Mechanics that you want

[BwdYeti]

Steel Bows are irrelevant to anyone with E Rank

Yeah because a lot of those exist

Oh wait from FE6-12 the only bow user to start with an E rank is Rolf, who has a Prf weapon that's already stronger than a Hand Axe. The only exceptions are promotions, where the unit is already good at their old weapon type that was probably axes, or reclassing, where the player wants someone to use bows so much they're inflicting the E rank on themself. Everyone else can already use Steel or higher.

EDIT

Actually with reclassing it wouldn't matter anyway, since DS FE Javelins/Hand Axes are D rank too. A newly reclassed Archer might not have access to Steel, but a newly reclassed Cav or Fighter can't do 2 range at all

Edited December 26, 2011 by BwdYeti

[eclipse]

. . .or a reclassed Hunter/Warrior/General. . .because I can think of a couple of irritating chapters where I'd rather hack out a bow than a Hand Axe/Lance, and I'd desperately want it to be Steel over Iron.

The reason why it's a PITA to raise bow rank is because enemies aren't suiciding into said bow user for most EP. With axes/lances, I can have the unit I'm training smack people around with said Iron weapon on EP until their weapon rank goes up. There's also Arms Scrolls, but I'd rather save them for something a little more relevant than "let's give this unit insta-Steel Bows~!"

[The_Purple_Knight]

I don't have room for you in my Terrific Trio, but

- arena abuse is near impossible in Lunatic

- money is a legitimate issue

- limit one forge per chapter

Arena abuse isn't impossible only characters with high luck speed and decent attack can abuse effectively I've never played lunatic mode but h5 in shadow dragon after Nuuk an gets to about lv20 he can sweep the arena in any mode un opposed . And even without gaidens factored in thats about 23 forges .Plus you don't have to break bank to make a decent range weapon only add 3-4 mt and a bit of hit in the case of handaxes and you should be good to go for a while .

[Othin]

Oh I have every right when arguing with the Terrific Trio.

Steel Bows are irrelevant to anyone with E Rank and FE12 players don't have access to Tomahawks and Spears (hint: its enemy only). The only viable 1-2 range weapon that has juice behind it isn't available until after Chapter 20 when Hardin drops Gradivus.

And since you three can make retarded ideas, I can too - let's give thrown weapons 20 Wt like they did in FE3. Added bonus - include negative AS parameters like they did in a couple FE games.

Or we just did what FE12 did right. If the only person ORKOing needs insane Str parameters (read: My Unit) I see no flaw to the problem. Once again, the issue with hypothetical Boyd is Max Str isn't achieved until around Endgame, he still has minor Spd issues unlike Swordmasters, he has E Rank in Bows to take no advantage of other bows, and even of he did effective Mt is x2 anyway. Swordmasters problem isn't exactly their low Mt. Their issue was FE9 units were fairly slow. They are just fat enough where, sometimes, Boyd can fail to double them, so he can still miss ORKOes, but not fast enough where their overkill Spd is necessary. Now in FE12, you need a hell of a lot more Swordmasters than Warriors since Spd capped Warriors get doubled and most don't have a sufficient Bow rank to make up for it. Even if they did, there's Horseman. Snipers still have a slightly better Spd padding and access to Longbows.

Units with E rank in bows can use Steel Bows after they use Iron Bows enough to attain a D rank. In the DS FE games, that's only 15 battles with a bow. More than reasonable when, compared to a Hand Axe, the only loss for a bow would be 1 Mt, which doesn't even matter most of the time. And as I said, Hand Axes are not the only thrown weapons. I said this not to compare to the stronger alternatives, but to the weaker Javelins, which in the GBA games have precisely the same Mt as Iron Bows.

Now, if you're going to insist that the comparison be limited to Mt vs. Iron Bows, let's look at how they compare in FE12. Javelins have 3 Mt, Hand Axes have 4 Mt, Iron Bows have 5 Mt. Still pitifully slanted against Iron Bows, when Javelins and Hand Axes have 1-2 range compared to 2 range. If you're going to argue that bows can stand up against thrown weapons in FE12, it's either because of bows' substantial accuracy advantage or because of their potential to reach higher ranks; both are advantages they would retain with the system Snowy and I have been proposing. Under that system, Javelins/Hand Axes would have the same range and virtually the same Mt as Iron Bows, but Iron Bows would retain their better accuracy and lower cost making them generally a better option when you can choose between the two; Iron Bows would also have the potential for soon making better ranged weapons available. So where's the problem?

Also, as for your "retarded idea", only Javelins has 20 Wt in FE3; Hand Axes had 9. However, extending the excessive Wt to both Javelins and Hand Axes would be a perfectly legitimate alternative method of balancing thrown weapons by, instead of taking away their melee, taking away their capability to double and their users' capability to dodge. In other words, pretty much what FE4 did, which in that area worked rather well. I would call that a perfectly good idea.

Edited December 26, 2011 by Othin

[Aethereal]

When you need a good chip against a enemy, any 2-range weapon, be it a bow, thrown weapon, or magic, will be useful. However, that chip damage only has more 'value' when you are fighting no more than 1-2 enemies at a time who can't attack at close range. When they do, the advantage of bows goes away. Besides, did you even pay attention? Bows will only be 'better' when the enemy HP falls into that narrow range where their target deals more than a attack/counter would to the point of not killing the enemy, but at the same time not enough to make it so that failing to chip also results in the enemy surviving.

Bows would be more useful when: You have one significantly stronger enemy in a pack (Fairly common), you have units who can combine with a bow user 2RKO, and combined with a hand axe user 3RKO, you are trying to clear all enemies on PP, or you want to avoid a counter on a unit after you chip it. Oh and against bosses.

Thrown weapons would be more useful when: Your units can still combine with a thrown weapon to 2RKO, (12 HP is a significant difference) or a scenario in which your units 4/3RKO all 3 of those enemies, but 3/2RKO all 3 of those enemies after the hand axe user attacks. Both sides have their merits, and since units with throwing weapons have other uses, it's okay that hand axe users are not going to have as many strong points as bow users. We want people to use bow users.

Let's go back to that 4X2 (potentially three times) vs. 10X2 (once) bit you talked about. Let's acknowledge that this is 'chip' damage so both enemies have at least 21 HP. Since it is 'chip damage' we need to assume a second (third?) person there capable of melee attacking. The simple fact is that a enemy needs a lot of HP for the extra chip damage to be worth it since the other person is going to attack for a 1RKO unless your enemy has something like 29 HP

You're looking at this from the mindset that the enemies are terrible. You cannot always make that 1RKO, and even if you can, stronger chip helps avoid counters. If you want to look at this from the mindset that your units are all so great that they dominate the enemies the way you describe, go right ahead.

The simple fact is that a enemy needs a lot of HP for the extra chip damage to be worth it since the other person is going to attack for a 1RKO unless your enemy has something like 29 HP

And if it has 40 HP, as tons of competent enemies do?

(as opposed to the 20 you suggested).

You suggested that. I never did.

Let's face it, a MT nerf, though part of the solution, is not the solution in of itself.

You saying that your point is correct, and telling me to face it isn't a way of making your point more valid.

Because by using bows later on, you gain access to more unique weapons with unique capabilities. Silver bows (which can be bought instead of tomahawks/spears which usually cannot), killer, brave, and so-forth. Heck, if chip-damage is really so great as you believe, I would expect a bow user to shoot up in the tiers simply because Silver bows deal more damage than spears and can be bought/replaced easily (not to mention possibly forged).

Yes, just like every one uses early bow users with bad ranks now. Ever used Rolf, Leonardo, Wolt, Dorothy, Neimi, Wil, or Rebecca? Do you understand how ridiculously terrible they are early game? So terrible that it's not worth raising them. A lot of those units actually have solid stats at end game, but nobody cares because it is so terrible raising archers without strong bows, and there's a perfectly viable replacement in hand axes/javelins, without the drawback of never having an enemy phase. No one would ever choose the archer, just as they don't now. Strong chip is useful, sucking ass for half the game to get strong chip isn't.

A handaxe because it can counter at 2 range. A javelin has the same MT as a iron bow, but can counter at 2 range. A handaxe has 1 MT on a bow which gives it a 2 HP range where it is 'better' at 2 range. While that can matter, the much bigger factor is that they can also counter at 1 range as well for picking them over the bow. TBH, the only MT change here I would make is nerfing the Handaxe by 1 MT so it's equal to the other weapons here.

God, you're not getting the point. So you would choose an archer with an iron bow over a fighter with a hand axe, even with the -1 MT? If so, I need to ask if you've played Fire Emblem, and understand that early game archers suck?

You lower the MT too much and you hurt your melee weapon users ability to deal damage at 2-range. While I am not against lowering their MT, lowering it too much makes it so that they are dependent on forges/drops to deal any significant 2-range damage.

So, in effect, you make them worse than archers at the only thing archers can do? Because that would be, y'know, the point. Giving hand axes/javelins a new niche (Widespread, but weaker chip) is the entire point of this hypothetical. This leaves strong chip on a single enemy bow/magic users' role.

By restricting it to 2-range, iron bows and basic throwing weapons become largely identical. Assuming you don't have a short axe/spear, there is little reason to use the throwing weapon over the bow if you are just starting out and training up your bow skills can lead to better bows later on that are both stronger than what you have and can do things that throwing weapons cannot.

I would agree, if the start didn't suck so so terribly for bow users. But they are, so no one raises them. I literally cannot think of one example of an early game bow user who is considered good unless they're mounted. From FE4-FE10. Early game bow users suck, and with your change they would still suck.

while snipers, between now having their weapon not so dominated by other weapons in other classes and gaining 3 range on promotion, are now a lot better off in comparison to other units.

The difference between a sniper chipping and a paladin chipping is the same as it ever was. The sniper is better, and if they have good weapons compared to the paladin, significantly. That wouldn't be too terrible a niche if it was a more common niche. Like, if the sniper didn't have to use Killers/Braves/Silvers. Or if all your units didn't come promoted with awesome weapons.

As for the bow user, his purpose remains exactly the same as it was if we decreases mt, exactly the same if we kept 1-2 range, and exactly the same if we made any change what so ever that didn't introduce 1-2 range bow weapons. Namely 2-range melee damage specialists.

How does this purpose work out for bow users right now? Do people really like bow users with Iron/Steel compared to their hand axe/javelin counterparts? Is everybody who thinks Wolt/Dorothy/Wil/Rebecca/Neimi/Rolf/Leonardo suck wrong? Or do you think this hypothetical doesn't remotely solve the problem of units like them?

You've done nothing to support that conclusion except point out that Hand Axes have more Mt than Iron Bows. Iron Bows are not the only bows, Hand Axes are not the only thrown weapons, and Mt is not the only stat.

While I agree that they aren't the only thing that should be brought into consideration, Iron Bows(And steel bows) are generally the most used and most available weapons for bow users that you have for a majority of the game. Do you honestly feel that the difference between a Hand Axe/Javelin and Iron/Steel Bows is a significant one, when only considering 2 range? Spears/Short Spears, and Short Axes/Tomahawks only prove to make the difference less significant later on in the game, when I would hope a bow user's strengths would shine even more, with their more diverse and useful weapons.

Yeah because a lot of those exist

Oh wait from FE6-12 the only bow user to start with an E rank is Rolf, who has a Prf weapon that's already stronger than a Hand Axe... Everyone else can already use Steel or higher.

While there aren't a lot of bow users with E Rank, there are a lot who don't get access to tons of Steel Bows for 5+ Chapters, which is a lot. And Steel generally doesn't significantly outclass hand axes/javelins as is, at least not enough that people like bringing archers. If I had to choose between a fighter with a hand axe and an iron/steel axe or an archer with Iron+Steel Bows, I feel I'd almost always choose the fighter. Even if Hand Axes only had 2 range. But if Hand Axes were relatively weaker, the archer could do something for me that the fighter can't.

Edited December 26, 2011 by Aethereal

[Othin]

Let's say we have Mr. Hypothetical Fighter with a 2-range Hand Axe, and Mr. Hypothetical Archer with identical stats and an Iron Bow. The Hand Axe has +1 Mt, but the Iron Bow has like +25 Hit. So unless the +1 Mt makes the difference between killing and not killing (unlikely), I'm going with Mr. Hypothetical Archer.

Now, in reality, Mr. Hypothetical Fighter and Mr. Hypothetical Archer will have different stats, and that's okay. But if Mr. Hypothetical Fighter has ridiculously better stats, that's a different problem that needs to be addressed on its own. FE12's system, if it's that way, isn't any better: if the archer has worse stats and lacks 1-2 range, and his only option is an Iron Bow which just has +1 Mt to make up for it, then I'm still going with Mr. Hypothetical Fighter even under the FE12 system.

As for my own point, there's a world of difference between comparing Iron Bows to Hand Axes and comparing Iron Bows + Steel Bows to Hand Axes, especially when we're arguing over a single point of Mt. Notably, in FE7, a Steel Bow beats a Hand Axe in Mt, Hit, and Wt, so with the Hand Axe's range removed, the Steel Bow is the clear winner. I'm not suggesting Spears and Tomahawks be used to compare, although when those are available, they tend to be limited enough as to not fully compete with even Silver Bows.

Edited December 26, 2011 by Othin

[Momo]

Let's say we have Mr. Hypothetical Fighter with a 2-range Hand Axe, and Mr. Hypothetical Archer with identical stats and an Iron Bow. The Hand Axe has +1 Mt, but the Iron Bow has like +25 Hit. So unless the +1 Mt makes the difference between killing and not killing (unlikely), I'm going with Mr. Hypothetical Archer.

Going by FE11/12 rules, the hand axe user also gets +1 from the weapon triangle and takes less damage from Javalins. Also, there were plenty of times were +1 MT made a big difference in terms of an enemy dying, in my own experience.

That said, the two games did a much better job at making bow users viable, but they need to stop penalizing the classes for no reason. They have one less move than other units, just for the privilege of having no one range. Also, Hunters got increased speed and attack, along with an extra move point, while Archers got... more defense. It's ridiculous.

[Othin]

And -1 against sword users. 1 Mt can make a difference, but it's easy enough to identify those times to choose a different strategy.

A note to all: In FE7, Hand Axes have +1 Mt compared to Iron Bows, -25 Hit, and +7 Wt; in FE12, they have -1 Mt and -30 Hit. Can we stop making such a big deal out of a relative nerf of 2 Mt and 5 Hit? (2 Mt and 10 Hit compared to Steel Bows.)

Edited December 26, 2011 by Othin

[eclipse]

FE11/12 Archers get Longbows. Hunters do not.

[Othin]

FE11/12 Archers get Longbows. Hunters do not.

I might be missing something, but I can't find any information on Longbows being available outside of sidequests or online shops in either game.

Granted, sidequests aren't so much of an issue in FE12, but Serenes only lists it for 20x. That seems kinda late.

[eclipse]

Chapter 17 SD secret shop sells Longbows. Three is plenty for the rest of the game.

[arvilino]

And -1 against sword users. 1 Mt can make a difference, but it's easy enough to identify those times to choose a different strategy.

A note to all: In FE7, Hand Axes have +1 Mt compared to Iron Bows, -25 Hit, and +7 Wt; in FE12, they have -1 Mt and -30 Hit. Can we stop making such a big deal out of a relative nerf of 2 Mt and 5 Hit? (2 Mt and 10 Hit compared to Steel Bows.)

It's only really relative if everything else stays the same or atleast is very similar. The relative nerf (due to similar enemy density and durability) of the Hand Axe is actually 4 Mt between FE11 and FE12 and that is quite significant.

[Othin]

Chapter 17 SD secret shop sells Longbows. Three is plenty for the rest of the game.

I stand corrected. Although it's still rather late, and a weapon of only minor consequence in the first place.

It's only really relative if everything else stays the same or atleast is very similar. The relative nerf (due to similar enemy density and durability) of the Hand Axe is actually 4 Mt between FE11 and FE12 and that is quite significant.

In FE11, Hand Axes has +3 Mt compared to Iron Bows. That extra 2 Mt of difference was just FE12 undoing what FE10 did to further exacerbate the problem by making Hand Axes even more overpowered than they already were. In FE11, Hand Axes had as much Mt as Steel Bows. You can't possibly think they were only as overpowered than as they were in the GBA games.

2 Mt was undoing what the recent games had done to increase the problem. Only the remaining 2 Mt actually addressed the problem that had been present in the earlier games.

Edit: Checking again, in FE9, Javelins and Hand Axes had -1 Mt compared to Iron Lances and Iron Axes. In FE10, Javelins had equal Mt to Iron Lances and Hand Axes had +1 Mt compared to Iron Axes. In FE11, Javelins and Hand Axes had +1 Mt compared to Iron Lances and Iron Axes. This is not some fundamental style change; this is the developers tacking on extra points of Mt onto already overpowered weapons for no reason.

Edited December 26, 2011 by Othin

[Thor Odinson]

It would make throne bosses a nonentity to anyone who's not LTCing it.

FE12 had enemy only strong 2 range.

I don't see how that can't be brought back either.

[eclipse]

As someone who is stupid enough to use archers in SD draft tournaments (where Warp is usually banned), I find that Longbows are really helpful. It gives my archers an extra square of range, lets them chip mages/other 2-range things with impunity, and makes them all the more scary when they go sniper (10 range, can't be countered, doesn't care much about Ridersbane, which is a thorn in my side during the Macedon chapters).

[Othin]

As someone who is stupid enough to use archers in SD draft tournaments (where Warp is usually banned), I find that Longbows are really helpful. It gives my archers an extra square of range, lets them chip mages/other 2-range things with impunity, and makes them all the more scary when they go sniper (10 range, can't be countered, doesn't care much about Ridersbane, which is a thorn in my side during the Macedon chapters).

Well then.

Edited December 26, 2011 by Othin

[Florete]

I don't want to see how far back this goes, but things seem pretty off-topic from here. Let's try to get back on track, shall we? Unless someone can explain how this is all relevant.

If you want to continue whatever other discussion is going just make a new topic.

[Othin]

I don't want to see how far back this goes, but things seem pretty off-topic from here. Let's try to get back on track, shall we? Unless someone can explain how this is all relevant.

If you want to continue whatever other discussion is going just make a new topic.

To answer your request for an explanation: We are discussing the merits of proposed changes to thrown weapon mechanics.

Edited December 26, 2011 by Othin

[Rewjeo]

People want bows to be better, so they're discussing how to do that. Some people think nerfing 1-2 range weapons should be done to help makes bows better; others don't. It doesn't seem to have gone much of anywhere, though...

Edited December 26, 2011 by Rewjeo

[Celice]

But what does that have to do with the 3DS Fire Emblem? That's the question being asked. If it's just mechanics in general being discussed right now... that's fit for another part of the forum, I would think.

[Colonel M]

Yeah this is pretty on-topic since it discussed mechanics with 1-2 range.

Momo, remember that you only obtain +1 Atk if you have an A Rank.

Also, in FE12 at least, bows have a higher priority for forges since they have effective Mt on flying enemies and they're still more accurate. This is pretty crucial for the ultra low turn completions necessary. 2 range... I only forged a Hand Axe IIRC, and I was 1 Mt short on accident for what I needed.

If there were more dangerous flying enemies at least, 1-2 range wouldn't look so awesome. Either that, or have Longbows or 2-3 range for bow users. Make Longbows legitimately if were doing both - ie make them 2-4 or something.

Edited December 27, 2011 by Colonel M

[Othin]

But what does that have to do with the 3DS Fire Emblem? That's the question being asked. If it's just mechanics in general being discussed right now... that's fit for another part of the forum, I would think.

Most of us that are proposing changes are, I think, saying that we would want the changes to be in a future FE game (such as FE13), which is how I understand the point of this thread.

The existing mechanics are being brought up because some people are pointing to aspects of them to say that there's no need for anything new, while others are pointing to other aspects to say there is a need. It could be a moot point since we've already seen screenshots demonstrating that FE13 is using the FE12 system for thrown weapons, but in discussions like this, it's my understanding that plausibility is a boring factor better ignored.

Yeah this is pretty on-topic since it discussed mechanics with 1-2 range.

Momo, remember that you only obtain +1 Atk if you have an A Rank.

Also, in FE12 at least, bows have a higher priority for forges since they have effective Mt on flying enemies and they're still more accurate. This is pretty crucial for the ultra low turn completions necessary. 2 range... I only forged a Hand Axe IIRC, and I was 1 Mt short on accident for what I needed.

If there were more dangerous flying enemies at least, 1-2 range wouldn't look so awesome. Either that, or have Longbows or 2-3 range for bow users. Make Longbows legitimately if were doing both - ie make them 2-4 or something.

Flying enemies as targets for the effective bonus can be good, but it's situational; the effectiveness of the bows hinges on times when the flying enemies are present and difficult to defeat otherwise, which can be difficult to work out well to be relevant without being dominating, especially between multiple difficulty levels.

As for increased range, that's another idea I've liked, but it seems to me that it makes less of a difference the more you have. 2 range adds a lot of flexibility on top of 1 range, but how much flexibility does 3 range add on top of that? And then 4 range, how often do you need to shoot from three spaces behind your front line, or through three walls, or otherwise at an enemy that far away? It seems like it gets excessive and further away from relevance.

Edited December 26, 2011 by Othin

[Thor Odinson]

2-4 range could mean shooting a nasty bolting asshole or status asshole that's out of reach normally. Hate those guys, and hate it even more when I can't hit them. Sure, it'd be situational, but it's still better than not having it. And it also depends on the number of defend chapters(the kind where killing the boss has no effect on ending the chapter). having awesome range and standing behind a tanky guy shooting a nasty enemy from far away sounds pretty nice to me. And 3 range means not even have to eat counters from a Javelin or Handaxe or a Mage on player phase, which depends on the strength and speed of the archer, would either mean "hey free kill!" or a nice chip that allows another unit to finish off without having to eat a counter.

[Othin]

Oh yeah, every point of range has its uses, I'm just questioning how often that use will come up, how much value it's worth.

[General Banzai]

Mechanics I DON'T want: Paid DLC

Owait