Samz707

I guess but there should be an effort I guess to ensure the difficulty doesn't drastically drop. (So it should stay hard if that makes sense, A few easier stages aren't too bad but a game shouldn't become a cakewalk.) I kinda actually liked Echoes for it, stuff like the final Berkut battle where you have to watch out for the Entrap spell or the poison swamps kinda force you to do more than just "throw units at them and hope for the best." (Such as using the fact your clerics will heal anyone near them at the start of your turn and since the swamp does 5 damage and the Cleric skill heals 5 damage it sorta helps keep down the damage from being on a swamp tile.), so maybe having some more of these elements on a hard mode so you have to account for the actual map more would be nice.

I guess for me on the whole "Alm and Celica" situation, I do sorta like what the game is trying to kinda go for with Alm: while he doesn't make any story mistakes, there are (Even if Turnwheel makes it fairly unlikely this will happen outside of any sort of challenge run, which is why I'm not that big a fan of it.) several moments where he can mess up and get called out on it, such as killing Zeke, failing to save Mathilda and maybe even end up killing Delthea in self defense. (Though I don't know if Luthier comments on it outside of the actual battle though you still ended up killing an innocent and potential recruit.) I do actually sorta like this in theory, how the player's failings are mentioned. (I''d actually like another FE game where there's I guess side-objectives such as saving civilians where failing them isn't a game over but the story goes on with you getting called out on it since I feel any sort of dramatic moment where the Hero fails works a ton more in gaming if it's actually optional and it's the player's own fault since well, it's actually your fault.) Celica is kinda mostly the same, You have the 3 whitewings where you're kinda encouraged to keep all 3 alive and you have saving all of Valbar's group, you have optional moments where the tone of some bits (Such as recruiting Valbar and his group) change a decent bit darker if you failed (Granted to my knowledge the Valbar's group dialogue only changes if Valbar is dead, I can't find anything if it changes if just Leon/Kamui dies.) then she has some really contrived bad plot stuff about trusting the obviously evil Jedah which I think is kinda awful. So I feel they're actually even mostly in the same "Doesn't make mistakes unless the player does" field up until the Swamps then Celica ends up going downhill and making really stupid decisions. (I don't know how this went down in the original Gaiden but I seriously feel like A: they should have had Celica not agree to Jedah's proposal but just get forced into it after being ambushed at the tower since it would change very little (Since she's basically given no choice in the end anyway and we were already heading to Duma Tower.) or B: Have Jedah actually not be so obviously evil and some semblance of actually being able to manipulate people since he kinda both looks, sounds and acts incredibly evil.)

Eh I liked Echoes. But even then the forced in Awakening tie-in part is pretty much completely awful, complete with one of the worst boss fights I've ever seen. (Because who doesn't love gratitous RNG or forced hours of grinding/buying DLC classes? and random spawning in enemy reinforcements with gratitously inflated stats is totally fair.) But yeah based on what I've seen of TH (And played of it so far) as well as what I've played of Awakening and seen of Fates, FE isn't actually going in a direction that interests me. I think it says alot that I'd probably buy that fake Battles of Revolution April's fool joke over pretty much any recent FE game. (Echoes doesn't really count since it's mostly a remake keeping to the style of the original.)

So the only way to reliably beat this is to just go through hours of grinding? And even then what do I do about Grima? the enemies in that per have so absurd stats it's insane, Jesse is a level 10 dread fighter yet an enemy dread fighter will A: kill him in 2 hits without crits and B: has an 100 percent hit chance. Even then there's the completely random reinforcements so it's ultimately all up to luck it seems. It pretty much seems the only way I can beat this is if I just rush him with Dread Fighters then hope A: No enemies spawn next to them and B: They consistently critical hit Grima.

I don't like Thabes Labyrinth's backstory. (Which I've heard praised a few bits.) Why are there just convenient signs in chronological order? not even notes but full on stone signs randomly scattered about? if it's to warn people off then why not just all together at the start? I don't know how much of it is from Awakening (Since I've heard a bit of it is Echoes adding backstory to Grima since the game had to acknowledge Awakening existed for some reason.) but the way it's actually told is like a really bad horror game and is kinda jarring considering how we have Memory Prisms for a better means of Exposition, it's like they were just told to throw this together quickly. (Also the actual dungeon crawling isn't fun when I can just get swamped by 4 dragons and a ton of enemy Myrmidons that somehow have better stats than my maxed out Dread Fighters and all have poisoned weapons, it seriously feels like entirely different people worked on this dungeon than the rest of the game and they were not good at their job.)

I'm finding it kinda unfair, the later levels in my experience (Since i was trying to avoid fights and died once I actually got into one) seem to just consist of every enemy having extremely high stats, poisoned weapons and at least one dragon. Am I just supposed to slowly fight almost all of the enemies in the dungeon one at a time so it's just one group of dudes at a time? Am I supposed to only tackle when it literally everyone has hit the level cap? (Since my level 20 Dread Fighters actually only die in one or two attacks to enemy Myrmidons.

Ehh maybe? depends really how forgiving the game is. I tend to dislike random elements aside from chance to hit in a strategy game (For instance I'm kinda put off by the fact TH has you pass a RNG check just to be able to change class.), I feel like everything aside from chance to hit should be fairly consistent. It could work but the problem is the game would need to be fairly easy/the weather not do much to avoid screwing over a player potentially maybe.

Doesn't Bramimond say "I think I'll be joining you." or something among those lines when Anthos is dying? I took that as him actually using alot of his power to bring Ninian back, to the point where it shortened his magically enhanced life-span and that's why he says he's not too far behind Anthos and is also going to die, just not as soon. I guess Mark's lore-breaking superpower is the ability to stuff himself inside other people.

Cool, I guess as one more question because I forgot to put it on the post, can full on dragons (Such as the final boss of FE7) be made playable with no issues? Me and a friend are just discussing about ideas for an Hack where you get a water dragon. (and if possible, it's water breath attack causes it to start raining, slowing movement temporarily like the rain in Fe7.)

I did try to look this up earlier and I did see mentions of needing a patch on another site, is that for another modding thing unlike FE builder or is the patch just part of FE builder nowadays? So how do the stats work? does the game actually track magic/strength seperately or do they just share the same value?

Probably won't start actually using the FE builder for a while but I was curious if it was possible to build a armored mage character who uses magic? Like that one CIPHER card with Valjean in his heavy armor with a tome, is it possible to have a unit using both say, Tomes and Lances/swords? or are the strength/magic stats completely unable to switch in GBA? (Since they're in the same spots in level up/use the same stat booster items.) I know it's probably impossible but I'm wondering.

Ask Link if he needs to buy anymore swords before his current ones break and direct him to Ana if he says yes.

I can stomach horror generally, I don't know why but there's something about horror in a video game that feels alot more detached than a movie so the gore/guts tend to rarely seriously terrify me in games (I guess due to you know, not being life-like), though I do prefer horror games since they can rely on tense gameplay and survival mechanics that fill me with a sense of constant dread rather than just gore and jumpscares. I actually kinda love the thrill of a good ol' survival horror, never knowing if you have enough resources and constantly weighing up whenever it's better to fight, run or occasionally hide. (Which is why I'm not too much a fan of the "Just run away" games, it can work occasionally but in most of them for me it just kinda gets boring after a while.) I do get annoyed when a non-horror game tries to be horror-y by just having tons of blood and guts everywhere, it can work occasionally (Tomb Raider 1's Atlantis is a strange place, where the walls are made of flesh that pulses as if it's alive while enemies are hatching from eggs, it's definitely something else being in this strange fleshy place that seems to be somehow alive.) but mostly it just kinda doesn't work. (Tomb Raider 2013, where it gets so over the top Lara has a literal bloodbath and they even do the "skeleton's head rolls off as you move by it" trope and the game is trying to be 100 percent serious here as if it doesn't realize how absurd it's being.) That said, a well done horror movie (Such as The Thing.) will always manage to get the gore more gruesoem for me due to it being more life-like. (Though certain horror films do actually use dead animals and their guts for gore, which I feel is a bit much, I know at least for a time it was actually cheaper to just use real human skeletons instead fake ones which is kinda all kinds of messed up.)

I've always been a horror fan, not sure how exactly it'd work for a SRPG but it could be interesting.

Where is it stated no one died? (And even then, thats a terrible contrivance and some pretty godawful writing which still doesn't change the fact the Shepards don't care if any of their own die nor do they show concern for the people they just cut down.) Again, we're in a perma-death series, generally if one of my people get hit a bit with swords/arrows (even just twice in the case of Donnel), they die on the spot pretty quickly, I do not believe that me setting dudes on fire with the fireball or zap them with lightning, that they're simply just sleeping off what would logically be kinda horrific injuries. In a game with Perma-death, I'm pretty sure it's logical to assume that "People die when they are killed" and that by killing someone when I deplete their life that they are in-universe dead, that's how it works roughly 90 percent of the time in most FE games, it's how it works logically and it just in general doesn't make sense for people to magically walk off injuries (Yes I know magic heals injuries but it's established that you generally can't bring someone back from the dead, this isn't Konosuba where you can die every other day and come back, you die in FE, you're generally dead for good.) If my own units die 100 percent of the time, plot armor not withstanding, I think it's safe to assume the weaker, enemy units die from roughly the same punishment, I don't think its a Headcanon to assume "People die when they are killed.". That's how most FE games work and that's how most strategy games (Such as X-com or Jagged Alliance. )work, you fill something with lead, burn it, crush it or slash it til' it stops moving/vanishes from the battlefield, it is dead. I don't see how assuming the basic rules of the game applying both ways is a headcanon. It's slapstick that is just "woman attack man funny", it wouldn't be funny if it was the other way around to most people nor does Virion really deserve being kicked in the first place.

It can honestly be something as simple as refusing to acknowledge stuff other FE games did. Fe7 has us killing honest good Caelin troops because Lundgren is forcing them to fight us, this is treated as a bit of a reveal (since the characters assume the assassins are in with Lundgren intially if I remember) and the cast are honestly shocked and angered by this and bring it up when fighting Lundgren, we kill innocents essentially because we're forced to fight them but the case react oppropriately. FE Awakening We kill border guards over a contrived misunderstanding at a checkpoint (Also did we really just go to get the help of a nearby nation without sending a messenger or something? also no, I do not believe that in a perma-death series, we are generally not killing enemy units because that's stupid to me.), no one comments on it and the actual leader of the checkpoint is kinda more upset she attacked royalty rather than any deaths on anyone's side, neither do the Shepards seemingly care at all they just killed innocents or if any of their own died. So the FE7 cast acknowledge "Oh crap we just basically killed innocent people doing their job" while the "Heroic" (because frankly they just come off as not very heroic people to be honest.) Shepards seemingly don't care they just killed essentially innocents over a misunderstanding. (And it never comes up again so this fight honestly never even needed to exist.) So in trying to be "Lighthearted" and dodge the issue entirely....Awakening, for me personally, makes the cast look actually like worse overall people than Lyndis' Legion and seemingly lacking any sense of regret for killing innocents. Again, Perma death so I don't think me setting a dude on fire with a fireball is going to just have him wake up later, I think it's safe to say when I deplete someone's health with a fireball he's extra crispy. Also Sully kicks Virion because woman on man abuse is totally funny and totally doesn't make the woman look like a horrible violent person and some of the supports (such as Female Robin and Chrom) are just lame jokes that don't actually make the characters feel like they're bonding that make me want to stop reading supports altogether. And by that logic I could argue you clearly really like Awakening and are therefore biased for it.

Isn't it implied Noire literally developed her split personality because of her mother's abuse?

The light-heartedness can still be poorly placed. Case in point, Virion's comedic intro completely clashes with the entire scene that literally just happened and is I think one of the worst character introductions I've seen in a video game. (Not that I see many terrible ones but good god is it obnoxious.) Also I feel being heavily comedic in a Perma-death game is kinda a bad idea, for obvious reasons in that Anime trope hijinks (That I personally find pretty much just annoying anyway.) don't exactly mesh well with the fact someone possibly just died/got crippled and can never fight because plot-armor in the previous battle, if anything it kinda makes the cast look like they're not actually friends when they just don't react. (Yes I know other FE games don't do that mostly but they never tried to tell me that almost everyone got along and were friends so Awakening just draws attention to it when the "friends" never comment when another one dies.)

Fair enough but to me she comes across as kinda more annoying. (And again, the way Robin and other characters act makes it feel like I'm supposed to find it charming or something when I really don't.) Also that Dress-cage thing is just a terrible outfit.

Yeah I don't really like it personally. I think a good comparison I guess is Lissa and Serra, they're both the "Bratty healer" but Serra is actually disliked by characters for her brattiness yet with Lissa the reactions of various characters seems like we're just supposed to find her brattiness "endearing" rather than well, being a brat. Robin finds Lissa amusing seemingly while Hector hides from Serra, Serra's brattiness is treated as more of a flaw I guess that functions as a laugh rather than purely trying to be funny. (also I admit I stole the comparison from a friend but I agree with him when he pointed it out.)

Yeah I get you, I miss the PS2 Era GTA games because they at least let you get to the point of the admittingly kinda shallow gameplay that worked as a "sum of it's parts" thing but nowadays you have to sit through a ton of cutscenes and a massively long open world just to get to the actual missions. Tomb Raider 2013: You took an action adventure game with exploration and turned it into an incredibly linear cover shooter that's incredibly edgy. Max Payne 3: You took a fast paced John Woo game and you made it a cover shooter with constant cutscenes where Max gets in a specific bit of cover and automatically alerts everyone in the room to his presence because I guess we can't have a video game where the player actually gets to make choices in how to start a fight. Fire Emblem Awakening; I don't think it teaches how to play FE well, I don't think the characters/story are good (Infact the Shepards come off as frankly horrible people who are arguably worse than some evil characters in previous games which makes it impossible to actually want to see any of them survive.), it's message of "friendship" is undercut by the real Meta being Robin Emblem and actually done worse than other games in the same series and just in general, I don't really like it, at all, it's the worst FE game I've ever played easily as it simply doesn't provide even acceptable gameplay or story, if it does something, it does it medicore at best or downright awful. Modern X-com: They took most of the strategy out and replaced it with even more luck-based elements/restrictive game design, I love not being able to shoot down a wall unless I can lock on to a dude on the other side, I love not being able to shoot explosives in the environment intentionally unless I waste an explosive (Which I can only carry one, because inventory items are now one per soldier because they took out the actual inventory system.) and I totally don't hate how, instead of calculating a chance to hit per bullet, now entire bursts of gunfire are now a single chance to hit, it pretty much dumbs down/removes everything I actually liked about Classic X-com.

While I've not seen her in-game yet, I really don't like what I've heard of Tharja. She's pretty much Sonia, both horribly abuse their child but somehow we're not supposed to hate Tharja for it. (And at least Sonia never abused an infant and probably did less to Nino considering Nino doesn't have half the problems Noire has.) (Also her weird crush on Robin, that's apparently ever explained and just exists.) Why am I supposed to like (And even want to marry) a character who's literally worse than someone who was presented as an nonredeemable monster in past games.

I wonder if it's possibly because recruiting him is kinda a pain if you're not thinking about just exploiting the fact Archers can't do anything if you physically block them off from moving, so anyone playing Awakening, either as an early game or as their first game. (In my experience) is going to be very frustrated very quickly on how they actually feed Donnel kills without him dying, since he does so little damage it's actually hard to feed him kills otherwise in my experience and border-line impossible to get enemies in the "sweet" spot via attacks from other units since he does that little damage while pretty much dying from one round of combat with pretty much every other enemy. (And his hit chance isn't super high if I remember either.) So it's probably slightly because of how hard it is to recruit him in the first place (Since people love to recommend Awakening as a first game.) so their frustration with his recruitment overflows onto him.

Yeah I agree with you on Celica, I like her for the first half of the game but after the swamps she must have taken a direct blown to the head or something because it's like she's suddenly lost a ton of IQ points, it's kinda hard to believe this is the same Celica defeating pirates early on, it's almost like her character arc is actually in reverse or something because she just gets less competent later on. It's really bad with Dolth, you're telling me this on-his-deathbed Purple cult dude is able to somehow grab Celica and threatens her friends to get her to come with him? Celica, he's near death, you can cast magic without a weapon, you can literally just cast literally any spell and kill this dude right away, you literally have several different spells that would probably instantly kill this dude.

12-ish minimum I guess? I get about having low numbers, kinda but you reach a point eventually where it's restrictive frankly. I could take a weak character who'll probably get one-shot....or I could just take a strong character, again. Due to character stats, I very rarely used Donnel and Fiora for instance, since they felt like glorified tissue paper that'd have incredibly low chances of actually being useful. (Donnel especially, seriously even Archers can 1-round him, I'm pretty sure he must be the weakest unit in the series that's an actual combat unit, insert Gordon Ramsey clip of him calling someone useless.) During Echoes plot battles though, where I have my whole army deployed, I find myself actually having my weaker units chipping in, I can keep one of my weak Pegasus Riders off to the side, then when a guy is badly hurt enough, have them swoop in and get some EXP and kinda the same for other characters, Yeah I do mostly side-line them but if there's an actual unexpected opprotunity to have them chip in, in a way that doesn't get themselves killed, I can take it, got a weak mage? have them heal other units when they fall back. So yeah I think a unit cap above 10 is needed.