Anomalocaris
-
Posts
1,777 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Anomalocaris
-
-
8 hours ago, Fabulously Olivier said:
I honestly couldn't view said image. Even zooming in on it was just unreadable.
-
Myrmidon
-
Mercenary
- Hero
- Swordmaster
-
Thief
- Assassin
- Dancer
-
Mercenary
-
Soldier
-
Cavalier
- Paladin
- Holy Knight (Now an alternative to Paladin instead of a promotion)
- Dark Knight (Ditto)
-
Pegasus Knight
- Falcon Knight
-
Cavalier
-
Fighter
-
Brigand
- Warrior
-
Wyvern Rider
- Wyvern Lord
-
Armored Knight
- Fortress Knight
- Great Knight (Now an alternative to Fortress Knight instead of a promotion)
-
Archer
- Sniper
- Bow Knight (Now an alternative to Sniper instead of a promotion)
-
Brawler
- Grappler
-
Brigand
-
Monk
-
Priest
- Bishop
- Gremory (Now an alternative to Bishop and Warlock instead of a promotion)
-
Mage
- Warlock
- Gremory again
-
Dark Mage
- Dark Bishop
-
Priest
This is just flattening the existing class tree so that every existing moveset has a final-tier representative (except Soldier, which would require new classes). Trickster, Mortal Savant, War Monk, Valkyrie, and Dark Flier are all absent, but could be added as new movesets branching off of Thief, Mercenary, Brawler, Priest, and Warlock respectively. War Master is also missing, but redundant when both Warrior and Grappler are in the final tier unless you think it deserves a distinct moveset too.
-
Myrmidon
-
On 7/24/2022 at 9:44 AM, Archeleon said:
To me it always felt like they could have squished the Advanced and Master tiers together and buffed the Advanced ones a bit. Go from Thief to either Assassin or Trickster, Mercenary to Swordmaster or Mortal Savant. Pegasus Knight straight into Falcon Knight. Cavalier to Paladin, Holy Knight. Armored Knight to Fortress Knight or Great Knight. Instead of Brigand going into Wyvern Rider, WR would be Intermediate from Fighter and go into Wyvern Lord. Brigand into Warrior or War Monk. Archer into Sniper or Bow Knight. Brawler into Grappler (Speedy) or War Master (Beefy). Priest into Bishop or Valkyrie. Mage into Warlock/Gremory or Dark Flier. Dark Mage back to Intermediate going into Dark Bishop or Dark Knight (Would be Tome class with some magic lance stuff). Something along the lines of that.
I actually tried flattening Advanced and Master Tier together and it makes for a MUCH better class system. Edit: Minor typo, listed Fortress Knight twice and forgot to include Great Knight, but it should be pretty intutive where it goes.
Every moveset except Soldier has a representative in the final tier, instead of some just disappearing or requiring a dismount to use. Pegasus Knights no longer have to go through Paladin to reach Falcon Knight.
War Master and Mortal Savant are gone while Hero has returned, but I think that's a fair trade. Trickster is gone too, but it and the other three Wolves classes could be wedged in as new movesets.
-
Edit: Accidental double-post.
-
25 minutes ago, Jotari said:
This might sound stupid, but are you trading them for other materials? That's where most of mine end up going.
...I didn't even realize the Smithing Stones from trading at the Supply Master and the Smithing Stones that actually sit in your inventory were the same currency. That explains it.
Well, I have no other use for Smithing Stones anyway, so it hasn't been a problem, was just worried I was losing them to something else.
26 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:Hmmm... Might not be as aggravating for a mage as Pegasus knights would be.
Also, what's with the supports? Because I find it really odd that some characters have an A support with no C or B beforehand, among other oddities.
You can probably handle it with a mage, though you might not get the S-rank if she's too slow at killing them. It really does seem to want you to reclass her into an axe class for Crusher.
There's just fewer support conversations this time around. I think it's fine, since this is an action game, not an SRPG. The previous FE Warriors did something similar where every character could gain support points with each other, but only certain character pairs had conversations (and only at A-rank).
-
4 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:
Exactly what enemies are on her side of the map? Pegasus/Falcon Knights?
I believe it was horseback units like Paladins.
-
Is anybody else encountering an odd issue where their Smithing Stones mysteriously disappear? Mine keep bottoming out at like 1 or 2 for no reason, even though I'm not spending them on anything (I'm exclusively forging Umbral Steel/Mythril weapons at this point).
-
So, I did some testing with the increased Combat Art Experience strategy in place.
As we expected, it seems to double the gain rate.
- Using Wheelsweep, which takes 10 uses to level up, it levelled up after exactly 5 uses.
- Using Miasma Delta, which takes 5 uses to level up, it levelled up after 3 uses and gained a small bit of progress (1/10th) toward the next rank.
-
21 hours ago, vikingsfan92 said:
As for roster additions for three hopes my top 2 are both for the empire and already have models in game Fleche and Ladislava. Judith and Nadar probably should be playable for the alliance. Not sure who to add for the kingdom maybe one of the newly shown dads?
There are still Gilbert and Cyril as far as characters who it makes sense to be Azure Gleam-exclusive. Not the most exciting choices in the world, but they're there.
-
12 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:
Okay, thanks.
Are there are particularly tricky paralogues in this game? And if so, what makes them troublesome?
I wouldn't call it tricky per se, but Annette's assumes you've built her as an axe fighter rather than a mage, with her side of the map having nothing but lance enemies.
-
59 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:
Also, how much of a disadvantage must you be at to get "Against All Odds" (which says defeat an enemy general while at a disadvantage)? Because it isn't clear, but it seems that using a weapon type that is bad against the enemy's ain't enough.
It means being against someone with a super-effective weapon. Like killing an Archer when you're a Pegasus Knight, killing an Armorslayer-equipped Mercenary when you're an Armored Knight, etc.
-
8 minutes ago, Jotari said:
Also, just in general, they gave us Trickster but not Dark Flier? I dont see why that wasnt an option. Poor Constance.
Trickster only made it in because they could easily rebrand it as a promotion for Assassin and recycle the same moveset. The other three DLC classes would all need new movesets to go along with them, and movesets are the development bottleneck here.
-
I think characters having associated weapons outside their preferred classes (like Lorenz's Axe of Ukonvasara or Mercedes' Tathlum Bow) is fine, honestly. Good, even. It gives you actual motivation to try out different classes with characters instead of just keeping them stuck in their preferred classes all game.
I do agree that there should have been a few more multi-weapon classes than just Fighter; at the very least, I think Dark/Holy Knights should have had an alternative Tome-based moveset and Wyvern Lords an alternative Lance-based moveset, but I don't think just recycling the animations like you suggested would look good at all in an action game like this. They'd need to be wholly different movesets.
-
56 minutes ago, Corran said:
So I've seen a lot of classes in this game where the tutorial says to press and hold X during a strong attack to shorten the charge time of the next class action. I've tried to do this, and found that it works maybe 10% of the time, at the most. Is there some trick to this I'm missing? I feel like when it works, I see that the gauge starts partially filled.
It's really misleading, and took me a long time to realize what it meant. Contrary to what it says, it doesn't mean holding the button during the actual strong attack.
When you finish a strong attack on those classes, you'll very briefly see a white glow around the character. Press and hold X during that.
-
3 minutes ago, Tediz64 said:
i don't know how to edit the graph itself so i'll leave that up to you. The head the column could be named "Level usage count" possibly as an example and underneath it the numbers could be like Lv2:5/Lv3:10 as a sample. We can edit the paragraph i added to the two separate pages and state simply that one can take it from level 1 to level 3 in one battlefield provided they have the durability for all the usages. As you suggested, we can also stipulate what the effects are of the chapter exp gain once we confirm them.
Yeah, I'll take care of it when I get the chance.
Thank you for researching this, combat art exp was something I've been curious about for a while but didn't have a good opportunity to test.
-
Just now, Tediz64 said:
Hmm....i'm thinking. So i'm trying to visualize it and think of how the random user would see it. So are you suggesting we make the graphs on each one wider by adding two more columns with the head of each column being listed as example "Usage to reach level 2" and "Usage to reach level 3" and then put the number underneath it? For a laptop/computer it could work, but for mobile phone users they'd have to start sliding their finger on the screen to reach the other end of the graph so they can see the columns. Also what are we going to add more columns for when they have the chapter effect of combat art experience increase gains suggesting other numbers? Or just add a paragraph at the top stating that when that effect is active, the numbers are cut in half?
I was thinking just one column with the two values separated by a slash, actually, like the weapon durability.
Combat art experience gain from a chapter effect probably doesn't need to be listed in the chart itself, a blurb at the top will probably be fine. Assuming it just doubles the amount of experience gained, which I suspect it does.
-
5 minutes ago, Tediz64 said:
I don't mean to double post but i saw you edited so now I'm slightly atlering my response as well
The game makes not mention of combat arts/spells being broken into tiers. You are choosing to word it as such and break it down like that for your own purposes. Wording it like that on a wiki isn't user friendly (by which i mean, the average person reading that will have to engage more in comprehending what they are looking at when they return back to looking at their game screen) And despite might increasing (they visibily add a little plus symbol for level 2 and another plus symbol at level 3) the word small, medium, and large don't go away.
So now i ask, why do dislike the way i choose to word it? Because of the exceptions of self buffs and 3 spells? Or is this problem deeper than that? Are you unhappy with me making contributions to this game's wiki? Did you want to test this yourself and provide the info first like as if this is some kind of competition to fill out the wiki? Help me understand why you are challenging me please. I want to know because if you don't want to work together, i can stop posting.
Yes, the tier thing is just me breaking it down for my own understanding. Not terms I intended to use on the wiki, since it's not an actual aspect of the game.
And yes, I dislike the might-based description because of the exceptions of self-buffs and certain white magic. It's none of the other, weirdly personal stuff you're suggesting, I'm not that petty.
As I said in my previous two posts, would just listing the values in the charts themselves suffice? Then we bypass all the exceptions, and more importantly new users can look up arts/spells by name instead of having to memorize each of their might values.
-
7 minutes ago, Tediz64 said:
Hey look buddy. I asked VincentASM when the game was coming that i wanted an account so I could made edits and make contributions to this game's wiki page. 3 years from now a person is going to get this game for the first time and have loads of questions. I want people to come to serenes and literally have all the answers readily available to them. I like conducting experiments and researching. I also love this franchise and would be happy to contribute to the community and help out cause i come here often and use the info here while playing so i sure do appreciate all the effort past people put into filling out these pages on numerous FE games. I'd like to do the same thing, but i don't want to do that if i'm gonna get challenged every step of the way. I had asked when the game came out if anyone was going to lead this project (filling out the wiki) and if anyone was going to take charge by assigning us tasks to research so that we don't overlap or waste time with multiple experiments that have the same goal. Now all i can say is that, i won't come here and provide info unless i've tested it RIGOROUSLY and replicated the results. I do in fact use the scientific method and also had numerous pages filled out in contributions to the first Fire Emblem Warriors game so this isn't my first time playing a musou or nintendo brand warriors game. You can be confident in my results cause i wouldn't give them out unless I tested them heavily. People who are likely to stop by and check out serenes's wiki page are likely going to read that data we provide so I will be very clear in how i articulate my words so people can read and comprehend the info we have. So can we work together? Not this nitpicking over word choice or how things are phrased.
Cause both of us would have had to mention and stipulate the few exceptions in combat arts/spells. Saying the durability cost would have or could be misleading because the displayed number could be altered if someone already ate a meal at the camp or has the armsthift ability equipped and then went into their convoy/charater page to view details of the combat art/spell (regardless if they are in camp or are already deployed onto the battlefield). I already thought of this ahead of time (seeing an altered number). If a person who is already the type to come to a wiki such as serenes or a stranger using google gets directed here, after they read the page's details on leveling and see the info, they are going to go back to looking at their game and see their move's details and then proceed to grind so they can max out their stuff. I worded it carefully with that in mind so they can just focus on the grind . I use wiki(s) and guides often so I know what is considered being worded friendly and simple and i make contributions to another site known as fandom on other game franchises so i really put effort into tailoring info for other people's consumption/use. So i ask again, can we work together?
I'm not trying to get in your way. I suggested listing it for each combat art, that way we don't have to worry about exceptions. Durability isn't ideal for the reasons you listed, but might isn't ideal either due to buffs and white magic spells that don't have a listed might value, so I think just adding level-up costs directly to the table should be fine, yes?
-
16 minutes ago, Tediz64 said:
But if we list this way, that will exclude Agnea's Arrow, War Strike, and the exclusive CAs gained from the weapons such as Eviscerate since they follow different durability costs but they do still have a listing of Large in might. You'd have to add in a paragraph stipulating that those that cost more still follow the same rules as those that start off costing 20 at base, where as i'd have to add a paragraph stipulating that self buffs plus 3 spells should be treated as equals to others. Either way we still reach the same result. The only thing left to be tested at this point is which i'm currently working on, the bonus multiplier from the strategy and the unique combat arts gained from weapons.
I've already tested the theory with a handful of characters all using the same named combat arts/spells and kept getting the exact same result. You need 5 and 10 to get to level 2 and 3 respectively for small might, you need 10 and 15 uses to get to level 2 and 3 respectively for medium might, and then you need 15 and 20 uses to get to level 2 and 3 respectively for large might. What led me to my hypothesis that it was tied to might listing, was more or less just a starting point for me to start my experiments. It really isn't that important. All that mattered was i had a starting point, and then after numerous experiments, reached a conclusion. I got to a point where i could share the data with others since it was tested rigorously that way, when others set out to accomplish it, they reach the same result; a maxed out combat art/spell at level 3.
I just tested Jeralt with Atrocity; despite having a durability cost of 44, it levelled up after exactly 15 uses, just like a 20 Durability art, so it seems pretty consistent. That's good to know.
I don't think it's specifically tied to might so much that every combat art and spell in the game is internally sorted into three tiers.
- Basic tier which costs 10 durability, takes 15 uses to level-cap, and has small might when it's an attack.
- Intermediate tier which costs 15 durability, takes 25 uses to level cap, and has medium might when it's an attack.
- Advanced tier which costs 20 durability, takes 35 uses to level cap, and has large might when it's an attack.
Some of the special skills, such as those tied to Heroes' Relics, have increased durability cost, but otherwise behave as expected for their tier in every other regard.
Might increases while durability cost decreases with level-ups, but cooldown time seems to stay the same.
I think we might be better off just listing the level-up costs for each art individually, instead of pinning it on might or durability (both of which have exceptions).
-
14 minutes ago, Corran said:
I can now confirm that I got the gatekeeper in Chapter 5 of Azure Gleam. This seems to confirm that you have to be on your final route(not third playthrough) and then you get him in chapter 5. This is when he first shows up in your camp anyway, as he's not there in chapter 4 on any route.
Good to know. Guess that settles it, he joins in Chapter 5 once you're on your third route (not counting repeats).
15 minutes ago, Tediz64 said:I don't think we should compare it against durability cost since that can be clearly be muddied with all the numerous available discounts (the level it is at, food, and the abililty from archer). Instead we should compare it against might listing and simply state that self buffs are treated as a large might, and that the 3 spells (Ward, Silence, and Restore) are also treated as large might for leveling purposes.
I disagree with this, I think that durability bracket is more useful a comparison because it applies to buffs and white magic that don't have listed might values. The discounts are irrelevant to the actual bracket it's in, but I was thinking of listing the experience requirements on a per-skill basis anyway. Once I do a little more testing.
Oh, and the "greatly reduced" durability cost meal reduced Atrocity from 44 to 30, and Lightstrike from 10 to 7.
-
1 minute ago, Tediz64 said:
Well, it seems there are currently known only 5 combat arts (one for each weapon type) and 2 spells (Agnea's Arrow and Quake from Black/Dark respectively) that exceed the 20 durability cost but they do still follow the same leveling requirments as any other Large might combat art (i can atest to the axe one and at a later time i'll also get the gauntlet one and sword one maxed out).
As for self buffs or spells that don't have a might listing, but do cost the same as CA/spell that is listed as Large, we can just note in the page that they are treated as equals to the aforementioned for leveling purposes.
What I meant was that the wiki could document level-up requirements compared against durability costs, since it's more universally accomodating than might. We just might need to say "Durability cost of 20 or higher", if we're correct that all of those special arts still have the same level-up requirements.
There's also the increased CA experience gain strategy we'll have to account for. I think it might double the exp gain rate.
-
2 minutes ago, Corran said:
Have we factored in the discounts caused by food buffs?
Nah, I'm looking at it without any food buffs right now.
Food buffs only discount the cost during battle anyway, I believe.
-
5 minutes ago, Tediz64 said:
When i first set out to test the usage and leveling, it didn't even occur to me that War Strike had more than a 20 durability cost. I just started counting how many times i used it and waited till the result screen to see if it matched. It wasn't until i realized i started a new chapter and had War Strike on a new person and didn't have the meal from the Kitchen taking off 4 dura, that i really started to feel it. It took almost 9 battles to max it out and in my head i was thinking "what the hell is the differnce and why is it taking so long". Then i was holding the button down to pull up the combat arts and saw that big number and immediately face palmed since i didn't document it in my notes. 😅
However, it did still follow the might's listing and ended up with 15/20 uses. At the moment on my current file, i only have access to two combat arts that greatly exceed that durability cost (Balthus' and Edelgard's CA) so once i take those two to max, i'll report back. If you have access to Dimitri's or Claude's (cause i'm currently on a Scarlet Blaze run) unique combat arts, could you test them out? What do you mean document it by durability cost instead of might?
I do have Dimitri and Claude's, but Dimitri's already maxxed Atrocity out at Lv.3 and Claude's has made progress and so cannot be fairly tested.
I can give somebody else the Crest of Blaiddyd to see how long it takes to level up Atrocity, though.
Bigger issue I've found now is that the data from the spreadsheet isn't accurate about relic weapon combat arts (It just lists their durability costs as 20/18/16, yet in-game I'm getting some weird values like 22, 19, etc). Gonna need to do some testing on that, but for now I've blanked all the values I cannot confirm with certainty.
-
7 minutes ago, Tediz64 said:
Using War Strike (the previously known War Master skill but now transferred over to Warrior) as an example being an outlier to the normal 20 cost, it still followed the Large might rule of 15/20 uses. Self buffs such as Battle Trance and and Mortal Struggle also followed the large rule i theorized, and spells such as Restore and Ward also followed the large rule (which checks out with the durability cost). So yes, it coincides with durability cost. When i set out to test all of this, i already had the hypothesis it was based off the combat art/spell's might listing but i had to figure out the buffs/others but then it ended up matching with what i had guessed.
Any outliers probably follow the large rule but i've yet to truly test it with combat arts from the special weapons such as Balthus' Eviscerate or the exclusive ones such as Claude's. I haven't gotten to mastering those yet so at the moment, i don't have that information. Worst case scenario it might have it's own separate numbers for leveling but given the previous examples it'll probably be something like 20/25 at worst.
So then it might be better to document it by durability cost instead of might, to accomodate self-buffs and healing spells that don't have associated might values.
The only thing that needs testing is stuff with more than 20 durability cost.
-
27 minutes ago, Tediz64 said:
Okay so my results are based off 7 different combat arts and 4 spells that have small might; 4 combat arts and 2 spells that have medium might, 3 Large might combat arts and 2 spells and my theory and thus far results have shown to be consistent.
Small might CA/spells take 5 uses to get to level 2 and 10 uses after that to get to level 3 (so 15 uses total to go from 1 to 3); Medium might CA/spells take 10 uses to get to level 3 and 15 uses after that to get to level 3 (so 25 uses total to go from 1 to 3); and Large might CA/spells take 15 uses to get level 2 and 20 uses after that to get to level 3 (so 35 uses total to go from 1 to 3); and last but not least self-buffs are treated as Large might so they follow the 15/20 uses rule. I'm also testing class exp gain but will return later when my results are concrete. I just wanted to share the leveling info for CA/spells. I'll head over to the wiki to update it
Does this also coincide with durability cost? Most Combat Arts/Spells are either 10, 15, or 20 durability cost by default, with only certain ones exceeding that.
Thoughts on Class Trees/Weapon-Access
in Fire Emblem Warriors: Three Hopes
Posted · Edited by Anomalocaris
Hero would use the Myrmidon/Mercenary moveset. It's bizarre how that moveset stops existing after Advanced tier, and (gender-lock aside) Hero makes the most sense as a continuation of it.
I did consider splitting the gauntlet and bow classes away from Fighter, but while that works for gauntlets (Brawler->Grappler->War Master), it doesn't work for bows without either adding a new class or making Sniper promote into Bow Knight again, which is what I was trying to avoid.
Yeah, the only solution to that would be adding Halberdier and Sentinel as infantry promotions for Soldier, but I didn't want to add any classes that weren't already in Three Houses or Three Hopes. That would be the ideal addition, though.