[What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?]

1 hour ago, Shrimperor said:

*laughs in Lysithea*

 

Yeah, in Awakening. Not in Fates

Highly doubt Fates makes it not terrible.

I don't like having gimped units just to force in a pair-up system and I don't like basically controlling only 5-6 units a battle.

In addition to issues that probably would still exist, like using up weapon durability with attacks I don't want.

 

 

[What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?]

 

5 hours ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

Pair up has been around longer than adjutants.

See, I get that my point sucks, but the point is supposed to be satirical. It sucks because it mirrors your point, which also sucks.

A mechanic isn't bad because it's a central mechanic which you are expected to utilize and interact with. It's not bad because it's new. The idea that the core ideas from the early games are more valid than core ideas from later games is arbitrary and dumb.

Well, they are though? if they're still around that (usually) means they're solid mechanics that work well (Usually anyway.), something new inherently is arguably less valid because it could not work, (Like the Three Houses Monestary, which feels like an unfinished Alpha that was rushed in which is kinda bad for the literal selling point new feature.) it could work but I've definitely played games with new mechanics in a series that I've felt "Yeah I'm not going to ever miss this if it never ever comes back.", by the nature of being new they aren't as tried and tested as old mechanics.

 

5 hours ago, Benice said:

I don't get what's wrong with adding another layer of planning, though. I also like FE to be simpler and fast, but in my limited experience with pair-up in Fates, it works very well. It is concrete and not luck based, and you can plan your phase around utilizing the two different types of pairs. Similarly, they aren't needed to complete the game. It adds diversity to play styles, is relevant but not mandatory, but isn't pointless at all.

For me, Pair-up just adds trial and error in Awakening. (and I hate trial and error in strategy games, alot.)

You can only check Dual Strike/Dual Guard stats with the "full" interface and when attacking on YOUR turn, there is no way to check it if you have the simple interface and if there's no enemy in range, which actually means you have to pair up before you can potentially see the chances of it, got two dudes paired up and and a Wyvern is going to attack them next turn flying across half the map? no way of actually predicting if you'll get extra damage/completely avoid damage, which are both kinda things that I consider very important to actually know.

Even when it doesn't screw me over, it frequently wastes weapon durability if the Support partner can't actually do any decent damage to the target due to weapon triangle/damage values. (And probably switches weapon too, since Units with a ranged weapon in their inventory but not equipped still has Dual-Strike chance when I have them paired with a ranged unit, meaning.) so I essentially have to account for a bunch of attacks I didn't actually call for when it comes to weapons breaking, in a game where I can waste a decent amount of in-game money to upgrade weapons that I normally can't repair. 

Secondly, it actually so far has made Support bonuses an active downside for me, Lets say Vaike is holding down a 2 tile hallway with  let's say, Lon'qu  on the other tile, Vaike will get dual strike/guard chance even if unpaired up since even units who aren't paired up but next to each other do these, Vaike can survive being hit once for whatever reason (Already injured from a previous turn or enemies simply hitting that hard), and while the dude coming for him is too far away for me to actually see the combat forecast, I can reasonably presume he'll survive one hit and have a healer heal the more injured Lon'qu next to Vaike before another enemy attacks him, since the enemy who will attack him will block off his other melee-only dudes behind him from attacking Vaike, hence I can take time to heal him,  I have absolutely no way of predicting if Vaike will get a Dual strike or Dual Guard, so when Dual Strike DOES kick in and Vaike dies since now the enemy behind the enemy Lon'qu just killed can now attack him, this situation has happened to me way, way more times in Awakening than I'd like, Dual Strike has only given the enemies cheap kills on my units via stats I couldn't see, since you can only see the chances in the Combat Forecast. (And each character has different chances of Dual Strike/Dual Guard in my experience so it's not even like the chances are the same for everyone.), it made Chapter 6 in Awakening a god damn nightmare til I lucked out and no one got any dual strikes for the most part.

It's such a terrible "Assist" to the player that it actively harms you that a successful play through of a level actually hinged on it not triggering for me.

I have no way of seeing the numbers if I can't attack the enemy on the same turn (and for the longest time since I was using the simple HUD, I had no way, at all.) and my chances of getting screwed over in this way will actually increase the more support bonuses I have, it takes what is supposed to be a positive and actually manages to make it an objective downside for me, since now I can get killed since I can no longer predict if enemies will block off their allies easier, at least Critical Hits I can predict due to stats actually on the stat sheet/weapon type, it's bad enough to the point where I'm considering never doing supports til my units manage to get OP stat-wise since it's almost never actually helped me in a way that didn't get me killed on the same enemy phase.

With other controversial mechanics, like deserts (mostly) and Swamps or Cantors, I can predict them, I can actively plan around them since I know they'll function the exact same way, Cantors will always spawn more units after a turn or two, Deserts and swamps always slow down my units. (And weapons don't break in Echoes so it's not like Cantors potentially  break all my weapons.)

So yeah, it's actually made supports increase the chances of my units dying by stats that I can't see half the time.

Not to mention the fact it's annoying since Awakening already has lower unit caps for chapters than Fe7 and cutting those in half means I'm essentially controlling 6 units at most half the time.

 

 

[Come up with a potentially controversial gameplay mechanic]

Characters who REALLY hate each other and just barely work together.

We're talking "Refuse to trade" bad, you need another unit to be a middle-man if you want them to trade items, if one is capable of healing they refuse to heal the other and maybe depending on how psychotic they are, there is a chance they'll actually target each other if let alone next to each other at the end of a turn automatically if they haven't attacked that turn, so they can potentially murder the other if you're not careful.

Their supports would basically just be them insulting each other and their "Support bonus" only actually kicks in on the final A rank and until then they're actually debuffed next to each other.

 

 

[Fire Emblem Character you like?]

Kliff, he's got one of the best final map quotes in the series and is honestly just a cool mage dude.

 

[Have you ever felt like FE's general gameplay lacked... something?]

6 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

This "running away to heal" happens in Tellius, too. Enemies will even trade Vulneraries with one another!

 

Honestly it's getting kinda silly how modern FE insists on mechanics like Pair-up or that Monestary that's literally killed my desire to play Three Houses constantly, yet something as simple as "AI enemies actually trade healing items" is something that apparently isn't important, because why have an intelligent enemy in a strategy game?

I really hope the next FE game actually does improve the AI instead of focusing on a terrible hub system that just adds incredibly obnoxious padding, I kinda play strategy games for the strategy.

 

[Have you ever felt like FE's general gameplay lacked... something?]

I guess I've always felt the AI is a little too dumb, it says alot that (Only played some of the games so I could be dead wrong) that Echoes in on the 3Ds feels like the only FE game with good enemy AI, since that's the only one in my experience where they actively try to go get healed when injured that is actually falling back to a healer/healing tile instead of just using a health item in their inventory.

Same with design I guess, I really think that in a strategy game, hit rate and maybe critical hits should be the only random factors (So not a big fan of Pair-up, especially with how dual-strike/dual-guard stats cannot be viewed freely and only when attacking and only with a particular HUD type), while they were way too rare, I really like how in FE7 mines and Light Runes were added, even if the AI never really used them, Strategy games tend to sometimes have defend missions where you can construct structures or maybe having have to deal with minefields but FE doesn't really have any of that, for how potentially versatile fliers could be for transporting units, FE tends to be fairly reluctant to actually use it in it's level design, generally flier rescue is more for saving time with slower moving units than anything else in my experience, so honestly FE Echoes/Awakening/Three Houses actually feel a bit like a downgrade from FE7 to me since these great ideas for equipment to add gameplay (That would add even more if we were avoiding minefields via fliers or thieves) were replaced with...mechanics I am less than fond of. (Like Batalions, which I thought would be extra controllable Generics but are just glorified super moves.)

I'm not too big a fan of the "puzzle" design I guess? it depends on the game ,FE6/7/Echoes don't really bother me but bits like Chapter 7 of Awakening, where it's a nightmare of trying to remember who isn't terrible unpaired up, the dual pair stats you can't actually easily freely check and trying to not get any weak units one shot by the enemy wyverns don't feel fun since it feels less like a strategy game and more like a glorified point and click series of events where one wrong mis-placement equals someone dying with no real way to actually approach it in different ways, I'm not a big fan of battles in strategy games where you pretty much do everything in exactly the right spot or it's basically death. (Also because I think this is not a good fit for a game where hitting, damage values since critical hits and avoid are all luck-based and quite random since growths aren't consistent.)

 

[How exactly do I understand the pair up strike/defend?]

1 hour ago, TheSilentChloey said:

That's just the rng.  Which is why I said that for Awakening I don't rely on it.  It's not a sound strategy to lean on.  Just treat it as it is X% chance it will happen.  You won't know the exact number unless you use full interface and check post pair up.

 

That said SF has a lot of resources to work out pair up bonuses on site, so there is that if you have the time to check it out.  It can explain better than I can.

Thanks I guess.

Still pretty dumb how there's exactly one in-game way to check it AND you're locked out of it if you're using the simple interface.

I really am not a fan of having to open up fan-sites just to check information that should be easily accessible in-game but I guess I'll have to do that.

[How exactly do I understand the pair up strike/defend?]

11 hours ago, TheSilentChloey said:

 

It's the only way.  It's not a poor design detail either, because Awakening already has enough numbers to worry about without that but if you know the basic numbers beforehand, you can tell that Chrom and Lucina will always get an extra 10% chance for their backup units to dual strike, and anyone who had dual guard + will get an extra 10% chance to have the dual guard happen.

Working from that just make sure that A supports or higher are paired up and you'll trigger the dual strikes.  It's different from Fates in that regard with the gauge has to full for the dual guard and dual strikes are automatic.  Personally I don't rely on that.  Also if you didn't notice before I paired everyone off, it did and does show you what extra stats the lead unit is given.  Look beside the stats as there is a +# that's your pair up boost, also where rally and tonic bonuses are as well.

Yeah but the actual dual guard/dual strike numbers are what I want to know ahead of time, considering how half the time Dual Strike actually screws me over. (Such as trying to hold a 1-tile wide area, then Vaike who's paired up with I don't remember who at the time, gets a dual strike, then promptly gets killed by an enemy that wouldn't have been able to attack him otherwise and his stats were so terrible at the time he needed the actual stat increase..)

[How exactly do I understand the pair up strike/defend?]

2 hours ago, TheSilentChloey said:

Have you ever used the full interface?

 

If not then here:

This video has what you need.

So If I'm not missing anything, the only way to see the actual odds are in the pre-fight screen before you attack? in the box. (that's missing from one of the interface options anyway because thatisn'tterriblegamedesignatall!)

No way to see it before I actually pair-up units like the other stats? that's kinda an issue since I'd rather know the chances before I turn 2 units into 1. (such as when the enemy is going to initate the attack next turn.)

 

 

[How exactly do I understand the pair up strike/defend?]

10 hours ago, TheSilentChloey said:

Pair up has an rng chance for the character in the back of the pair up to hit an enemy and block their attacks on either phase.  A to S support has the highest chance for both to happen on either phase. No support to B support is sort of low.

Yeah but is there any way to see the RNG chance outside of when I attack first?

There doesn't seem to be a way when I'm pairing up the units before I actually get in an attack.

[Come up with a potentially controversial gameplay mechanic]

27 minutes ago, X-Naut said:

Attacking a target who cannot counterattack guarantees a follow-up attack unless the weapon cannot follow-up.

Two weight stats, one that works off Weapon Rank and one that works off a factor of Strength.

I feel like the first one would arguably make Archers even more bad than they already are.

[How exactly do I understand the pair up strike/defend?]

Unless I'm missing something, is the only way to tell the chances of a pair-up strike/defend with a character when you're initiating an attack on an enemy?, considering how some characters have different stats for it and how frankly aggressive the AI is, I don't exactly have much of a chance to pair up, look at the pre-battle menu to see what the chances are for that pair of characters then seperate and repeat.

 

[Soooooo what'cha playing?]

Fire Emblem: Awakening

Well I got to Chapter 7: Incursion and that was a totally not unfairly difficult chapter.

I think Awakening might flat-out be one of the worst games I've ever seen written, Emmeryn basically goes to kill herself for the sake of drama, Chrom gets punched because we totally need an out-of-place (and a crap joke anyway) humor moment after that and THEN we try to go all serious again, this is actually painful to watch.

[Come up with a potentially controversial gameplay mechanic]

More general "Objective"  focused maps.

For instance, you're in a big forest map that lets you deploy most of your troops, there's a big passage down the middle, after 2-3 turns a bunch of Convoy (so Merlinus basically) units start heading down, each of them are carrying a ton of items you get after killing them but they'll escape if they reach the end, so using mines, light runes and blocking the path if possible, you take down the convoys (maybe it's game over if any/certain amount get away) while dealing with their guards.

FE kinda suffers from somewhat bland objectives for a strategy game in my experience. (And I'm not counting ones that'd require new mechanics, like stealth missions.)

[So what's the silliest thing you've done in an FE Game?]

On 9/22/2020 at 5:32 PM, starburst said:

Overpaying for a Nintendo Switch in mid 2018 and keeping it in its box for about ten months, "just for the new Fire Emblem game." And the game was terrible disappointment for me.
The silver lining? Being a previous model, the device could be hacked, which has allowed me to try many other games before purchasing them.

In-game: Thinking, for many months and across various campaigns, that Beast Stones in Conquest were considered "red" and part of the Weapon Triangle. 😬
I will surely remember more silly things and come back.

Reminds me of how I got a better pc for a bunch of games, which all turned out to be kinda bad, I have played games since then that only my new pc could run but it was kinda upsetting at the time.

I turned Nils/Ninian into essentially my demolition experts  during FE7, since Mines take up inventory spots and everyone else was carrying weapons and healing items, I gave them my mines/light runes in their inventory, I didn't use them too much but that's more due to me being forced to use them sparingly due to lack of them.

[What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?]

23 hours ago, Ottservia said:

Dude if I can get Lissa to level 4 or 5 before chapter 6 on Lunatic without any grinding then maybe you’re maybe you’re doing something wrong(or you’re getting rng screwed). Awakening does give you the tools to deal with it’s bullshit. I should know I’ve played through Lunatic several times.  I know how this game works. Yeah awakening spams ranged enemies at you so work around it. You don’t have to pair up your units you know you can separate at the cost of a turn in order to create a mini barricade. Take advantage of the weapon triangle for dodge tanking because a lot of the of the early enemies use axes so units like Stahl, Robin, and Chrom make for effective effective shields. You could also try giving bronze swords to Frederick and Sully for this exact purpose. Also use your Jaegan. Frederick is really useful for the early game because he can easily take out strong immediate threats. Look at Enemy ranges to determine how far they can actually reach. There are plenty of options available to you. You just have to use them

Frankly, by that point , I feel it's no longer actually worth it using healers instead of healing items.

Your units will take more damage the next turn anyway (Since defense is something pair-up can increase) so the slightly extra healing of the heal staff isn't worth it I find,  I can get roughly the same results (With no risk of a unit suddenly getting overwhelmed due to their stats effectivelly getting worse) by just downing an Elixir/Vulenary.

Not to mention, again, alot of units start with some god-awful stats (Like Lon'qu, who is pretty much the reason I thought Lyn was a great unit playing Fe7 since he can't even crit-reliably with the killing edge he starts with nor does even have any noticeably better speed than other units.) so separating isn't a valid option if that unit is currently using another unit that's frankly bad as an attempt to make them both better, I would not trust frankly any of the Awakening units who isn't Frederick, Un-funny meme man Kellam or Robin to reliably survive without support bonuses so far so I feel like It's honestly just safer to use a healing item than a song and dance separating pair-ups then praying to god my suddenly lowered stats aren't low enough to get doubled or take a ton of damage, it's simply way more efficent and less risky to just down a healing item then risk suddenly getting doubled to death, or picked off by a range unit that the defense buff from pair-up would have let them survive.

 

EDIT: Also Awakening is so bad at humor it's actually hard to watch, like Sumia punching Chrom in the face when he's concerned about his sister.

 

[What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?]

3 hours ago, Ottservia said:

Dude if you don’t know how to keep your healers safe then I’m sorry you’re just kinda bad at the game. I’ve beaten this multiple times on lunatic and not once have I had a problem with keeping my healers safe. I don’t know what to tell you man. The X button exists for a reason so use it

Look at chapters like when Ricken joins, you're bombarded with ranged units who can easily one-shot healers which makes the basic heal staff (which is all you have at the start.) fairly useless, it's not like GBA where you can rescue a healer to put them out of harm's way, same with Chapter 6 and other battles, when ranged enemies that will hit your healer behind the dude exist, pair-up is pretty useless for keeping them safe, add the general aggressiveness of enemies in Awakening where you barely get any breathing room since most enemies are gunning for your units and not lying in wait and it's real hard to use a healer more than once or twice a chapter so far without something one-shotting them.

The only way to keep a Healer safe is to basically have them be someone's pair-up buddy who can't actually get around to healing for most of the chapter, so you're stuck with healing items most of the time and unable to actually get them to safely heal a dude, which means they stay weak since they're not getting exp so the cycle continues.

Pair-up seriously hurts this too, In older games, I had say, 12 dudes a chapter, that's enough room to somewhat block off a healer, but when I have to pair up, suddenly 10 units is only 5 and that's basically impossible to defend a healer with and flat-out impossible against any archers or mages, especially in the random battles where you basically spawn surrounded by dudes. (and god forbid if they're Wyvern Knights with small axes that can fly across the map and still oneshot a healer.)

With Rescue, A cav can run up and drag the healer out of danger in any situation where I need to heal a dude, with pair up, they run up and then hide behind the healer, giving them a stat boost that frankly probably isn't going to protect them when they take an axe to the skull, With Rescue, the Unit who initiates the action is the one taking the hits, with Pair-up, the unit who initates it is the one who's hiding behind the dude, which is kinda bad since you know, healing takes up your action.

So healers are pretty much worth nothing, since it's too dangerous to actually let them heal someone since then they're exposed to dying if a nearby enemy so much as looks at their general direction since with the basic heal staff you need to be right next to who you're healing, which puts you very quickly in bow/mage/throwing axe/lance range and Awakening so far loooooves to spam you with those, ergo I find healers worthless and frankly wish I just had competent units who didn't need pair-up and rescue instead, all pair up does is frustrate me. (or even just competent units with neither like Echoes.)

[What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?]

14 hours ago, Ottservia said:

This is why pair up is much better in fates. It basically removes 90% of the RNG involved and actually uses it in a way that better incentives strategy. I love awakening lord almighty does it have issues in the gameplay department.

Even without RNG, it's simply very cumbersome and feels half-finished. (You can still warp paired up units and healers can't heal the unit they're paired up with, meaning they're borderline useless as pair-up partners, to say nothing of the fact that apparently literally no enemy is paired up in Awakening from what I heard.) 

There's no real easy way on-the-spot to calculate how much damage the the partner will do if they chip in, you can't easily see (I'm presuming I'm missing something) how much damage they will do and you can't swap their weapon without swapping, which will take at least 2 turns. (One to swap then the turn to actually change their weapon.)

It makes healers really bad, they're too fragile to use unpaired up but when they are paired up it takes 2 turns for you to swap them around/unpartner with their partner to heal anyone, which takes too much time considering how some chapters in Awakening have the entire enemy force rushing you from the start, so I've simply found spamming healing items the only way to actually heal since they'll likely die in 1 turn without even getting to heal anyone otherwise.

Unless Fates dramatically changed the UI (which I haven't seen), dual attack ends up being a massive guessing game as you have no idea how much damage they will actually do if they attack. (And you end up arguably wasting weapon durability potentially, like Sumia doing barely any damage to an sword dude Chrom is fighting.)

[What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?]

Pair-up seriously harms Awakening.

Even ignoring how alot of your units feel really nerfed to make you use it and the "simple" (AKA bloody useless) combat menu completely hides the numbers for it from you.

Will Sully suddenly magically block an enemy attack for 0 damage when paired with Stahl? Will Chrom suddenly take part and instant kill an enemy that you were trying to soften up with Sumia to feed another unit EXP?, it adds way too much extra RNG to the game.

Had a unit who can only take 2 more attacks holding down an 1 tile hallway? well he's going to die now because his partner finished off the dude you were hoping for him to leave alive so now his friends can charge up and hit you, it can very easily screw you over as the devs clearly didn't realize that sometimes in FE you don't want to always kill the dude attacking you when he has friends that will attack you next. (And you need to pair-up since everyone starts pretty subpar so you need those stat increases.)

It's pretty much frustrating, at least with critical hits It's one extra random factor, with pair-up, it makes combat unpredictable to the point where it honestly feels like I could do the best tactics in the world and somehow, some way, it'll find a way to screw me over by "Helping" me, either by making it hard to spread the EXP around properly or killing a dude who was supposed to block his friends from attacking  (Which happened so, many, god damn times in Chapter 6.) and when it does actually help me, well then it's not satisfying because you practically got a Deus Ex Machina.

I'm really not a fan of egregious random chance in strategy games.(Such as Modern X-com removing/highly nerfing any "guaranteed" forms of damage, like explosives.), give me a chance to hit and maybe critical hits but leave it at that, have the strategy come more from level design than piling RNG nonsense onto it.

[Video game music]

Pretty much one of my favorite tracks in anything ever, I've never been so annoyed at a piece of music only being played once in a video game before.

[What changes would you make to Binding Blade in a potential remake?]

9 hours ago, Hello72207 said:

The problem with doing that is that in the original FE6, Ceclila states in her support with Lilina that Roy had almost no skill with magic, so changing it in a remake would change what is canon.

And that was only half-dragons. Roy is a quarter dragon if Ninian x Eliwood is canon.

I can't see Roy riding wyverns, because wyverns come from Bern, who is kinda the main protagonist for the majority of the game, and Roy had never really been to Bern, so he would never have had training riding one.

 

If they go the full mile I guess with any FE7 Remake save-link stuff, maybe Roy still has no skill in magic normally but if Ninian's his mother then he has skill in magic perhaps? so that bit stays the same and only changes if Ninian is his mother? so it stays like the original for every other possible version. (Including No FE7 save link)

Granted, it'd mean it'd be more difficult to make another game set in Elibe if there's a good few changes depending on Roy's Parents  but, ehhh if Awakening is the series standard for sequels to previous continuities, I can live with only two games set in Elibe. 

Just spit-balling here as I'm not really too sure myself.

[Thoughts on “abrasive”,“mean”, or “immoral” characters]

Depends on how it's done.

For instance, Serra and Lissa are both bratty characters, Everyone in Fe7 reacts appropriately to Serra being a brat, Her supports take a long time to build and Hector flat-out hides from her in Lyn mode if you visit the house he's in with Serra, she's a brat but everyone reacts like someone would.

Lissa, in addition to arguably being worse, the game tries hard to treat it as "endearing", Robin acts like it's "Cute" and basically from what I've seen, everyone reacts like it's some cute character quirk rather than, well, being a brat. (Also the things she complains about are even worse than Serra, which makes it stand out more.)

So Serra is actually reacted to appropriately in the universe while Lissa feels like a bad cliche that's just annoying.

(Also Serra is introduced complaining about being lost which is somewhat Valid, while Lissa complains about a stone in her shoe because heaven forbid the royal brat just remove it, so Lissa is significantly more annoying to me.)

So if someone is an bit of an ass but everyone reacts like they should then it doesn't bother me while if someone is a bit of an ass but it's treated as just some wacky quirk that somehow doesn't annoy everyone around them then it's just annoying.

Same with a good other characters like Vaike, where they're obnoxious twits but the game tries to pass it off as a funny quirk that only the mandatory posh character would be disgusted by.

Also Raimi, who tries to kill our entire cast of characters for a frankly BS reason and yet no one really reacts appropriately, so it comes off like the Shepards just don't care, Erik in FE7 also tries to kill our cast of characters, frankly with a more justifiable reason and everyone reacts like you'd expect to a dude who just made an attempt on their lives, Hector even threatens to finish him off if he doesn't speak up.

While Chrom and his Shepards just react on how her personality changed and then a single throw away line of "Tell that to your border guards.." which is the kinda dialogue you generally don't use for "They tried to kill me, one of my sisters and my entire group of people" and tends to in fiction be used for calling back to comedic moments of inconvenience , not attempted murder.

So Erik is a traitorous swine, and the cast treats him like such, Raimi is a frankly terrible commander, who frankly for all we know would cut down traders and such passing through just because Bandits tried that trick before a few times (Which is what I immediately started thinking of on my first play through.) and the cast treats it like a minor inconvenience afterwards, instead of you know, attempted murder. (or successful murder depending on if anyone died.)

So ironically, Erik is a more likable and arguably morally better person to me than Raimi.

 

[What changes would you make to Binding Blade in a potential remake?]

1 hour ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

 

I have more recently pointed out how only full blooded manaketes could transform into dragons until...well, FE7, the worst game ever made. So while it may be canon to Elibe, it's still stupid and only applies when the writers throw away all concept of effort and deliberation.

 

Isn't

Spoiler

Al not a full blooded manakete but he can transform?

(Granted different continuity? I think, that FE6 Champion's Sword Manga is weird.)

We were discussing that Manga a bit (none of us have read it but I did read a bit online about it.) since apparently

Spoiler

Al Can suddenly  become a dragon later in the manga and it apparently heavily screws things up in the Elibe continutiy

 and my friend suggested as basically a similar thing but it doesn't come out of nowhere since you have to sorta set it up in the prequel and well, Roy is kinda weak.

Do they ever imply non-full blooded manaketes can't transform in 6?,I know Wyverns are apparently slightly different in the game's continuities if I remember, in some of them they're degenerated dragons. (Yet I don't think that's ever mentioned in the Elibe games and it sounds like something that would if it was.) Magic works differently in some of the continuities if I remember. 

(That's kinda the problem I guess with multiple continuities but alot of similar stuff, You're not too sure which applies to which continuity.)

Not a big fan of the Turn wheel, I honestly abused it too much in Echoes and I'd prefer not having the option. (And I know in Three Houses it's used as a crutch for terrible level design, in addition to Byleth forgetting about it in the plot.), Design a game that doesn't need a turnwheel, it's way too tempting to abuse and it's literally refilled for free after a single battle.

I do think maybe a few maps need a few small changes. (Such as the "I'm going to instant kill Sophia!" Wyverns in Nabata that you can only see ahead of time with a thief using a torch sometimes.) but the game is mostly fine, if admittingly clearly expecting you to already know how to play FE going in.

[Come up with a potentially controversial gameplay mechanic]

Like Metal Gear AC!D (A turn based spin-off of the MGS series.), Character facing is now a thing, you select where a character faces after moving them and this would also change if they get knocked down/attack another unit in melee, this could work for stealth (Since you'd stay behind enemies and watch their movement patterns.), being attacked from the side does a little bit of extra damage. (At least I think it does in AC!D.) but being attacked from behind causes double-damage, Units would also be unable to counter-attack enemies attacking them from behind.

 

[Is character development overrated?]

8 hours ago, Maof06 said:

The more a character acts like a real person, the more we can relate to him. That way, we can form an emotional connection with him and maybe see him as if he were our best friend, or dislike him if he reminds him of someone who does harm to others. This is subjective, I admit, but this is how I see it.

You made a good point. While Lara's character is basically static throughout the classic games (from what you said, I never played them myself), the character and the storyline would have suffered if she were static in the reboot series.

A bit off topic here, but do you think I should take a look at the classic series? I think I can emulate them on my 3DS.

I'm having Dragon Ball Super flashbacks now.

Wasn't aware you could emulate them on 3Ds but sure as I personally think they're very good. (Well for the most part, 3 has some unfair moments and Chronicles was pretty much made in a rush because of the publisher and it shows.)

You can also snag them on steam for about 99 Pence on Steam sales. (Emulation is probably the PS1 versions and the PC versions of TR1/2 have free downloadable expansion packs while Tomb Raider 3 is kind of unfairly difficult with some instant kill traps and you have infinite saving on the PC version of that one but limited saves with collectable save crystals that are way too rare on PS1.)

The PC version does have a slight issue in that all of the event music  (So say, a frantic bit of music when a boss showed up) was replaced with a single ambient track in every level though I know mods exist to bring the ps1 music back to the PC version.