Othin Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 The most Hit/Avo you could get from maximum supports in the GBA games was +25, actually. Maximum Earth meanwhile gives +50 in FE9 and +45 in FE10. Granted, that's the only bonus; maximum Anima, for example, gives +5 Atk, +5 Def, +25 Avo, and +25 CEV, which altogether is probably better than even the +50 Avo. But then, FE10's +45 has the advantage of only requiring two units together to get the full bonus, not three, and being possible to form easily between any two characters with Earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 DS, not GBA. That said, with the amount of shit 12 threw at you, I'd say +50 avoid isn't too unreasonable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrashGordon94 Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Well, the FE10 system was pretty similar. Most supports would be ready to level within 3 deployments, but using stuff like shove, adjacents, and healing, you could make them build faster if you wanted to. Obviously that would need to be slowed down a little bit since it would be silly to have everyone running around with A supports in Chapter 7, but being able to build a support in more ways than one is a good idea. Well, with the way you built Supports, I guess. But FE10 had otehr problems in its system (supporting anyone with anyone is fun and all but it's not a terrific idea balance-wise, only one partner at any time and NO REAL CONVERSATIONS). Not much to say about anything else. Earth was never really that powerful. +45 avoid is strong and all, but the DS games let you get as much as +50 avoid. ...+45-50 Avoid is pretty incredible actually, it could take an enemy's accuracy down from say 65% to 25-30%, that's a pretty large drop... And it sounds like there were other possiblities in other games to have stuff like that, but that doesn't make Earth any more balanced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowy_One Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 The big problem with Earth is that it's a mono-support. One of the problems that pure builds of any kind meet in any games where there can be hybreeds is the balance between the two types. Give too much to the mono and it becomes overpowering, but give it too little and it can be suddenly weak. For earth I think the best solution is to simply reduce the amount of AVO it gives by 1/4 or 1/5 so that it will still hold a distinct edge for people looking for pure evade while not outshining everything else. AVO in general probably needs a nerf though. As for heaven/hit elements in general, I don't really know what can be done to reliably buff them. Hit is not something you want to skimp out on if, at any point, you are below a certain amount (90% for me). Making hit rates low in general makes the game less about strategy and more about luck and I don't think the bonuses for supports are strong enough to make it so that a character you didn't want to use before because of bad hit is suddenly usable unless we're talking about something like a duel Heaven support. Maybe make it so that +hit supports give you extra crit if you've already hit 100% at a 3 hit to 1 crit ratio or something? Maybe a boost to skill activation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momo Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 The problem with Heaven was probably more who got it, at least in 9. From what I remember, one was Stefan. A swordmaster. The class that uses the most accurate weapon and has the highest skill stat. Another was Lethe, but I don't remember how good cat stats are. Point is, it was worthless on the people that actually had it. If someone like I dunno, Makalov, had it, it wouldn't be as terrible. For the same reason, Earth was probably not that bad. Only Oscar had access to hilariously high amounts of Avoid, all the other Earths just got fun amounts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anouleth Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 (edited) As for heaven/hit elements in general, I don't really know what can be done to reliably buff them. Hit is not something you want to skimp out on if, at any point, you are below a certain amount (90% for me). Making hit rates low in general makes the game less about strategy and more about luck and I don't think the bonuses for supports are strong enough to make it so that a character you didn't want to use before because of bad hit is suddenly usable unless we're talking about something like a duel Heaven support. Uh, really? Even one sided A Rank Heaven gives a huge +27 hit. That's the difference between Gonzales having 60 hit on everything and 87 hit on everything. Heaven gives really enormous boosts that would be quite useful for the DB, if it weren't for every Heaven character in FE10 either being awful (Meg, Lethe) or having terrible availability (Elincia, Tibarn). I can think of at least two characters who have accuracy issues in Part 3. Dual Heaven is +54. Very few characters have a use for +54 hit. Edited February 11, 2012 by Anouleth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowy_One Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 Uh, really? Even one sided A Rank Heaven gives a huge +27 hit. That's the difference between Gonzales having 60 hit on everything and 87 hit on everything. Heaven gives really enormous boosts that would be quite useful for the DB, if it weren't for every Heaven character in FE10 either being awful (Meg, Lethe) or having terrible availability (Elincia, Tibarn). I can think of at least two characters who have accuracy issues in Part 3. Dual Heaven is +54. Very few characters have a use for +54 hit. Unless you preemptively know that a character is going to have a issue with hit it will take several chapters to build up that hit to a point where it can have a significant impact on play. That is assuming that we have free-range supports as well. If I notice my axe-user starting to lag behind in hit, if he doesn't have a +hit support, it's completely pointless. Plus, once you do get to a capped hit, anything extra is pointless. Not to mention most hit problems can be at least addressed by the lesser +hit elements (Fire, Light, and Wind) which can give boosts to attack, defense, and avoid as well (which are far more useful on the whole). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anouleth Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 (edited) Unless you preemptively know that a character is going to have a issue with hit it will take several chapters to build up that hit to a point where it can have a significant impact on play. That is assuming that we have free-range supports as well. If I notice my axe-user starting to lag behind in hit, if he doesn't have a +hit support, it's completely pointless. Plus, once you do get to a capped hit, anything extra is pointless. These are issues with all types of supports. Unless you know in advance that someone needs avoid, it will take blah blah blah, if your sword user doesn't have a +atk support it's completely pointless, and once you get to a certain level of defense, anything extra is pointless. None of this changes the fact that +hit supports can be useful. You think I didn't realise that they can be useless? Of course they can. And as I've stated before, I would like to see excess hit converted into crit in a 1:1 ratio. Edited February 12, 2012 by Anouleth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowy_One Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I'm worried about a 1:1 ratio because you will have people capping hit naturally (or close enough too it) will get their crit skyrocketed (I'm assuming you are only talking about hit from supports). Using PoR's numbers, a promoted Mia with a Ilyana/Rhys A/B would be getting +50 critical from her supports/swordmaster critical bonus and Stefan would be getting the same as well even though his supporters don't give ACC themselves. A 1:2 ratio would drop that down to ~38 and a 1:3 would make it ~ 23 critical before skill/weapon on a swordsmaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BwdYeti Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 1:2 ratio is much more balanced, but other than that it's a great idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I'm worried about a 1:1 ratio because you will have people capping hit naturally (or close enough too it) will get their crit skyrocketed (I'm assuming you are only talking about hit from supports). Using PoR's numbers, a promoted Mia with a Ilyana/Rhys A/B would be getting +50 critical from her supports/swordmaster critical bonus and Stefan would be getting the same as well even though his supporters don't give ACC themselves. A 1:2 ratio would drop that down to ~38 and a 1:3 would make it ~ 23 critical before skill/weapon on a swordsmaster. Personally, I don't have a problem with it. It would just make units like SM and sniper fill their roles as not particularly high damage units, but high hit/crit units to make up for it, better. It's not like SMs are exactly OP in games where hit and speed aren't issues. And even then, they aren't that OP because they have other problems for the most part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowy_One Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 They aren't OP, but they also can't get 50% critical without a unique sword (KE usually) or a unique skill (like Wrath). If they ever got their hands on vantage they would likely end up being outright terrors. 60-70% chance of critical before the enemy even attacks followed by a relatively high chance of dodging and then a second attack. The only way that wouldn't be overpowered would be if swords/swordsmasters were so weak that without the support a swordsmaster is effectively useless. No. 1:1 is simply too high a ratio. I favor 1:3, though 1:2 is also acceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor Odinson Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) We had insane crit SMs. They're in FE6. Rutger's amazing since he joined early with great bases and basically exists to kill all those annoying throne bosses, but Fir's only really mediocre and the 30 crit + FE6 being nice to swords just saved her from being outright bad. Just giving them a buttload of crit isn't gonna make them OP'd. Especially if their 1-2 range options are still utterly shit and useless and if they're still not particularly durable. I use a 1:2 ratio in a project I'm...well, doing calculations for more than anything, but if the hitrates are not that high I might bump it up to a 1:1. It really depends on the game, though. In a game with FE6esque hit rates, 1:1 wouldn't be unbalanced since most units struggle to see 100 ever even with swords except on the slower axemen, but FE8, for example, with balls-slow enemies and high hitrates all over the place, 1:2 would be more optimal. Edited February 13, 2012 by Luminescent Blade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) We had insane crit SMs. They're in FE6. Rutger's amazing since he joined early with great bases and basically exists to kill all those annoying throne bosses, but Fir's only really mediocre and the 30 crit + FE6 being nice to swords just saved her from being outright bad. Just giving them a buttload of crit isn't gonna make them OP'd. Especially if their 1-2 range options are still utterly shit and useless and if they're still not particularly durable. I use a 1:2 ratio in a project I'm...well, doing calculations for more than anything, but if the hitrates are not that high I might bump it up to a 1:1. It really depends on the game, though. In a game with FE6esque hit rates, 1:1 wouldn't be unbalanced since most units struggle to see 100 ever even with swords except on the slower axemen, but FE8, for example, with balls-slow enemies and high hitrates all over the place, 1:2 would be more optimal. This. You also have to take into account that Mia and Stefan have rather large hit bonuses from supports that wouldn't be available to most units, so they'd be outliers. Plus, if SMs are more like they were in 6 and, to a lesser extent, 7 they'd be doing decent damage to low def enemies and low damage to the rest so the crits would just give them damage output more similar to a stronger paladin or hero. It's just that FE9 was nice to them in terms of strength and gave enemies terrible stats. Even look at Mia early on. She struggles to ORKO even axe fighters because of her low strength. But her offensive ability goes up much faster than enemies defensive parameters. Even then, she still struggles to ORKO higher HP enemies and is next to useless against high def enemies. Edited February 13, 2012 by bottlegnomes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowy_One Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 This. You also have to take into account that Mia and Stefan have rather large hit bonuses from supports that wouldn't be available to most units, so they'd be outliers. Plus, if SMs are more like they were in 6 and, to a lesser extent, 7 they'd be doing decent damage to low def enemies and low damage to the rest so the crits would just give them damage output more similar to a stronger paladin or hero. It's just that FE9 was nice to them in terms of strength and gave enemies terrible stats. Even look at Mia early on. She struggles to ORKO even axe fighters because of her low strength. But her offensive ability goes up much faster than enemies defensive parameters. Even then, she still struggles to ORKO higher HP enemies and is next to useless against high def enemies. But is that not a weakness if other units can fight well against all other units while swordsmasters are restricted to only being good against those enemies which hold low defenses and are endowed with health? Is not the damage dealt dependent upon their critical, which is not reliably unless a swordsmaster attains such outlier status in the first place that they become a threat too all? The balance rests upon the edge of a razor. To step to one side is to have them become weak and useless against all but the most specific of foes, while to step to the other can make them far too powerful, capable of dealing excess amounts of damage in single strikes that eclipse what other units can do. Besides, if hit rates are low, few units will breach the barrier if it is as you so claimed, making the question of a 1:1 or a 1:2 ratio for crit and hit pointless as few units will attain rates high enough for such a question to hold meaning. Yet if the hit rates are too high for any reason, be it luck or intentional abuse, the whole system becomes askewed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Here's a thought, have the ones that are outliers be said units that have some trouble dealing damage, like Mia and Fir, not terrible, but not ORKOing everything, and have the SMs that aren't be stronger ones like Stefan. Anyway, it's not like IS has been particularly good at balancing things before, so this wouldn't really be a change. I'm not saying I want that to be the case here, opposite actually, but plenty likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowy_One Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 I'm still worried about that as the use of stat-boosters and RNG blessing/screwage/abuse can cause a unit in such a situation to become either amazing or a failure. A 2-point screwage vs. a 2-point blessing can have a damage-margin of up to something like 18/36 points of damage dealt depending on critical/doubling (as opposed to the 4/8 for a non-critical focused unit). Maybe a solution to this would be the inclusion of a 'minimum stat' that makes it so that a unit at a given level will always have at LEAST X amount of a stat at a given level (which reduces the potential of a unit being horribly RNG screwed). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Something to fix RNG screwage would be nice. Anyway, as is a 2 point speed screwage can pretty much ruin a unit, so it wouldn't be too different. But yeah, I can see your concern. Though I'm not sure how you got your numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowy_One Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 I admit I was being rushed, so I didn't think/calculate things through entirely buuuuut. Assume unit A and B are both SM and are fast enough to double. For the sake of argument we will say that the average MT at their level (whatever it so be) is 10. Unit A will be screwed by 2 points while unit B will be blessed by 2 points, making their 'actual' strengths 8 and 12 respectively. Assume critical for all hits as well. Unit A will strike once for 24 damage (8 X 3) and twice for 48 damage. Unit B will strike once for 36 damage (12 X 3) and twice for 72 damage. For the first strike, the damage difference is 12 damage (not as large as my quickly-rushed numbers, but still far from insignificant) and for two strikes the damage difference is 24 damage. That's not a small difference, especially when A and B could very well be the same unit, just on different runs (screwed on the first and blessed on the second). On a normal unit who doesn't use critical attacks the difference is 4/8 points of damage between them. Not small, but far from as large for certain. In the event of minor screwage the unit doesn't see a huge drop in the damage that they deal. If you want crit-dependant SM, you need some way to ensure that a gap that huge doesn't happen often. Two bad level-ups can kill a otherwise great unit like this. IMO, the 'easiest' way is to simply stick a minimum stat two points under the expected level. I don't think that's the best idea though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Sage Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I want this FE to have a shirtless mode, where everyone goes shirtless. And I mean everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowy_One Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 You just have to see Oliver and Gheb shirtless... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the cool guy Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Support convos Skills Base conversations A "Customization system" so that you can minorly change a chars stats (Like 1 point at each level to be spend freely) Over 80 stages Over 30 gaiden chapters Lots of tricky-to-get multi chapter secrets No Valni-style abusing. Many endings DLC beig really awesome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Princess Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 I hope they bring the soldier, shaman, and summoner class back ^^' I really love those classes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rothene Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 **wants spellcasting classes to feel more distinct from each other instead of can use X type of tome and are all valued based on their staffbotability** Like maybe playable tome using classes that DON'T get staves on promotion but some other substantial perks...like 8 move flying or armoured mages 8D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anouleth Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Armoured and flying mages are lame ideas. How about just making magic users /less shit/. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.