X-Naut

IIRC it's never really specified what caused it but given the severity and previous golden age, they had to have been stable for a time until something triggered it. That was just a guess based on Elibe's events.

At least Dolhr is better than Durrhurra... sorry, Durhua. Etrurian's guess is basically on the mark, Dolhr is a country of mostly humans who capitulate to Manakete rule. This makes sense when you consider the lore, as the Manakete have long been in decline and unable to repopulate after climate change worked against them. Hence you encounter few dragons in the grand scheme of things, but the few you do meet are very powerful, especially in Shadow Dragon. Beyond the occasional upper class dragon it's probably a standard army for the continent, but with more dragon heraldry.

If not defeat, Marth and Leif's armies should at least be able to cripple most armies with a slew of Warp decapitation strikes. Our armchair generals will likely be much softer targets than the gate or throne bosses they had to deal with; a few might put up a fight but I imagine the FE world soldiers are stronger man-to-man.

Putin announces partial military mobilization for Russian citizens (axios.com) Flights out of Russia sell out after Putin orders partial call-up | Reuters He's looking for as many as 300,000 reserves and is also trying to fast-track annexation referendums in separatist-held territories in an effort to legitimize more force in the name of "defending Russian soil." Which has resulted in widespread protests and mass flights to Turkey and the Trans-Caucasus nations which don't require a visa. Oh, and he's threatening the nuclear option too: Putin Raises Nuclear Threat Following Battlefield Losses | Time

I would rank the objectives as Seize > Rout > Defeat Boss =?= Defend > Survive and I voted for Seize alone. It's simply the most solid objective. Defeat Boss is, on its own, a weak objective IMO; it's a single-point objective but without the extra nuance that makes Seize good. Defend is tricky to get right because the map needs to be able to pressure you or engage you in some way. They do make a good team though, with the former providing a proactive win condition while the latter requires you to engage other fronts instead of mobbing the boss. Or if there are multiple bosses that can solve the single-point problem. Rout at least requires you to engage more of the map even if it's vulnerable to slogging when there are excessive reinforcements. And as Holy Elf said above there may be situations where the enemy won't lay down their arms and surrender; it's even more egregious in games where the AI lacks self-preservation. On the other hand, self-preservative AI can be the devil of Rout maps; although in a way, it does punish End Turn Emblem... Survive is not an objective, unless you're throwing an absolutely insurmountable threat at the player. Otherwise you can call it a forced opportunity to grind.

A physical Fairy-type slashing attack, something like say "Fairy Sword." With how popular swords are in old folklore it seems like a natural choice to broaden the physical pool for fairies. Also a physical Electric-type whipping move, "Wire Whip" maybe? Live wires are a thing and electricity has been associated with whips or tendrils when they're involved in elemental attacks.

In other news Lindsey Graham has decided to cast his own stone in the abortion debate: GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham introduces 15-week abortion ban in the Senate : NPR

You've heard of messenger birds now get ready for

It's rarer than your standard ironman, but it's been done before. There's a Thracia 776 run on YouTube that covers both the playthrough and the methods that went into it through commentary: Fire Emblem: Thracia 776 SS Low Turncount Ironman - YouTube It should go without saying that this requires a lot more planning than an ordinary ironman and there's a higher risk of bricking due to narrower strategies. The aforementioned run for example puts a lot of stock into Asbel as the primary bosskiller.

It would objectively help, but as others said it's a rather spoonfeedy and non-immersive solution. The screenshot might also be not descriptive enough, and going into more depth would push those two criticisms further. I think the most elegant solution is to just drop the all-or-nothing mentality about their use. In fact, using them in tandem would solve both phases' issues: throw a scout or two in on player phase and the rest of them on enemy phase. Have the first fort spawns be one turn of player phase and then same-turn afterwards. It telegraphs what, when and where to expect them without leaning on the fourth wall and it'd arguably make them viable on all difficulties. Which they should be, locking them to Hard+ essentially forces players to learn a new mechanic.

I'd say it comes down to the way FE typically identifies them, as lances. Generally, lances are the bigger weightier counterpart to spears, slower to wield but still usable with one arm and packing a stronger punch. This makes them better suited to mounted fighters in single combat, who have the steed to build momentum and carry them out post-strike. Otherwise, you'd best be packing armor to cover you in the wind-up and/or ending lag. And I do mean single combat, because that's what Fire Emblem typically deals in. Dual system and battalions exist but they really just create the illusion of formation fights while augmenting the one-on-ones. Granted Fire Emblem doesn't exactly take the nature of lances seriously nowadays, the last serious attempt was FE4. But the connotation's stuck and it's made them emblematic of mounted and armored classes to the point where it's pretty hard to find a compelling niche for lance infantry. I think the easiest way to fit one in would be to replace axes with lances on the Hero class. Heroes are frequently portrayed with shields and a lance does better with shields than an axe, and Soldier seems like a more natural promotion companion to Mercenary than Fighter. You'd be giving up the sword/axe infantry combo though.

Seconding P because it sounds like a really solid axe, it's also got a nice big blade to strike with. L and T are also solid and have the advantage of a narrower force vector. I (the letter) might be another strong option if you're looking for something to wield like a bo/battle staff, the prongs work like miniature pickaxes and can be used for grappling. You need good two-hand dexterity to get the most out of it, however.

There's a lot of context missing here. Bows in 3H are mostly 2-range and rely on skills or arts to break out of it, some of them class-locked. Meanwhile, magic is all 1-2 or 1-3 range by default, Thrysus is a free +2 that can be passed around (even to crestless peasants if you can accept the recoil) and while Magic Range +1 is high-effort it isn't class-locked. And correct me if I'm wrong, but magic doesn't have the hit penalty at extended ranges... I think lent brings up valid points about magic encroaching on bows' range niche. On your previous response, staff armor could be a reinterpretation of War Monk/Cleric. And in the event that pegasi main bows then Kinshi Knight or a copycat would make a great side-option to bow/staff Falcos.

Fourthing, fifthing whateverthing Bow/Staff Fliers. Bow flier alone is an intriguing concept for being its own kryptonite, but adding staffs (and only staffs) to the mix sounds like a great "busted but tame" concept provided they don't get too much range flexibility. You have essentially the ultimate non-dancing utility class between being flight with a staff user and a bow user that can easily chase down fliers. At the same time however, the bow-lock leaves them hard-countered by enemy bows and they likely have inferior magic to other magic classes. I think bows would thematically work great with pegasi too; being fragile, skittish and sensitive creatures they'd arguably be better suited to carrying an archer than driving a sword or lance rider straight at the enemy.

Yeah speaking of which: SC Republican Party overrules Greenville County GOP, confirms Russo as primary winner (yahoo.com) Saw this earlier and it looks like a small-scale practice run.

Lightsabers could be a cool weapon in FE: a magic sword that's only 1-range but might have higher Might than conventional magic weapons. If they ever toned those back down then it could be an outlet for physical classes to do higher magic damage in melee.

Different games have different faction caps. I can't speak for FE1/2 but I know the former never starts with more than 20 enemies per map. FE3 caps at 32 enemies; FE4 thru GBA at 50; and the DS games at 60. Tellius games are notorious for their higher enemy counts, part of it likely due to hardware.

Use it where the extra power saves you a use, particularly turning a 2HKO into a 3HKO. If you're talking lances or axes then using Steel more often can improve weapon rank, since they have a yield of 2 WEXP per hit rather than 1. The sword and bow don't get this unfortunately, being relegated to rarer, more niche weapons.

If you're going to have a hit bonus then IMO it should be consistent. Besides, bow accuracy is already spotty sometimes and a mount with wings presents a wider target, leaving them out would be weird. If that's too good on magic then maybe don't give tomes blanket effective damage? On the Swordslayer discussion, it's a clear reference to Mystery of the Emblem's Swordslayer, which was a sword designed to kill the Mercenary line since the mechanics made enemy Heroes very tough. So it sort of makes sense that the other sword infantry branch got included... making it an axe with the reaver effect, though? That's definitely a weird choice. Haven't played Awakening/Fates but Superior and "effective against weapon" weapons seemed more sensible because they weren't scissors cutting rock situations. One place I'd like to see this sort of thing is against magic, particularly on some spells themselves. If Bishops had a way to leverage effective damage against other mages they might hold up better against other magic classes post-staff rank gap.

A hit bonus on effective damage would be nice, especially if a drawback is supposed to be lower hit so that it doesn't just whiff the targets it's supposed to hit. It also mitigates the usual solution of just rigging a dodge to get around them. Zapp mentioned combat arts earlier and I do like the thought of how they could interact, but as someone else said the full 3x on any weapon is a bit extreme. I was thinking maybe if it was 2x, with effective arts on effective weapons stacking up to 4x? And that 4x is not fully negated by Iote's Shield or its clones, only being dropped back down to 2x. Another important question is whether it's the Might of the weapon or the art that gets multiplied... iirc both games with arts only do one or the other. I wouldn't mind if it did both; might seem like overkill to have Tempest Lance do triple on Ridersbane but if I'm stacking techs like that I'd be disappointed if it didn't one-shot.

You see the rat tail hanging from the right side of his head? Boey doesn't have that. And last year's 3H summer was the first banner. With it being a mixed banner there's been speculation that they'll be breaking the Duo-Harmonic flip-flop again with another Harmonic. There's further evidence in that the next Resonant schedule lists Three Houses as one of the games when the pattern predicted SoV: Whatever it is, I have no problems with 3H having to share the summer spotlight this year.

Binding Blade's splits are the most thought-invoking so they're the one I'll talk about. I'll preface by saying the requirements could stand to be less obtuse. Western Isles path isn't so bad, it's just a mutually exclusive house choice which is easy to make on repeat playthroughs. But the EXP split mechanic is obnoxious and affects your unit choice, or demands more attention to EXP gains than would be expected of players. It's also a split that feels like both should be played... maybe if a remake elevates Guinevere or Lilina to proper deuteragonist? I'm going to speak against conventional consensus on Ilia vs Sacae here. Yes, I'll acknowledge that Sacae has some more pain in the ass elements, but Ilia's not a golden promised land in comparison. Chapters 18 and 19 are a drag to navigate without warping or wings and while pegasi are less irritating than nomads they go too far in the opposite direction. I don't particularly enjoy being in near-constant ballista range either. And at the very least Sacae offers a change of scenery on repeat playthroughs. The same can't be said of Western Isles' B route, which look like the same two maps but swapped around and redesigned much worse. 10B packs the same pandemonium as 11A while being more claustrophobic and putting Klein/Thea in much worse starting positions. 11B pits you against a damned Iron Ballista (3-15 range!) before you even encounter the standard ballista. For all the headaches 11A can cause it's more palatable than the two maps it takes to skip it. It's a shame Elphin, Bartre and the fighters' world-building are locked to it... well, that and an Energy Ring instead of a Dracoshield. What is it with GBA being so stingy with Energy Rings? tl;dr Isles A > Ilia > Sacae > Isles B. Remake could stand to be more transparent about the splits.

I never boys to begin with.

When I said "spirit" I meant in the context of the human spirit, as faith and scientific reasoning are both extensions of the mind. Maybe a different word could be used but I don't have one in mind. My point stands though.

As all separate ranks? No, magic types have traditionally not been deep enough to warrant separate ranks. I wouldn't go further than GBA splitting, and even then I think there's an argument to group light and dark together under one "spirit magic" category. 3H's reason/faith split is also fine if you like staffs being grouped with something offensive. Fleshing out the individual elements I'd be down for, but I'm not a fan of blanket effective damage.