Shanty Pete's 1st Mate

To your core question - a two-weeks notice is generally a courtesy, for the employer's sake. Not providing one means they may be more reluctant to, say, provide a glowing recommendation for future employers. But if you don't care about that - it sounds like you've got your next position figured out - it's not like you have to do it. I would recommend providing as much notice as possible, once you get your starting date. If that's shorter than two weeks, your current boss can take it up with Uncle Sam. Best of luck going forward!

Sounds like a neat project! But, I have a few questions on this: Which difficulty - Normal, or Hard? How long a timeframe will each player be permitted? Will there be "backups/alternates", in case someone can't fulfill their chapter obligation? And, do I need prior experience recording gameplay on-screen, or is this something even a novice like me could accomplish? I might be available to participate, depending on the answers. Thanks!

Interesting! Looks very rudimentary, so it must not have gotten super far into development. The race track looks very reminiscent of Panda Terrace, from the third game. I wonder if they would've taken cues from other classic stages, like Tree Tops or Shady Oasis? Would've been cool to have Bianca and Ripto as playable characters, among others. More ambitiously, perhaps there could've been flying races, too, reminiscent of Spyro's own flying stages.

I've been thinking about this one for a while now! But first, who am I actually counting? I'll explain below: As for how I'd rate the games, let me start with the "worst" for them, and climb up to the "best". I could say a lot, but I'll keep my typed-out words brief. This was a lot of fun to compose. Feel free to give any feedback!

Yes, I would recommend it. Even if you don't wind up using some of them, better to have a battalion around as an option, than not. Last chance, I believe, is during chapter 21, before the battle at the end of the month. If you have the DLC, I think you can sacrifice certain items to the Pagan Altar to convert into Renown. Otherwise, I don't think there's anything you can "take with you", apart from the battalions.

I broadly agree with this, with the caveat that, I think having a final boss or primary antagonist "not in their right mind" CAN work... if they still have a clear and comprehensible motivation. Like, take (Tellius spoilers) Likewise, in Three Houses (more spoilers) So, yeah. Hopefully some more interesting motivations than "Manaketes be meshugganeh" going foward.

Ooh. This is making me strongly consider replaying Pokemon Y, while Wonder Trade is still a thing. That was a great innovation, and I'll be sad to see it go. My guess is, fans will set up their own independent servers, like we've seen for DS titles that use Internet. But I'm not sure how complicated those might be to access.

While I'm the first to criticize "Binding Blade" and "Blazing Blade" for sounding to similar - to the extent that I almost exclusively refer to them instead by number - I think "Blazing Blade" works, for story reason (spoilers ahead): So... that's why I think the subtitle works, thematically. Even as I will maintain, it was phenomenally stupid to give one sword the power to summon literal flames, and have that one NOT be the "Blazing Blade". Almost as dumb as, say, giving two games in direct sequence with each other a name that varies by exactly three letters.

To be clear, that's true of Crimson Flower as well, yes? To treat Edelgard's "knowledge" as wholly correct, would be the same as taking the Church's history at face-value. Thanks for this insight! This was basically my interpretation for why the "official Church history" didn't paint Rhea in a wholly bad light. Having said that, I don't think we can take it for granted that they had the majority of humanity on their side. The mere fact that they gained followers and rebelled, doesn't tell us anything directly about the Nabateans' rule. Maybe they were benevolent, or perhaps they committed atrocities. Or, they may have tried to be "hands-off", letting humans deal with their own stuff. This seems like its own kind of propaganda. For starters, Fódlan wasn't populated exclusively by humans. It included Humans, Nabateans, and Agarthans, at the very least. A totally representative government would include all groups, although that never happens. Second, Wilhelm was, in fact, a human. All of Fódlan's political rulers, since that war, have been human. The only exception is Rhea/Seiros, who blurs the lines between "religious" and "political" authority. Sure, many of them have "dragon's blood", but if that's to their discredit, then Nemesis and the Ten Elites must share such a penalty. Third, whether the Church "tarnishes" Nemesis' legacy is inherently subjective. They refer to him and his allies as Heroes, so they're not doing a very good job of it. If they wanted to "tarnish" him, they could've told the truth - that Nemesis killed a little girl in her sleep, and used her spine as a weapon to slaughter her family members. They don't portray Nemesis as "positively" as they could, but they certainly could've been far more "negative" in what they said about him.

It's pretty fun! A really cool way to revitalize the "F-Zero formula", and bring back a dormant franchise. It's a bit chaotic, but seems to reward skilled play. I haven't played too much, and haven't yet placed in the single digits, or even seen a Grand Prix to completion. Maybe someday, though!

Are we human? Or are we Dancer? This class is vital, let's rank 'em all! There we go. There's not a huge breadth between positions here, and I only feel confident in my "first" and "last/ninth" placements. Dancing is such a powerful tactic to have, but the games always find a way to balance the ones who offer it.

They seemed to be going for "relatability" with SoV Alm. He's a mostly chill guy with some funny charm, and at most a (largely justified) disdain for Rigel. While a harsher Alm would've matched the "Alm is Duma, Celica is Mila" duality, I can understand why they didn't go for that, as it'd be hard to make Alm likeable to a lot of players. They played it safe, and the story suffered as a result. The true villain of the game is the Sluice Gate guy. "I won't open this without orders from the Royal Family, who all died, meaning it's my duty to doom all of Zofia!" Hope he goes to the same "NPC hell" as the Silessian Mage who blocks Sigurd and co. from intervening to save Mahnya. Totally unnecessary! We already had Lukas, the ginger stud.

TFW you spend all your money on Super Repels so you're not obligated to swap your level 30 Quilava out for a level 3 Caterpie. Bold of you to assume Bartre is getting to level 5 Warrior in this design. Kishuna: ... Isn't the reason "I only have so many promotion items, and if I promote Lute now, I might be screwed on Phantom Ship where I have to bring unpromoted Artur"? Like, surely, you wouldn't want to promote willy-nilly, given that whoever you just promoted will only be deployable, like, a third of the time going forward.

Waiting on my royalty check, GameFreak. Never responded, but this could be really cool! Definitely appreciate it as a counterpart to Tri Attack, with even the status effects switching over. Although, I'd consider something like "Triple Trauma" for it.

Maybe. There's still a ton that we don't know about blood pacts. We might have to leave this as "agree to disagree", especially, as it's wandered dramatically from the original topic. Well, we could just make the Greil Mercenaries weaker. Shave a couple levels off here and there. It would suck not having a flier for most of Part III. That said, Haar is... interesting. He doesn't have all that much reason to fight with the Greil Mercenaries. Marcia practically has to beg him to help Princess Elincia. Then in Part III, he's not even helping the Crimeans anymore. Sure, he probably likes the idea of busting up some Begnion troops, but I don't recall him taking any stance toward the Laguz, or Gallia. Would it make sense for him to fight for Daein? Eh, not really either. He has no affection for Pelleas or Micaiah, and probably wouldn't be keen on doing the Senate's bidding. If there'd be any cause for him to join, it'd be because Jill is already there. We definitely should have some of those, yes. But I'd like to see some characters who actually have a reason to fight in their war. Give us an actual racist, who's excited at the prospect of his own "stuffed laguz". Someone who actually reflects the unresolved problems of Daein, and makes the moral lines of the conflict all the clearer.

I don't believe that's accurate. A country cannot literally be a signatory; rather, a person with authority over a country is a signatory. A blood pact is broken by the destruction of the document, and the death of at least one of the parties signatory to it. In the case of the document's continued existence beyond the original signatory's lifespans, the obligations of the pact are "passed on" to whoever next occupies the same position. So, let's say Lekain's grandfather, and Naesala's father, signed a blood pact. Let's even suppose that "Kilvas must obey Begnion" is a term of the pact. Per the rules, as we know them, assuming the continued existence of the document, the "heirs" to the Blood Pact would be Naesala and Lekain. Per the pre-established rules of Blood Pacts, the destruction of the document, and the death of Lekain (or Naesala), would result in the termination of the Pact. The text of the Pact would be immaterial, in the same way that the printed words "you will not light me on fire" do little to save a sheet of paper from being consumed in flames. In other words, if we take it for granted that Naesala is correct - that, even with Lekain's death, destroying the document alone will not free him of the Blood Pact - then the only logical conclusion is that Lekain's death is immaterial to the execution if the Pact. Ergo, neither Lekain, nor his direct predecessors, were signatory to the Kilvas Blood Pact. Incidentally, in the international cut, this detail is totally omitted: Perhaps this change was a mistake, or perhaps it was made to evade the unexplained ("wait, why would Naesala's blood pact work differently?"), and give a more satisfying resolution. In any case, if we're taking the International script as canon, then I'm almost certainly wrong. My argument applies to the "extended canon".

Actually, going by the extended script: So, Naesala believes that Lekain's death won't terminate the Blood Pact. This indicates that Begnion's signatory wasn't Lekain, and it wasn't Lekain's predecessor (either as "Duke Gaddos", or as "Vice-Minister"). My suspicion - going with the previous "outranks" comment, Lekain's "Senate" comment, and Naesala's conversation with Sephiran - is that the signatory was a previous Prime Minister of Begnion. Ergo, by killing the current Prime Minister, and then destroying the document, Kilvas would be freed of the Pact. In which case, "one day" comes sooner than later.

Hm... yeah, this model is plausible. From my end, though, when they recover the Blood Pact binding Kilvas from Lekain and destroy it, there's an implication that "this was responsible for all the bad stuff Naesala did!" But maybe that's just my own (mis?)reading of it. Actually, digging deeper, things get even weirder. From Naesala's boss convo with Lekain: So, the Kilvas blood pact wasn't signed by Lekain, nor by his direct ancestor, but by someone "higher up" than him. Going further, with Naesala's conversation with Sephiran: Sephiran was aware of the pact, and while it doesn't hold him responsible for it, it also doesn't disclaim the possibility. Perhaps he orchestrated it, acting as Lehran, between the King of Kilvas and a leader of Begnion? Say, a past Prime Minister? This would mean Sephiran would inherit the "controller" aspect, as the current Prime Minister of Begnion. As an aside, it would be totally in-character for Sephiran to compel Naesala to fight alongside Daein in the Mad King's War. Or to fight against Daein. He just wants all the nations to fight, yes? That's not to say he DID invoke it, or threaten to, just that he COULD have. Now, it's possible that the previous signer was an Empress of Begnion - in which case, either Sanaki or Micaiah would inherit the "controller" aspect. This would fit with Naesala using Sanaki's orders to "outrank" Lekain's. But the fact that Lekain tells Pelleas , specifying "the Senate", suggests that the control of the unnamed King (implicitly, a prior King of Kilvas) was held by the Senate, not the Apostle.

Yeah that's true, no one's really "competing for a spot". Same situation in Genealogy. Even units you "bench", by leaving in the Castle, can still Arena and do staff support. This was mainly a "for example", but it's also my genuine take. Marisa joins with better combat stats than Amelia, sure, but no common access to 1-2-range. As such, she's almost always putting herself at risk by attacking, whereas Amelia can avoid this. Moreover, Amelia can promote into Cavalier pretty quickly. This gives her good mobility and Rescue/Drop support. Even if you don't want to invest in her all the way up to Paladin, she can still do "odds and ends", like visiting villages or Trade-and-Canto. Marisa isn't offering anything of the sort, even if her melee combat is better. And with investment, Paladin Amelia is clearly better than Marisa in either of her two promotions. Ergo, I credit Amelia with only being the second-worst unit in Sacred Stones. You go, girl!

I've heard the term before, but didn't know all that surrounded it. Fascinating. I'd say "well, perhaps Sephiran made Lekain aware of blood pacts to begin with". Except, the narrative heavily implies that the Senate (possibly Lekain, possibly his predecessor) imposed a blood pact against a previous King of Kilvas. Lekain's wording suggests that this was in place well before the murder of Misaha, and subsequent Serenes Massacre. ...Wait. Why did Naesala and the Ravens fight for Daein in the Mad King's War? It was the Begnion Senate, not King Ashnard, who bound Kilvas with a Blood Pact. I can't imagine Lekain commanding him to do anything of the sort. And attacking Begnion troops, once the armies merge, seems like a "no-go". Are we to believe that Naesala was fighting in that war "just for the hell of it", whereas three years later, it's different because he was coerced into it?

Never responded, but thanks for this bit. I do wonder whether Izuka knew he was speaking with Sephiran, or if he was deceived in some way (i.e. via a disguise, indirect communication, or... hypnosis? IDK.). Also unclear whether their communication is before or after Izuka disappears from Daein. Per the wiki, Ashnard was the son of the King, but also "of a distant bloodline", so ?????. Seems irreconcilable to me - "distant bloodline" would imply that he wasn't directly descended from the current monarch, but instead shares, like, a great-grandfather with him. Maybe it was a mistranslation? Yeah, deeply dissatisfying. Especially because Pelleas isn't even getting anything in return. It's not even "buyer beware", it's "you didn't read the fine print, mwahaha!". Another crack theory incoming: the Blood Pact requires, well, the signer's blood. This implies that there's something peculiar about the signer's blood that gives it validity. Now, Pelleas' blood didn't change when he became King of Daein. It was the same DNA, same red blood cells, same blood type. So, how would the pact know he was King? Here's my idea: it wouldn't. Actually, it would know that he was never supposed to be King. He doesn't have the royal blood of Daein, after all. So if Lekain tried to activate it, it would... do nothing. It would only affect the people whom Pelleas' blood has "dominion" over, which, being baseborn, is... no one. Now, if Soren had been tricked into signing the Pact, then we could have a real problem on our hands. Thank Ashunera he's clever enough to read the fine print...

Late on this, but Well, that's what the Narrator says. But how much can we trust that guy? We never even see his face! Of course, if Sephiran did it of his own volition, then the Narrator wouldn't be lying. As he's technically a member of the Senate. Personally, I think it makes sense with the unmitigated hubris of the Senate. Perhaps it verges onto "mustache-twirlingly evil", but that's basically how Valtome and Lekain are portrayed, at least. Actually, looking back to the script: It only places the murder on the "Empire", so it could be anyone. But it's probably someone in the Senate, or one of their underlings. I assume that they didn't get an audience with Sanaki at this time. But anyway, Yeah, that's fair enough. It seems to be a "war of vengeance", with the goal of punishing Begnion (and the Senate, in particular) for the Serenes Massacre. Plus the murdered envoy. In that context, is it a "just war"? ...Eh, it's hard to say. I can see the nuance there. This is, of course, without getting into the phenomenal (and uncharacteristic) foolishness of Caineghis to appoint Skrimir to lead the Army, in the hopes that it would "build character". I tend to view RD Part I as "Lyn Mode, but lengthier and actually challenging." They both have a "tight little Fire Emblem" story, front-loaded into a game that doesn't abide by the normal narrative rules. Plus, each acquaints us with an ambitious young woman who will eventually have the spotlight taken from her by a brash, blue-haired hero. Radical take here, but what if you got to play as EVERY army? Switch from controlling the Greil Mercs, to the Hawks, to the Beasts, to the Dawn Brigade? Think about it - the goal is to get 80 units killed. It doesn't matter which army they're from. This rapidly-changing perspective not only sets the stage for Part IV (where, indeed, all of the above become playable), but could also be viewed as a manifestation of the growing, spiraling chaos. Now, it's not just a matter of swapping perspective between maps, but between turns themself!

I took the time to watch the video, over a long lunch break. It actually took me about an hour, since I stopped for most of the on-screen comments. Most of that vixmdeo is covered here, except for the particular results of your survey. I found that to be the most fascinating part of your video, and would advise anyone who participated in the survey to at least watch "Part III" of the video. I have respect for the work you've put into it, and think it's a worthy topic of discussion and consideration. Having said that, I mostly disagree with your thesis as presented. Sure, there's a lot of discussion, even argumentation, over unit merits. But I view that as the sign of a thriving community, not a hostile or inhibitive one. And while efficiency is an inexact metric, I don't see that as bad - exact metrics, as you pointed out (i.e. Speed Growths) don't lend themselves to interesting comparisons. My biggest bone to pick would be with your repeated use of the term "misinformation" in the video. I don't think it was being used properly. If someone says "Seth is a bad unit", that's not misinformation - it's an opinion. At worst, it's a "misapprehension". If they say "Seth is a bad unit because he has low growth rates relative to other cavalry", then that IS misinformation. But that kind of "outright lying" or "being flat-out wrong" is not so frequent in tiering discussions, and usually gets called out promptly. One more thing - just because I call a unit "bad", doesn't mean I'm calling the player who uses that unit "bad". Like, I think Marisa is the worst unit in Sacred Stones, but that doesn't make someone "wrong" for using her. It makes them wrong for calling her a good unit. But it's possible to play intelligently, and "aim for efficiency", even while using "bad units". That can be pretty impressive, even moreso than, say, clearing the game with just Seth and a flier. I'm not opposed to either of these models. I think that they can exist alongside traditional efficiency-based tiering. I just don't think that they should displace the way we've been doing it. There are a few other elements, though. "Who should I feed the fountains/boosters to? Which weapons should I forge? Which class do I make each Villager?" These are questions where some answers are better than others. Even if Echoes tends to depersonalize units to a degree that, with the right attention and investment, any unit can do whatever you want of them. The only really "sticky" traits are Res and spell lists. This is sort of the core of it to me. It comes across a bit as though the OP is trying to dictate how we "should" do things, as a community. Even if that's not the intention, it's frustratingly condescending. Like, I can respect "basic human decency" stuff, like "don't lob personal insults" and "be open to new voices". I try to stay "above the board", and deserve to be called out where I fail. But this goes beyond that, to "your metric is elitist and exclusionary, please change it". I don't want to be uncharitable, but that's the impression I'm left with, sadly.

So, it's not just me then. It looks like four Mons are universally required, whereas the last two spots are highly constrained. That said, it opens up ever so slightly in FRLG, where you could have something like: All thanks to a single type change to one evolutionary line! Moving on to Gen II, I noticed that every submitted set shares one particular Mon, in the form of I'm wracking my brain to figure out whether it's a must-have, and I'm leaning toward "yes". Namely, there are no teams out there where I can swap sonething new into its place, and still have everything work. I thought I could with @X-Naut's team, but turns out, there was actually an overlap there - oops! But if anyone can come up with a Gen II team that doesn't have that particular species, then drop me a line! EDIT: Future First Mate here - yer gonna walk the plank fer yer ignorance! Didn'tcha know that you could just replace that Mon with In yer original crew? Turns out, there's no forced matey after all, ye loony liver! Anyway, I'll round out my familiar generations with teams For Gen VI (XY): For Gen VII (🌞🌚😞 I haven't played the Galar or Paldea games, so this might be my limit!

Oh Arceus. Gen VI was a decade ago. Don't do this to me. Really cool idea! "Three-type Mons" are a bit hard to process mentally, but they could add some interesting interactions. Like, Mega Greninja Y can clear Toxic Spikes, while Mega Chesnaught X is immune to Electric attacks. Of the effects, my favorite has to be Mega Delphox Y's. The "Curse" effect is dramatically underused, and it'd be great to see a new move, ability, or item that inflicts it. One objection - I think "+1 Attack/Sp.Attack/Speed per turn" has the potential to be pretty busted. We've seen the ban hammer applied to Mega Blaziken. I would suggest either reducing it to a 30% chance, or making it a "once per switch-in" effect. Conversely, you could probably get away with upping Mega Greninja X's Poison odds to 30%. Oh, by the way - have you decided on a statline for these Mega Evolutions? Would they be the same across versions, or different? Those particulars could have a big impact on how viable these Mega Evos are.