say just don't bother leveling her, use her until you get Wendel, then drop her unless you need to repair a weapon you prize dearly. Merric - A solid mage all around, his big main flaw is his inability to promote until very late into the game, as you don't get a Bishop Ring until a late game chapter. Even so, he'll be able to compete with the big league mages, which are fittingly a bunch of old men. Hardin - This depends on if you really want another cavalier or not. Just like Cain and Abel he has solid stats and growths, but his issue is that he joins after Cain and Abel so you probably won't want another cavalier. Otherwise, he's just as solid a unit, and he has a swanky turban, so he gets extra cool points. Wendel - "Hey, why is a dumb ol' prepromote mage with almost non-existent growths here? Obviously he should be bottom tier! Look at that strength growth! And his bad skill and luck!" Nah, he's actually top tier. Look at the stats of Merric and Linde. Look at their growths. Now look at Wendel's. Now, lemme tell you a little something about how mages work in this game. You see, nobody among the magical lot gains strength. In fact, Wendel is the only mage who even has a chance of gaining strength. But what is important? Speed and weapon level. In these respects, Wendel is a god to be worshipped. Okay, maybe that's an exaggeration, but Wendel's got the goods when it comes to these vital stats. What helps, too, is he actually has a pretty good defense stat for a mage - a solid 8 out of 20, which is enough to protect him quite well, particularly with his good HP growths. He isn't hampered by a lack of promotion, either, as he's already promoted and has decent stats for mid-to-late game as-is. Minerva - She's not the absolute best flier, but fliers are good in this game and she's pretty solid. She's likely to get outclassed later on, but her availability makes her potentially more worthwhile than later fliers. Use her until you get the first two Whitewing sisters, use them a bit, and decide for yourself one or two among these three total (Minerva, Palla, and Catria) you'll want to bring into end game. Linde - Just like Merric, she can suffer from the lack of promotion for most of the game. Unlike Merric, however, she has crummy availability, and you'll need to put in some effort to be able to use her effectively. What she has over Merric is stupidly high growths in all the ways a mage in this game can have them - high skill, speed, luck, weapon level, and HP growths. So if you do level her, she will likely turn out to be the best among mages in everything except defense. Boah - He's basically like Wendel, if not slightly more powerful. While I'm talking about the last mage I'll talk about here (apart from Gotoh), I'll say why mages are powerful and don't need much strength. The simple fact is that there exists not a single enemy unit that has a resistance stat that isn't just 0. Not any of the minor bosses, not Jiol, not Gharnef, not Medeus... non except one: Camus. Because of this, the amount of damage you deal to virtually enemy is equal to either one plus your tome's might or two plus double your tome's might if you end up doubling them. So if you're using, say, Aura and Linde doubles the enemy, she'll deal 42 damage to them. Consider that the highest HP stat any enemy gets is 45 - the HP stat of Medeus. Yeah, mages are basically walking, talking nukes in this game. With that said, you'll need to consider whether you want four of these nukes running around, or if you just want to roll with one or two, and I personally think you should just stick with Wendel, Merric, or Linde. Palla/Catria - You can pick one or both - you can probably have four fliers on the map and it wouldn't be a bad idea. I'd personally probably just pick one of them, though. Palla is pretty solid at base while Catria's the "growth" character. Note, however, that Palla's stats at base are more than viable after promotion gains for late game, and so just because she doesn't impress as much with her growths it ultimately matters little as she'll just be good anyway. Catria is the one that'll really need to catch up, but she'll catch up pretty quickly and will have lots of room to really grow into a monster. She definitely has more potential than Palla, but you need to put in a bit of elbow grease to make it happen and leveling her isn't as painful as leveling Est. Xane - Do you want to duplicate an already good unit? Use him. That's really all there is to say. Xane can be used in his base form, but his base form is... well, it's just trash. If you use him, you'll want to use his transform ability. Est - I feel it's only appropriate to mention her, though I really wouldn't recommend using her unless you are fine with the idea of power-leveling her. Strangely enough this is a better appearance for her than later iterations of the Archanea games, but she's still not... great. I mean, she's great once you get her raise up in levels, but good luck doing that without having her grind somewhere. Tiki - Yeah, I'm gonna say Tiki is stupidly powerful in this game. Bantu as well since he's mostly immune to non-mage enemies. Tiki not only basically has max defense, but she's likely to attain high stats all around. Perhaps you'll already have really good units by the time you recruit her, but she'll become pretty powerful an she also won't be nearly as much of a liability as Est because her stone gives her ridiculous defense. Lorenz - I'm gonna say he's viable for end game, despite his poor speed. He can tank hard, and has plenty of room to grow into an even more potent unit. His speed will continue to be bad, but honestly he's a solid unit. Gotoh - You don't even have an option, you're forced to deploy him. But, like, what reason would you even have to hate him? I mean, just look at his stats. You might almost think he's somehow related to Camus as he's the only other unit that has resistance. That's all that needs to be said, just use him.

It depends, but in most games you can definitely low-man the entire story. Generally if a game wants you to spread your forces out to tackle multiple objectives, such as a number of Conquest maps, or you have to defend a few very squishy units, low-manning would be difficult. However, there are not very many effective counter balances implemented to keep you from low-manning - as in, not much stops the snow-balling of levels that results from low-manning apart from gradually decreasing EXP gains, which doesn't matter too much most of the time since they'll allow you to level to the point where you're OP as-is.

Just a joke, mang, though I probably would like the series more if they were historically accurate/realistic to what a feudal society was actually like. I know the reason they don't do it, however. But to clarify, I was referring to the caste system in Japan that was based on China's old Four Occupations system, which was notably different from how people were classed in Europe because in China/Southeast Asia they made it a point to distinguish between peasants, artisans, and merchants while Europe generally didn't place the merchants or artisans anywhere in particular (they were probably in the "free peasants" category). With that said, Oboro herself is probably more in line with being in the samurai class by virtue of her current occupation and the relatives that took her in. I don't know if it'd make for bad storytelling, it really depends on how the writer actually executes it. Probably best to avoid the topic of serfdom, though - slavery is a bad enough topic, imagine telling a kid that the vast majority of people were basically slaves to callous rich people back in Medieval times. I know it's not really as fast-paced dramatic as Fire Emblem typically is, though. I will say, however, that a story like William the Conqueror's could be made to be fairly dramatic and cool - three wannabe kings all eyeing a slice of land, two of the claimants in bitter disagreement after the previous king complicated the throne's succession, multiple sides of the story... there's a lot you could do with that, and you could give each of the claimants some distinguished traits to make you more sympathetic or opposed to their causes. I might be biased though because I just like the Normans in general. Also, Three Houses actually hit the mark pretty damn close when it came to portraying a Medieval society, and the relevant issues, such as Miklan's disinheritance, the squabbling of the nobles of the Leicester Alliance, or the lack of power the royal throne in Adrestia and Faerghus have are rather riveting and dramatic conflicts in the story of Three Houses.

People talking about how they learned history from Samurai Warriors and Civilization games, and here I am having learned it from the Mount and Blade Warband mod Gekokujo (and random investigations via Google which aren't at all a proper substitute for an actual history degree). Although some things are just to significant to avoid learning, like Nobunaga's obsession with guns. Speaking of, if Hoshido is based on Edo-era Japan then why aren't there tanegashimas anywhere to be seen? How is it that Mozu seems to be treated as lower class than Oboro's immediate family, and why are merchants prestigious enough to be a promoted class?

If you're talking games that came out in 2020, there have only been three I even played - Mount and Blade 2 Bannerlord, Crusader Kings 3, and Baldur's Gate 3. Well okay, also Animal Crossing, but I always tend to abandon those kinds of games pretty quickly. In hindsight there were games I was thinking about getting that I ended up not getting for one reason or another. One of those was The Last of Us: Part 2 for... numerous reasons, and another one is Cyberpunk 2077. Yeah, I know the latter isn't out yet, but I've, I guess, been dehyped. Anyway, if I had to pick my favorite among the limited selection of games I've played from this year, it'd go to Bannerlord. Just the sheer amount of play time I have in that game far outshines the play time in the others. Something's appealing about being just some absolute nobody mercenary who, through fighting in tournaments, building trade empires, and helping peasants and nobles with their petty issues, becomes a lord and maybe even a full on monarch that conquers the continent. Crusader Kings is the game I've spent probably the second most amount of time on. They actually just released a stupid and insane ruler creator where you can pick any monarch, duke/duchess, or minor noble in charge of one or two counties, and replace them with a custom-made person. So you could make Waluigi the Emperor of the Byzantines and give him some pagan religion or have him create a brand new cult of Waluigism if you give him an unreformed religion. Even without that, though, it's great. I can turn William the Conqueror into a bisexual hunk that is not only the conqueror of England, but also the conqueror of your heart (even though he was supposedly more faithful to his wife than most monarchs of his time were). Or I can play as his less favorite son, Robert Curthouse, and somehow manage to make him a leper. It's great. And Baldur's Gate 3, well... I've barely played much of it because my piece of crap computer has trouble running it. I think the modding community is certainly taking it places, though, as they've created all manner of custom playable classes, class options, and races (really just filling in the gaps of this early access game, but you know). I probably shouldn't have bought this game in its current state, honestly, but I guess I just enjoyed Bannerlord (another early access game) enough that I figured I was clever enough to know if it's good or bad. Really, what's holding me back is simply how much of a slog the game is to run on my computer, and I'm hoping future optimizations will make it better.

With that winning combo of interests, I give you a hearty welcome to the Forest. btw if you want to upload images like I did, you'll need to upload them to an image-hosting site like Imgur first.

Yeah, I was more thinking of the Irish when talking about the nobility systems. Well, Ireland and the few Celtic kingdoms of Scotland from that time period. Actually, on a slightly less related topic, one of the campaign starting points of Crusader Kings 3 is 867, and you can play as either the Viking kings who are trying to colonize the land, any of the Anglo-Saxon nobles that were resisting the colonization, or virtually any other noble that existed in that time. If you really wanted to you could try to unify Ireland and mount an invasion of England and Scotland in that game. The game's not entirely accurate, but it is meant to basically allow you to change history or play out historical events the way you'd want to and it is definitely less egregious than Assassins Creed in terms of representing history. It's more about territory expansion than virtually any of those things. Always has been, and still is. Won't get into a tremendous rant about it because I could spend all day talking about how all of those rationalizations are just excuses to justify the desire of aristocrats to seize wealth and resources for themselves, but racism and religious feuding are not part of human nature, as there's nothing natural or spontaneous about either.

Yeah, the Celts abandoned pagan religions well before the generally agreed starting point of the Medieval Period. At first I think they had adopted their own Christian beliefs referred to as Insular Christianity, but eventually adopted Catholicism proper (though I'm far from an expert). By the time of the Viking Invasions they definitely weren't these dark nature magic types they're often portrayed - most of them, just like anywhere else in Europe, worshipped Jesus Christ in some fashion. Moreover by the time of the Viking Period they did have a nobility system that was more or less just as scattered as the rest of Europe's nobility systems. While perhaps the disrespectful portrayal of Celts in particular isn't as problematic as, say, a bad portrayal of African cultures, it is troublesome for them to glorify colonialism in any capacity. Colonialism and imperialism have, historically, always resulted in suffering. People of the "uncivilized" cultures (seen as such by more powerful kingdoms like England or France) were enslaved, brutally conquered, and almost had their cultural identities completely stripped. Many cultures were outright erased from the face of the Earth by brutish, savage English, French, and Roman imperialists that sought to homogenize the lands they conquered so that they would have no cause to stray from their firm grasp, and often we've been taught that this has been "good" because supposedly this all was necessary for a technologically advanced and "civilized" society and so by this logic we owe a debt of gratitude to these cruel imperials for creating such "great" nations. That includes slavery - as an American I absolutely have heard that slavery was "necessary" to build our nation, and that even that the English were good guys even though we fought a war of independence to kick them out. Oh yeah, and that President Washington didn't like slavery, which is BS since he had slaves of his own. Speaking of, that's why I dislike the story in AC3. Look, I do respect that they made the American revolutionaries out to be not as heroic as we often fantasize, but in contrast they made the Englishmen look like heroes instead who were looking out for the interests of Native Americans. This is absolute BS; both the Spanish and the English were responsible for horrific atrocities committed against the indigenous peoples here, and they had no remorse whatsoever because these imperialists who were so obsessed with their pedegrees believed non-whites (particularly those of differing nationalities) were naturally inferior to pure stock English/Spanish people, especially if those English/Spanish were nobility. And providing small pox blankets was not an accident - it was deliberate biological warfare. Neither the English nor the Spanish imperialists ever cared about the wellbeing of indigenous people in this time. Same with any other kingdom that colonized the Americas or virtually any other land. I understand AC has always had historical revisionism. I mean hell, the entire main struggle of every game revolves around a Crusades-era holy order which realistically was only secretive in the same vein as a lot of other zealous organizations were (Germanic tribunals from back when they had trials by Vehmic Courts, which were basically the ancient equivalent of white supremacist "militias" being given legal authority to do what they please), and how this long-since dissolved military arm of the Catholic Church was secretly behind everything bad that happened in history, except not really. But there's a point where even if they're fully admitting it's not accurate it's still promoting a certain ideology. And given how they can get political in all the wrong ways (but remember it's all coincidence, they definitely don't believe this stuff /sarcasm), it wouldn't surprise me if they were trying to promote the idea that colonialism was hip, trendy, and cool. Like with any of these kinds of things, the troubles are always the result of either directors, project managers, or executives who are either callous or incompetent (that's the key thing, because not everyone who holds these roles are bad - those that are good and care do great work for their companies and games, and make life easier for the rest of the employees). Though Ubisoft has a... ahem, history in regards to bad portrayals of other cultures, so that's probably why they get flak a bit more. Really, a lot of VG companies get away with a lot of BS because of lacking oversight and unions, which is a complicated subject (though it's still wrong, no doubt about that). With that said, if you mean "shun" as in "don't buy their products", then you may as well become a luddite because most things you come upon have been created through the abuse and over-working of employees. It is an unfortunate reality that we have to fix not through individual action but through collective activism. And no, I don't mean "collective activism" as in mass boycotts, because gamers have proven they don't have the discipline to do that in large enough numbers to make an impact. I mean speaking out, in a meaningful way, about this kind of stuff and trying to pressure companies and politicians to enact positive policy changes and criminalize those who've committed crimes such as sexual assault.

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but this is what I personally thought of about Fire Emblem Fates. I'll tell a story starting from when the game was first being revealed, and give a little context to how I was feeling at the time. So I came basically fresh off the Awakening train. I was still playing Fire Emblem Awakening, but also was kinda thinking about dipping my toes into other games. I still mostly visited GameFAQs at this point and it was chock full of whiny people complaining about the last game, and since I was still a somewhat impressionable youth I thought the story in Awakening was genuinely bad just because some mouthy dickheads on the internet said so. Enter Fire Emblem Fates and its announcement. I don't remember exactly what the reveal was like, but I remember looking at some of the screenshots and thinking "wow, Japanese-styled unit classes? That's hella cool!" I also remember seeing female characters in traditionally male-exclusive class roles (Charlotte as a fighter) and the male pegasus knight Subaki, and the talk about the new knife/shuriken weaponry. I won't do a play-by-play of every single new revelation (hehe), but the ultimate point is there was genuine hype - I think on both sides of this "divide" people talk about with the fandom. Sure, I do think as some of the more... um, "choice" features were revealed, veterans started jumping off the hype train, but still I could swear some who were disappointed with Awakening were super excited to see what potential "Fire Emblem If" had - to see if perhaps it'd outperform Awakening and "restore" their faith in the series or whatever. I myself believed it would end up being a better story. One of the big things I remember, however, is one particular thing Iwata said, which was that you'd be making choices throughout the game... choices with huge impact on the story. In hindsight I think either he wasn't aware that there was only the one choice (well, apart from sacrificing Shura for some boots in Conquest, lmao), or it was said to hype up the game, but either way when you look back on it one does feel outright lied to and misled. Even bigger in my mind, though, was how Conquest was pitched: "The Nohr path will force you to revolutionize an unruly kingdom from the inside – this path offers a slightly more complex story and will be more challenging." Now, obviously we know how exactly we "revolutionize" the "unruly kingdom" from within, but take yourself back to before the game released and imagine what kind of image that word choice puts in your mind. Of course "unruly kingdom" leads you to thinking of unscrupulous types such as Niles or Hans, but pay mind to the world "revolutionize". Revolution. That is a word people typically use to describe not just a simple act of rebellion, but a widespread disruption and usurping of a powerful government institution. I'll also point to how it says the story will be "slightly more complex". I'll get back to this point later. Come release day, I buy Birthright and Conquest, and play through Birthright first. You couldn't ask me to be bothered to remember much of the story of that path if you had me at gunpoint, but I do remember enjoying playing through it well enough. I did feel genuinely bad about Azura sacrificing herself (and thus widowing poor Kaze), and while I kinda thought it was dumb that Xander just kept on fighting after Elise sacrificed herself (though I rationalized it as he probably just wanted to die at that point) the death of Elise was sorta weighty to me even if I had little attachment to them. I was sated well enough with the story since it was, as they said, kinda traditional... at least on the surface. Next was Conquest. Lemme bring you back around to the point about the "revolution from the inside" tagline. And yes, this is gonna delve into wanting it to be something it's not, but this is the expectation the marketing set me up with. I thought the way the story would pan out is that Corrin's army would never leave Nohr - in fact, they would be in open defiance to King Garon, and try (but at first fail) to rally everyone to their side. You would be at odds with both Hoshido and Nohr - the Hoshidans because they only care that you're Nohrian and the Nohrians because you are against Garon. You would work to disrupt Garon's operations and effectively raise up an army fit to fight a civil war, eventually finding the siblings joining your side. It would all culminated into a battle with the Nohrian King himself and the Hoshidan forces who've reached deep in your homeland and effectively become invading warmongers themselves. Now, I don't need to tell you that this is not at all what we got. Instead, we got a plot device railroading the game into a race to get Garon to sit upon the Hoshidan throne so that your dumb siblings could realize that, hey, Garon's a literal monster, as if it wasn't enough that he was a figurative monster. But back to me playing the game, I was able to dig the point about pretending to do the dirty work of Garon well enough - it came across as some sleek espionage that might culminate into a full-scale operation to dethrone Garon or change him somehow. But fast-forward to the back-to-back slaughter fests in Nestra and Cheve. Garon and his goons perform such horrific acts of cruelty that they basically become unjustifiable, and Corrin, understandably, can't take this brutal slaughter. Azura, who foolishly tried to exorcise Garon's demons and instead caused him to go on a rampage, leads Corrin to Valla to show them the truth about Garon - that he's a goo monster, basically. And you both come to the conclusion that he needs to sit on the throne to be revealed as this. It is from this exact point that the story takes a massive dive and starts being unlikable. At first you do your best to avoid unnecessary slaughter. But you end up slaughtering the denizens of the Kitsune Hamlet (sorta like how you slaughter the wolfskins in BR) and when you reach the major Hoshidan fortifications is where things just suck. You are able to only spare Sakura, her retainers, and Yukimura as the Nohrians just slaughter all the soldiers under their command for... reasons. You reach Takumi's Great Wall of Hoshido and you're ordered to slaughter everyone there, including two of my favorite characters Oboro and Takumi - I outright avoided taking down Oboro because you only actually just need to take down Takumi (and he doesn't die at that point anyway). You enter, and must slaughter Hinoka's forces next - except this time, with the coercion of Camilla, Hinoka and her retainers are spared. You march in the streets and watch Garon's thugs just cut down innocent civilians for no reason, and you do nothing about it. You finally reach Ryoma, kill him too, and then, and only then, are you finally allowed some degree of vindication as you get to, at last, kill the bastards that did all the horrible, irrationally evil things they did - Iago and Hans. And of course you kill Garon and Takumi, and that's all she wrote. But that is why I have such a strong distaste for the story in Conquest - why I hate its story with a passion. You end up either doing evil things or just letting evil things happen around you because of some stupid plot device. There's no justification or good reasoning behind why anything has to be the way it is. On top of it all, the game arbitrarily decides that I must kill some of my favorite characters from the other path or likely let them be killed by my detestable "allies". Not just Oboro and Takumi either, but also Saizo and Kaden. Okay, obviously Takumi wasn't gonna be spared because he yeets himself off a 50-foot wall and runs off (and is possessed in the same way Garon is), but why is it that the Hoshidan royal sisters and their retainers get spared but not the princes and their retainers? Everything about this path just irks me so wrong. While I was playing through Conquest, though, I also took to playing Revelation (yes, I'm calling it Revelation without the "s" at the end because, goddammit, that's what it's actually called). There was another bit of misleading I glommed onto, though I think that was because of some journalist outlet rather than official sources. It implied that in Revelation you would use Dragon Vein points (you know, the ones you use to upgrade your home castle) to buy units. As in, pick and choose your favorite characters from each path to use in this final path, which I'm gonna say right now would've been a hella cool idea - way better than what we actually got. Anyway, the revelations (hehe, did it again) in this path only served to ruin the overall story of Fates. All the pain, heartache, and sacrifice in the other two paths? Completely goddamn pointless, because this third ending exists where everyone reconciles their differences. And while there was some pandering and patting your avatar on the back in the other two paths, nowhere was this more prevalent than in Revelation, and it sucked. Now here's the thing. I'm not opposed to a "golden ending" being in a game like this. But the issue is there isn't enough struggle or sacrifice to make it feel like a deserved golden ending. If nothing else it should've at least been the most difficult path. I guess it is the most "difficult" path because I have difficulty mustering up the will to play through it more than once. But anyway, you just stroll up to Anankos and knock him on his ass, and everyone lives happily ever after. Oh, and Gunter betrays you, except it's fine because after you beat him up the younger princesses get together to heal him right up and he goes back to normal. Also, the reason this ending couldn't normally work was because of some nonsense about how if you talked about Valla you would just vanish... but, like, Azura knows about it, and that should be enough since she could try to lead others to Valla to learn the truth instead of just being quiet about it all. So this leads me to what I'm gonna say now. I do think the disdain people have for the story in Fates is justified. The story relies way too much on plot devices in railroading the events, most major characters have little to no good justifications for doing the things they do, and it's gut-wrenching for all the wrong reasons. I know that ultimately the idea was less about the kingdoms as a whole and more the individual characters and, more specifically, the families and how impossible it is to reconcile their differences, leading to inevitable tragedy, but the way a game is marketed has a big impact on what you expect from a game and people get justifiably angry when it's discovered that they were misled. We were outright told this game would include big choices (plural) and we were promised an unconventional, revolutionary story from Conquest when in reality we got a gently weeping accidental warmonger story. With that said, the game as a whole? I can't bring myself to hate it. There are things that bring me back to it. I do enjoy the characters in the vacuum of supports, the gameplay is pretty solid (though more and more I hate Revelation and its Binding Blade inspired maps), and the few ROM hacks people have made for it give it extended life for me. And I do remember genuinely enjoying Birthright - as a self-contained experience it's not the best, but it's enjoyable enough. Just wish it didn't have as many filler chapters as it did - all chapters that involved Iago just felt like a comical side arc with no actual purpose beyond padding. Now, can I judge the game's story on its own? It's hard to, honestly - to take away all the false expectations the marketers gave me, and just look at the game itself. But I don't think they'd change my opinion that the plot device nonsense is completely asinine and that having unjustifiably evil "allies" in Conquest completely ruins the point of fighting for the misunderstood kingdom - a kingdom that, while seeming rough around the edges, still seems like you're meant to sympathize with. But they're not sympathetic if the main guys running the show go around, raping, burning, and pillaging everything they see for no reason other than getting their f'ed up jollies off. I don't care what genre of media this is, this bad of writing shouldn't be acceptable anywhere.

I guess what I'm getting at is... mages suck in this game. And it feels like it was a deliberate reaction to how OP dark mages were in Awakening. But really, if the best mage one can muster is a unit that can neither tank more than one or two hits nor can reliably ORKO enemies, then maybe it's better to just not use mages at all and rely on exploiting natural unit weaknesses with specialized weapons that you're given (or use ninja Saizo to soften them up). I mean, it sure as hell wouldn't be the first time in the series that excluding certain class roles was a viable strat or "Horse Emblem" wouldn't have become a term. You can also have Felicia or Jakob class-change to Strategist right from the get-go, assuming you are willing to sacrifice the only Heart Seal you have available at the beginning of the route split. Well, and the money you'd need to spend on the Heart Seal.

Sometimes with hacking/modding it ain't about if the game itself is bad, but what the engine build is capable of. Echoes introduced cool things like dungeon exploration and quests which could be expanded upon to potentially make some cool ROM hacks in the future. Anyway, welcome. I'm unsure if you'll find very many people enthusiastic about hacking the 3DS games here, but they're out there. I myself am into finding Fates hacks to install, and have considered dabbling at least in writing supports (ain't quite as simple as just writing a basic dialogue between two characters, lots of formatting and tedious things go into it).

Definitely worse in Revelation: Odin, Nyx, Arthur, Effie... basically anyone that joins in the chapters after you recruit Camilla, sans of course the prepromoted units and some other exceptions. Also Gunter. In both BR and CQ you don't get an unpromoted unit any later than chapter 14, but in Revelation you're getting them as far into the game as 17 which is just excessive - even child units by that point automatically get offspring seals to ensure they match the rest of the army in strength. Odin is just abysmal - they did him so dirty in Revelation, it's downright offensive. And Gunter has his stats from when you left him off at Chapter 3, and by this point his stats are barely a match for the enemies you're encountering. Worse in Revelation, but not as terrible a decrease in strength as previously mentioned ones: Benny (still can be a solid tank, but he kinda struggles a bit), Saizo, Selena, Beruka, Kagero, Orochi, Rinkah, Hana, Subaki, Elise, Hinoka. You may question why I'm including units that are actually terrible such as Orochi or Rinkah. Well, that's because honestly they weren't great in Birthright either, so it's not a significant decrease in strength - you're basically just making stinky trash even stinkier. Selena and Beruka got shafted a bit, though - if you had to pick a sword-wielding retainer, go with Hinata, and really you only just need Camilla to be your axe monster. I think you can still make something of Benny if you wanted to, but it'll be an uphill battle. Saizo is actually still good, but he suffers a bit due to lower level join. Elise suffers the same problem as most post-Camilla chapter units, but because she's a healer it doesn't matter quite as much. Hinoka probably should've joined as a promoted unit, because I feel that contributes to her being kinda less potent - she's still viable, but you need a bit more effort than you do in BR to make her good. Kinda the same performance: Most royal units, Oboro, Hinata, all neutral units (Kaze, Mozu, et al), Reina. All the royal characters were pretty powerful to begin with, so the fact that they're the best units in Revelation is honestly no surprise. Oboro had barely any competition with other units in Birthright, and because she joins at a reasonable time with good enough stats to be viable while many other units either stayed terrible or were made terrible there still isn't much for her to compete with. Hinata is also sorta alright, but like in BR he's in a weird class given his stat spread. Reina remains a fairly viable, if somewhat feeble, option, and it's hard to judge the neutral characters because they can appear at different points or have certain caveats about them that make the call hard to make whether they're better or worse in Revelation. Actually better: Hayato, whichever Corrin retainer you get first, Keaton. In BR Hayato starts as a level ONE unit. He's just terrible in BR because of that. But in Revelation, he starts at a solid level 9 and generally has the best stat spread out of all the mages apart from Leo, not particularly favoring or failing in any one stat. Either Jakob or Felicia, if obtained first, will remain a fairly valuable asset in early game, and could be kept into late game - Jakob in particular can start as a healer until Sakura comes along and then switch to a combat role relatively easier than most units can. Keaton, meanwhile, has the benefit of joining Revelation a chapter earlier than he would in Conquest, while also having the same stats as he would in Conquest. Compound this with the fact that his class makes him a solid unit that can bend to fit any situation and that many non-royal units are just not great, and he's likely viable enough to be kept into endgame. Substantially better: Silas, Sakura. Silas is already a fairly solid unit in the other two paths, but in Revelation he stomps on everyone who joins the same chapter he joins (minus Elise, 'cuz the one thing he can't do is heal people). For some reason he's supremely jacked 'cuz he starts at level 18 and thus is not only viable to bring into later chapters but you may actually see an improvement in your army's performance until you recruit the rest of the princes and princesses in the game. Sakura has the unique benefit of having just a single healer to compete with - Corrin's retainer. If Corrin's retainer is Jakob, you have all the incentive in the world to make her your exclusive healer, and no other viable healer comes around for another six chapters - plenty of opportunity to healbot like crazy to jack up her levels. She's still pretty good when Felicia is your first retainer instead because Sakura's got a better stat spread that enables you to let her tank the occasional hit if either you need a bait or if you screw up, and that stat spread means she could actually fulfill a secondary combat role when it comes up (though E-rank weaponry as a promoted unit, egh). Really, it just comes down to the fact that she has little competition. Wait, they existed?: Flora, Fuga. Okay, the latter doesn't appear in any path except Revelation, but honestly what can one make of a unit like Flora who is probably more similar to an offspring unit than a standard unit since she joins whenever the hell you get a maxed out turret (I think, don't remember for sure)? I really wish they had her join earlier in the game, it's lame that one of Corrin's own retainers refuses to join until the tides of battle are already strongly in Corrin's favor. By the time you get Flora most of your team will have been built, so really she's just good as a backup unit in case someone dies and you aren't inclined to reset to save them. Lmao, literally dies a chapter after you recruit her: Scarlet. Why even bother, Intelligent Systems? Seriously, sod off with that shit. And I mean, she's a good, solid unit, too! Why shove that in my face only to toss it in the trash the very next moment? This is why whenever I play the game with a save editor anymore I just edit the save so that she isn't dead, because her death was pointless and stupid and the story in Revelation just sucks in general so I really don't give a damn, lmao. Really, the summary is that some units change greatly, some units stay the same, but for the most part you're gonna be using the princes and princesses unless you're challenging yourself through unit restriction. For a normal playthrough, apart from the princes and princesses I'll probably just be using the units I already like (Oboro, Mozu, and maybe some 2nd Gen units like Shiro, Forrest, or Velouria). If you want to do away with the princes and princesses, however, then there are some very clear winners and losers among the lot you recruit, and it seems like there's an obvious slant in favor of the Hoshidans. It's a shame, too, because I had such a dramatically different vision for what Revelation was gonna be, mostly because of a severely misleading article about it; I thought it would have you recruit units not through normal means but rather through the accumulation of dragon vein points, so you would pick and choose who to use in any given playthrough. And honestly, I feel like that would've been cooler than what we actually got. I've become so much colder towards Revelation, I went from thinking it was good for what it is to despising the level design almost to an irrational degree, goddamn I hate Mr. Fuga's Wild Ride and the ice breaking and the moving platforms and the everything in this path that isn't Mokushu or the Destroyed Town.

Yeah, what exactly do you want out of the union between the characters? Do you want to give your avatar access to as many good classes as possible while also having very good stats, are you trying to give improve the other unit in the union with a great partner seal class, or do you want a good kid? Or is it a mix of the three? All I can really say, in general, is that you probably won't want to focus on magic, the Oni Savage, Knight, and Cavalier classes could benefit Kagero and Oboro quite a bit, and that boon/bane don't have much impact on Kana's stats (I say "much" because it'll still affect max stats, but that's only a consideration for basically endgame, and it's only a marginal amount of difference at that point, particularly because if you don't grind Kana probably will never reach max level). I think the biggest consideration you have to make is the spouse. That's why I say don't focus on magic, because by virtue of picking magic you'd likely also be inclined to pick a magic class as secondary class which really doesn't help Kagero nor Oboro, both of whom have pretty bad magic (Oboro's is a bit better, but still not great). They'll generally want the same classes - Oni Savage, Cavalier, Knight, or possibly Wyvern Knight - and in regards to the avatar's boons and banes really it's just a matter of what you think is best for your avatar. I'd say Cavalier is the safest bet because high movement is always good and the stat spread is pretty even. Pair up isn't a huge factor in how you want to build your character. The bonuses can be a little nice, but unless you're really only barely managing to win battles against foes they're not a big deal like support bonuses can be in the GBA games. And as long as you aren't relying on magic or magic classes, the pair up bonuses both the avatar and their spouse will give one another will generally complement one another anyway.

I thought that's how it was by default, but yeah, that's how it's supposed to be. Whatever those other people were saying sounds like nonsense. Global is, I'm pretty sure, just for the program itself, not any of the UI elements related to the specific games the program supports (the audio files, the images of characters and backgrounds, etc.).

Did you download the resource packs? I do remember one had to download the resources and the application itself separately, and merge the resource folder in the pack with the one that is already in the application's root folder. You want the Awakening Core pack to get the visual elements of the supports. You may also want to try running the application in administrator mode, if all else fails. If you have this in a place in your computer that is typically locked (e.g. underneath the Program Files folders), your computer might be blocking the app from using certain things.