Generals need better caps

[Renall]

It's worth considering that Generals were probably not balanced with min-maxers, wifi battling, and Lunatic mode in mind.

Well then the fundamental design of Fire Emblem is FUBAR if a single stat (hi SPD!) scales well to higher difficulties and all classes and characters who can't cap it really high are shit.

I should fear giving up my General's DEF cap as much as I fear giving up a Swordmaster's SPD cap or a Berserker's STR cap. I don't, of course. Not even remotely. If it's not SPD/STR/MAG/MOV, I don't even begin to give a shit. That's pretty messed up, I'd say.

I dunno, maybe give them back full weapon triangle control + bows and some massive wexp bases? And a decent SPD growth, if they're gonna have a shit cap. They need something.

[bottlegnomes]

The problem I see is the weird 30 cap for Paladin defense. I don't even know why they decided to give them such a high defense. It really makes

My guess is that it was a mistake on the part of the developers. How many other classes have a luck cap below 30? None, as far as I know. And pallies usually have around 25 defense. I'm guessing they just kept it the same in this one because they felt it would be weird to change it in a game that takes place in the same series.

[riariadne]

Paladins honestly should've had 27 defense or something. I guess it sort of makes up for RD though, were Gnerals>>> Paladins.

^I think that's actually been confirmed, at least for SD (but don't quote me on that). Why they didn't fix it, though, is beyond me.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Lightning

[Ether]

Paladins honestly should've had 27 defense or something. I guess it sort of makes up for RD though, were Gnerals>>> Paladins.

Eh,Generals still had shit caps,but there were a couple of serviceable Pallies.(Titania was great,Oscar was okay).And if you took the time to raise them,atleast Fiona/Astrid could have endgame potential,while Generals were shit outta luck.

[Interceptor]

Well then the fundamental design of Fire Emblem is FUBAR if a single stat (hi SPD!) scales well to higher difficulties and all classes and characters who can't cap it really high are shit.

Why is it FUBAR? Because it breaks down under situations that only a hardcore niche even cares about? Pardon me while I die laughing.

[Rodykitty]

Generals suck? Good, full invincibility is a lame tactic and they fully deserve it.

[Emperor Hardin]

Generals need better speed and movement. Even fast Generals like Gatrie are held down by low caps.

[Momo]

One thing I think would be cool is give Generals a sort of passive Charisma ability. Nothing insane like the Charisma of the past (Go, my army of auto 45 boosted avoid!), but something like that. If they don't have the decency to frontline anytime soon, they can at least try to manage to keep up as to give benefits to people 3 spaces away. Besides, they're Generals. Why would they not have leadership qualities? Also, Big Shield.

Just give em staves.

[Renall]

Why is it FUBAR? Because it breaks down under situations that only a hardcore niche even cares about? Pardon me while I die laughing.

Well that happened to be the circumstances under discussion. Pardon me for thinking a game should hold up to the same level of mechanics at increasing stages of difficulty, or that speculation on the root causes for the problem on topic are laughable.

A super-difficulty like Lunatic ought to be "you have to be way more careful, coordinate your attacks better, and occasionally take dangerous risks," not "Can't double against capped SPD? Can't take a hit or two against retarded godlike forges? Instant trash, GTFO."

That aside, if you don't think the stats are grossly imbalanced even on Normal I don't know what to tell you, because they absolutely are. Hell, some units are considered trash even on Normal Casual, for basically the same reasons.

[Rodykitty]

Generals need better speed and movement. Even fast Generals like Gatrie are held down by low caps.

Halberdiers.

Faster Generals with better movement are seriously a completely different class.

[Deliriyum]

Halberdiers.

Faster Generals with better movement are seriously a completely different class.

Its a shame they don't exist in everything not called FE9 or FE10.

[Anouleth]

Well then the fundamental design of Fire Emblem is FUBAR if a single stat (hi SPD!) scales well to higher difficulties and all classes and characters who can't cap it really high are shit.

I should fear giving up my General's DEF cap as much as I fear giving up a Swordmaster's SPD cap or a Berserker's STR cap. I don't, of course. Not even remotely. If it's not SPD/STR/MAG/MOV, I don't even begin to give a shit. That's pretty messed up, I'd say.

I dunno, maybe give them back full weapon triangle control + bows and some massive wexp bases? And a decent SPD growth, if they're gonna have a shit cap. They need something.

The only thing that Generals need is good durability, by which I mean 'useful and above average'. Imagine if there was an early-joining General that was effectively indestructible for the entire game (assume he stole a Master Crown from Tellius and has 60HP/38DEF/30RES). He would be a great character, even if his speed was poor, since being able to dish out damage on enemy phase compensates for the inability to double.

Durability does have applications and it can make up for poor offense. But when you have poor mobility (and can't expose yourself) or when mages rape you (and you can't expose yourself) or when other characters have enough durability to not risk death (and there's no point in exposing yourself since they have better offense), then it's not good enough.

It's not hard to find examples of good Knights and Generals and see what made them good. Oswin was good because his high strength/defence made up for his poor mobility/speed, since he dealt roughly as much damage (or more) than other characters and was indestructible as well. Even earlygame Gatrie is better than most Knights, since in Chapter 4/5, his high durability is useful.

[Renall]

It doesn't help that the Hammer exists, either. Or the Rapier/Wing Spear/Wolf Beil/etc., I guess, but at least those are somewhat limited in application.

[Rodykitty]

The only thing that Generals need is good durability, by which I mean 'useful and above average'. Imagine if there was an early-joining General that was effectively indestructible for the entire game (assume he stole a Master Crown from Tellius and has 60HP/38DEF/30RES). He would be a great character, even if his speed was poor, since being able to dish out damage on enemy phase compensates for the inability to double.

Durability does have applications and it can make up for poor offense. But when you have poor mobility (and can't expose yourself) or when mages rape you (and you can't expose yourself) or when other characters have enough durability to not risk death (and there's no point in exposing yourself since they have better offense), then it's not good enough.

It's not hard to find examples of good Knights and Generals and see what made them good. Oswin was good because his high strength/defence made up for his poor mobility/speed, since he dealt roughly as much damage (or more) than other characters and was indestructible as well. Even earlygame Gatrie is better than most Knights, since in Chapter 4/5, his high durability is useful.

Indestructability is extremely lame.

I'm happy that Generals cannot tink entire maps and weaken enemies for others with ease.

[Tryhard]

Indestructability is extremely lame.

You know how generals love mages/sages, with their high resistance, right? Right.

[Renall]

Indestructability is extremely lame.

I'm happy that Generals cannot tink entire maps and weaken enemies for others with ease.

The problem is, this seems to have been their roughly intended role, so the class has no particular reason to exist in player hands if it isn't going to be capable of doing that.

What, precisely, is it for? If it's just "decent durability" then there's lots of characters who can get that, have better offense, and much more movement. And it isn't offense, because doubling is more important than damage and they don't generally reach offense caps (with some exceptions).

[Interceptor]

Well that happened to be the circumstances under discussion. Pardon me for thinking a game should hold up to the same level of mechanics at increasing stages of difficulty, or that speculation on the root causes for the problem on topic are laughable.

What's laughable is not the speculation itself, but the implication that anyone over in Intelligent Systems gives a flying shit about it in the first place. Balancing Fire Emblem's system across multiple difficulties is a heavy lift to begin with, why on earth would they put in the effort for such a niche group of gamers?

Going off of past experience here, we'll be fortunate if NoA even gives us Lunatic mode in the first place.

That aside, if you don't think the stats are grossly imbalanced even on Normal I don't know what to tell you, because they absolutely are. Hell, some units are considered trash even on Normal Casual, for basically the same reasons.

Individual unit balance (as opposed to class balance) is a different kettle of fish, but one that I also find absolutely hilarious. When people talk about it, often times they start from the premise that the units were meant to be balanced, and come to the conclusion that IS therefore failed somewhere in the design process. Never does it cross their minds that shit units were put into the game completely on purpose, even though there's a giant hint of optional challenge elsewhere in the form of selectable difficulty levels.

[Rodykitty]

Their intended role in early FE games is to hold choke points, not to trivialize armies.

However, defense is the most powerful stat in FE, therefore a class based around it cannot be too powerful. It's obvious the designers in FE3 & FE5 knew this.

[Momo]

If you're gonna make an invincible class, make them actually invincible. 11 kind of did this, their worst point was just move. Make em more like that and they'll be fine.

Going off of past experience here, we'll be fortunate if NoA even gives us Lunatic mode in the first place.

Past experience of one whole game, followed by two that were left intact.

[Renall]

Their intended role in early FE games is to hold choke points, not to trivialize armies.

However, defense is the most powerful stat in FE, therefore a class based around it cannot be too powerful. It's obvious the designers in FE3 & FE5 knew this.

Defense is nowhere near the most powerful stat unless dealing significant damage is unlikely or impossible. DEF always has to face the obstacle that is STR + Weapon Mt, and unless the combined average STR + Mt is much lower than a unit can get DEF, damage is still being done. Obviously more DEF is better than less DEF, but to call it the best stat is questionable in all but a handful of entries in the series. This argument completely falls on its face in games with low caps or Mt forging, assuming enemy STR is worth a damn.

Ask yourself some of the following:

Would you trade a 30 DEF cap for a 30 SKL cap if the other had to be 20?

Would you trade a 30 DEF cap for a 30 STR cap if the other had to be 20?

Would you trade a 30 LCK cap for a 30 anything cap if the other had to be 20?

Would you trade a 30 anything cap for a 30 SPD cap if the other had to be 20?

EDIT: Also you can't hold a choke point you're never able to reach in time.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Renall

[Interceptor]

Past experience of one whole game, followed by two that were left intact.

Yes, let's just ignore the whole thing about Master Crowns, Wrath, Resolve, magical where-the-hell-did-those-come-from PRF weapons in Part 3, free forging, etc, none of which altered the difficulty of the game relative to the JP version one whit.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Interceptor

[MasterJP28]

The only thing I ever saw in a General is the 30% growth in defence. It can make characters like Barst with defence growth be able to raise it by a few stats nothin more. Hell male A has Paladins for 30 Defence and Male B has Warriore with 28 Defence, I know it's really dumb saying warrior with their nonexsistent defence growth. Also i'm refering to present FE's not the ones in the past where you had to defend for a number turns. In these 2 FE's it's all about sieze -_- I miss those defend chapters from Thracia they were awesome.

[Mr. Francis York Morgan]

I think you guys are whining about stupid shit honestly. The general class set is fine.

Sure it's not the class for speedrunning/wifi but that's not what it was ever intended to be good at. It was designed to hold the goddamn line and provide chip damage. Which it does quite effectively.

[Juigi Kario]

Just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents.

About the Paladin 30 DEF to prevent forge Poleax abuse thing: the reason why Knight Killers and whatnot exist is to be able to deal with Social Knight abuse, because in the original, they got fairly high Physical Defense to deal with their Movement Power, their main standing point, being potentially rendered useless in close combat or in thick terrain. But it couldn't be so godly that they'd just end up obsoleting Armor Knights, who already suffer in terrain as well. Still, the defense was rather high, and by the time things actually get their damage input going, HP is already getting a move-on too. Enter Knight Killers, capable of tearing through Social Knights' HP. No longer would Social Knights level maps once any mages were neutralized, because they had to deal with weapons capable of killing them fast to keep them from passing. Now they would have to either attack smart or die dumb.

Of course, this brings up another thing to point out: Armor Knights are supposed to sponge attacks. Sure a game should encourage good attacking, but providing too much attacking ends up creating a defensive metagame, as everybody will be seeking to cause the opponent to make the first mistake, which ultimately becomes the critical one, because the player who capitalizes on it will relentlessly hammer their opponent and leave them in a virtually hopeless situation, and that's if the opponent is even lucky to survive the mistake. Defensive ability, on the other hand, can be used to throw off attacks and allow yourself to attack with reduced if any fear.

If anything, Hammers should be with a weakness compared to Poleaxes, contrary to what I thought earlier. Granted, they do at least exist to deter Armor campout, but beyond that, they shouldn't help to make the Armor Knights useless at their job.

As for the DEF issue, if Might isn't high enough, DEF can have a surprising impact due to law of diminishing. Not as big as Speed, but there is a reason why Marty in FE5 has 3 stats at 0 AND a lack of skills. Yep, overcompensating weakness. Let me answer each of the questions:

Would you trade a 30 DEF cap for a 30 SKL cap if the other had to be 20?

NO! I'd rather not rely on criticals, and I can generally get good hit rates.

Would you trade a 30 DEF cap for a 30 STR cap if the other had to be 20?

Depends. Probably not if I can be sure of my weapon management.

Would you trade a 30 LCK cap for a 30 anything cap if the other had to be 20?

Most likely.

Would you trade a 30 anything cap for a 30 SPD cap if the other had to be 20?

For anything but DEF or maybe STR, definitely. In the case of the other two, I'd have to give it some thought.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Juigi Kario

[Big Klingy]

Imagine if there was an early-joining General that was effectively indestructible for the entire game (assume he stole a Master Crown from Tellius and has 60HP/38DEF/30RES). He would be a great character, even if his speed was poor, since being able to dish out damage on enemy phase compensates for the inability to double.

General Sedgar in SD says hi. That sums him up pretty well. (well... not for the entire game, but certainly for at least 60% of it) He's also considered near-broken for it.

I thought General was one of the best classes in SD, since due to the new avoid formula, avo is unreliable at best, so you need to be able to take a hit. In this game, it looks like they've taken a big hit, but that's mostly due to the different style of this game. The main threat from enemies is not high str or uber forged weapons, it's that they have these AND very high speed. So basically, if you can't avoid being doubled you're basically dead. Also, Axe using enemies are stronger and more frequent.

It's an interesting change, I would argue that in SD, Generals were one of the best classes, and swordmasters one of th worst. Now, it's the reverse.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Big Klingy