Mechanics that you want

[CrashGordon94]

Well, I have to say, I don't like FE5 sticking mounted units with Swords regardless of what they actually used, that definitely sucks.

[paladin21]

Well, I have to say, I don't like FE5 sticking mounted units with Swords regardless of what they actually used, that definitely sucks.

I totally agree with that, someone that uses an axe while mounted is supposed to be able to use it while dismounted. Some mechanics just have no logic at all. I'd agree that some of them couldn't use their secondary weapon (social knights using only swords while dismounted, but both swords and lances while mounted), but when they have only one weapon when mounted... I guess they were just lazy and made one class for all the mounted units (except bow knights, who get their dismounted bow knight to use bows).

[Othin]

I totally agree with that, someone that uses an axe while mounted is supposed to be able to use it while dismounted. Some mechanics just have no logic at all. I'd agree that some of them couldn't use their secondary weapon (social knights using only swords while dismounted, but both swords and lances while mounted), but when they have only one weapon when mounted... I guess they were just lazy and made one class for all the mounted units (except bow knights, who get their dismounted bow knight to use bows).

Indeed. While the mechanic had some interesting implications at times, the dismounting system in Berwick (and TRS, from what I can tell) was much better.

[paladin21]

Indeed. While the mechanic had some interesting implications at times, the dismounting system in Berwick (and TRS, from what I can tell) was much better.

Well, in BS, you have the choice to use any of your cavs as infantry with little penalty (unless you want to use lances for greater damage), and sometimes you might think of dismounting to prevent the horse from being killed. However, the gameplay is different, and the foot soldiers have a chance to get at the enemy before the cavs have taken them out, and rushing with a cavalier can get it killed before you can move another unit. I think the traditional FE style is pretty balanced, with a 2 mov difference between mounted and dismounted units, and higher terrain penalty for mounted units. However, a balanced dismounting system should be implemented (something that would make you want to dismount at some times, but not making them almost useless comparing to infrantry).

[Anouleth]

I totally agree with that, someone that uses an axe while mounted is supposed to be able to use it while dismounted. Some mechanics just have no logic at all.

It seems logical to me. Using a lance on a horse is very different to using one on foot. If anything, it correlates pretty well with real knights who would charge with a lance and then switch to a sword for combat in close quarters. And it also makes sense that a unit wearing cavalry armour and trained to fight on horseback would find it more difficult to move and fight on foot. They also wouldn't get the advantage of height and momentum that a horse provides, or being able to use their horse as a weapon.

[bottlegnomes]

It seems logical to me. Using a lance on a horse is very different to using one on foot. If anything, it correlates pretty well with real knights who would charge with a lance and then switch to a sword for combat in close quarters. And it also makes sense that a unit wearing cavalry armour and trained to fight on horseback would find it more difficult to move and fight on foot. They also wouldn't get the advantage of height and momentum that a horse provides, or being able to use their horse as a weapon.

But knights were also completely able to use swords on horseback, and often did. If they're trained in two weapons, like the aforementioned social knights, it makes sense, but if they're only trained in one, it makes no sense to have them suddenly start using a weapon they have no training in.

[Anouleth]

But knights were also completely able to use swords on horseback, and often did. If they're trained in two weapons, like the aforementioned social knights, it makes sense, but if they're only trained in one, it makes no sense to have them suddenly start using a weapon they have no training in.

But typically they do have training in them, at least a little bit. The only mounted unit with E Swords is Glade in FE5. And clearly you need some training to reach E in the first place.

[Othin]

But then they couldn't use the weapon while mounted if they knew how to use it while dismounted? While a lance makes sense to only use mounted, it doesn't seem like there's much of a reason why a character would be able to use an axe mounted and a sword dismounted, but not vice versa.

[Anouleth]

But then they couldn't use the weapon while mounted if they knew how to use it while dismounted? While a lance makes sense to only use mounted, it doesn't seem like there's much of a reason why a character would be able to use an axe mounted and a sword dismounted, but not vice versa.

Obviously it doesn't make perfect sense, but then again, very little about weapon ranks makes perfect sense in FE. Certainly, I can understand the logic behind their particular system and I don't think it's any crazier than units gaining weapon ranks or losing weapon ranks on promotion, or why units arbitrarily can't use most weapon types when it seems that anyone should be able to learn to use any weapon with enough time.

[dondon151]

But then they couldn't use the weapon while mounted if they knew how to use it while dismounted? While a lance makes sense to only use mounted, it doesn't seem like there's much of a reason why a character would be able to use an axe mounted and a sword dismounted, but not vice versa.

~~GAME BALANCE~~

[Paperblade]

We're talking about the series with the Warp Staff, balance is a foreign concept.

[Mekkah]

~~GAME BALANCE~~

Lyn: What?

[Othin]

~~GAME BALANCE~~

I'm not talking about gameplay, as it's not an issue here; there are plenty of alternatives to giving that Axe Knight two weapons in a situation where it would be unbalanced in the first place.

[dondon151]

I'm not talking about gameplay, as it's not an issue here; there are plenty of alternatives to giving that Axe Knight two weapons in a situation where it would be unbalanced in the first place.

Then what on earth are you talking about?

[Othin]

Then what on earth are you talking about?

The plausibility of a character being able to use one (non-lance) weapon only when on a horse and another completely different weapon only when dismounted, when the two weapon types are both very much usable both mounted and dismounted.

[Parrhesia]

You can use a spear on a horse, and you can use a spear on foot. COMPLETELY different techniques involved.

I can see axes on foot and mount, but again, game balance.

Personally, I liked the way FE5 handled dismounting. But they should've given you more indoor spearmen. And maybe not made the only one who could use spears at base have an E rank.

[dondon151]

The plausibility of a character being able to use one (non-lance) weapon only when on a horse and another completely different weapon only when dismounted, when the two weapon types are both very much usable both mounted and dismounted.

In a game with flying unicorns, you're complaining about the plausibiity of weapon skill.

[Phoenix Wright]

I think social knights should be able to use magic, staves, and weapons. Fighters should be able to use swords. All non-magic units should have high resistance, as well as magic users having extremely high defense.

But seriously, I do think that if, for example, a unit uses an axe mounted, and a sword unmounted, it doesn't make much sense. They should be able to use both at any time. I don't really see what this has to do with game balance, since it won't really do much at all. Dismounting should be used to bypass ballistae and cavalry-piercing weapons. Or for fun and/or other strategic purposes.

[Othin]

In a game with flying unicorns, you're complaining about the plausibiity of weapon skill.

Don't forget the people who can summon thunderbolts by waving their hands around.

But yes, I am. The two aren't necessarily related; the existence of magic and other fantasy elements in a setting is not automatically an excuse for just anything without further justification. That justification can be related to the fantasy elements, but it still has to be there.

Edited October 7, 2011 by Othin

[Anouleth]

I think that it's perfectly acceptable for RPGs to arbitrarily permit and forbid characters from using certain weapon types. I think that it's quite hypocritical that you're simultaneously arguing that characters should be able to summon and disappear horses at will in the middle of pitched battles and arguing that for them to switch their weapon type when they do so makes no sense.

Edited October 8, 2011 by Anouleth

[paladin21]

It seems logical to me. Using a lance on a horse is very different to using one on foot. If anything, it correlates pretty well with real knights who would charge with a lance and then switch to a sword for combat in close quarters. And it also makes sense that a unit wearing cavalry armour and trained to fight on horseback would find it more difficult to move and fight on foot. They also wouldn't get the advantage of height and momentum that a horse provides, or being able to use their horse as a weapon.

I agree with the lances, but... axes and swords? It's exactly what you say it correlates pretty well with real knights who would charge with a lance and then switch to a sword for combat in close quarters. You didn't mention dismounting anywhere in that sentence, so I assume it's what a social knight would do.

Obviously it doesn't make perfect sense, but then again, very little about weapon ranks makes perfect sense in FE. Certainly, I can understand the logic behind their particular system and I don't think it's any crazier than units gaining weapon ranks or losing weapon ranks on promotion, or why units arbitrarily can't use most weapon types when it seems that anyone should be able to learn to use any weapon with enough time.

Yeah, being in the middle of a war is the perfect moment to start learning how to use nunchuks.

You can use a spear on a horse, and you can use a spear on foot. COMPLETELY different techniques involved.

So completely different classes are involved, lance and duke knights know both techniques but they can only use a sword to cut a wedding cake, while social knights and paladins only use the spears while dismounted to look good on pics.

I can see axes on foot and mount, but again, game balance.

Yeah, being forced to rise two different weapons for different places instead of specializing into one, truly balances the game.

Personally, I liked the way FE5 handled dismounting. But they should've given you more indoor spearmen. And maybe not made the only one who could use spears at base have an E rank.

That's the hole lance and duke knights leave when they dismount, since social knights can increase their sword rank while mounted anyway.

[Anouleth]

I agree with the lances, but... axes and swords? It's exactly what you say it correlates pretty well with real knights who would charge with a lance and then switch to a sword for combat in close quarters. You didn't mention dismounting anywhere in that sentence, so I assume it's what a social knight would do.

And I imagine, that switching to a sword when dismounting indoors is meant to represent a knight charging with a lance and switching to a sword in close combat. After all, those silly cavalry lances are basically useless to a foot soldier since they're meant to hit the enemy with the full force of a charging horse behind it.

It seems that this is more a complaint about mounted units not being able to use every weapon in the game more than a complaint about dismounting penalties.

Yeah, being in the middle of a war is the perfect moment to start learning how to use nunchuks.

If untrained, "has never been in combat before" Neimi starts with D Bows, I imagine that anyone could have the equivalent of E Bows. Certainly, being in the middle of a war doesn't seem to stop characters from learning how to use new weapon types upon promotion.

[Othin]

And I imagine, that switching to a sword when dismounting indoors is meant to represent a knight charging with a lance and switching to a sword in close combat. After all, those silly cavalry lances are basically useless to a foot soldier since they're meant to hit the enemy with the full force of a charging horse behind it.

It seems that this is more a complaint about mounted units not being able to use every weapon in the game more than a complaint about dismounting penalties.

If untrained, "has never been in combat before" Neimi starts with D Bows, I imagine that anyone could have the equivalent of E Bows. Certainly, being in the middle of a war doesn't seem to stop characters from learning how to use new weapon types upon promotion.

Which is entirely irrelevant when axes are being discussed.

That said, apparently that isn't the case, as a Knight or Soldier using a lance will do as much damage as a Cavalier with the same Str score. Now, in Berwick Saga, where spears gain damage based on movement from a charge and lances are a mounted-only subset of spears even more dependent on movement, you might have a point, but we're not talking about Berwick Saga.

Speaking of Berwick Saga, if we were complaining about mounted units not being able to use every weapon in the game, we'd really be complaining about the Spear Knights who can't use any weapons outside of the Spear weapon group ever, even when dismounted. But we're not; I don't know about Paladin, but that's the sort of system I'm advocating.

Neimi:

Um... Is there anything I can do to help? I feel so... When I was little I used to go hunting with my grandfather. What I mean is I can-- I'm not bad with a bow.

It's not clear how much of her experience she's expressing, but she's very much trained with not only using a bow, but using it on living things. The extent of that training is unclear, but it still demonstrates she's not necessarily inexperienced with the weapon just because she hadn't actually used it on a human.

Edited October 8, 2011 by Othin

[Anouleth]

Speaking of Berwick Saga, if we were complaining about mounted units not being able to use every weapon in the game, we'd really be complaining about the Spear Knights who can't use any weapons outside of the Spear weapon group ever, even when dismounted. But we're not; I don't know about Paladin, but that's the sort of system I'm advocating.

Well, why is it that foot fighters can't use every weapon type as well? If weapon types are easy enough to learn that a knight can learn them all, then surely a mercenary or a different type of soldier should be able to learn them all too?

It's not clear how much of her experience she's expressing, but she's very much trained with not only using a bow, but using it on living things. The extent of that training is unclear, but it still demonstrates she's not necessarily inexperienced with the weapon just because she hadn't actually used it on a human.

What about Rolf them, who essentially picked up using a Bow just by having Shinon help him for a few odd hours here and there? Both of these characters are pretty young. Are you saying that every Fire Emblem character has no experience hunting with a Bow, or has never even tried to learn a Bow, since apparently all you need to do is get taken hunting as a young girl or have someone show you and you can pick it up fine.

Edited October 8, 2011 by Anouleth

[paladin21]

And I imagine, that switching to a sword when dismounting indoors is meant to represent a knight charging with a lance and switching to a sword in close combat. After all, those silly cavalry lances are basically useless to a foot soldier since they're meant to hit the enemy with the full force of a charging horse behind it.

You see lances as heavy weapons intended for charging, but you forget that in FE the weapon type "Lance" includes all sort of pole weapons (except maybe the pole axe), and most of them ain't so good for charging, like javelins. As a matter of fact, in FE5 only the horseslayer has the look of the type of weapon you wouldn't be able to use as a foot soldier, the rest can be wielded to fight in unpromoted Ephraim style, and if he was in FE5 I don't think he'd drop his lance to use a sword.

It seems that this is more a complaint about mounted units not being able to use every weapon in the game more than a complaint about dismounting penalties.

I don't want mounted units to use every single weapon type, just make it so that dismounting certain units don't make them stay behind in weapon ranks. If they can use two different weapon types when mounted, whichever they are, I don't find it wrong to be able to use only one of those weapon types, but having to change entirely the weapon type you have to use seems wrong for me. Just think of Altenna as an enemy with the Gae Bolg. Beating her would be very easy if you could lure her into a building, so that she should switch to swords, and probably not the best ones around.

If untrained, "has never been in combat before" Neimi starts with D Bows, I imagine that anyone could have the equivalent of E Bows. Certainly, being in the middle of a war doesn't seem to stop characters from learning how to use new weapon types upon promotion.

That's divine inspiration. You surely must have noticed the light that surrounds them when they promote.

More seriously, aside from several overpowered promotions (and yes, I'm looking at FE4 Leaf), units don't learn how to use every weapon in the game, just one or two more (in case of FE8 generals). When they promote, as I see it, they feel prepared to use an aditional fighting style to the one they already master, just like getting the crit bonus.