Mechanics that you want

[Anouleth]

I was thinking that the issue would be that Dracoknights wouldn't double while a different class with a higher speed cap would, rather than getting doubled themselves. Enemies only need 20AS to be impossible to double, which I thought happened quite early.

[Strawman]

I wonder if third tier will make a return.

I thought third tier classes were cool myself, if not over powered.

[CrashGordon94]

They would be cool, but they can be rather tricky to balance.

[Refa]

The thing is that there's already a really strong reason to stick with just a certain set of classes through weapon rank.

And in FE12, the caps of mounted classes often make them unviable. The 23AS of Dracoknight, for example, is simply unusable later on in Lunatic. I think that dondon is right; characters should have the opportunity to reclass, but many reclassing options are just completely unusable for certain characters and just aren't needed. Who is going to reclass say, Etzel to a Berserker?

I think reclassing is cool because while most of us can agree that it's not practical to reclass Etzel as a berserker, it sure is fun(ny) to reclass someone like him, or say Wrys, into a Myrmidon (or any class they're not suitable towards, really).

[grandjackal]

The thing is that there's already a really strong reason to stick with just a certain set of classes through weapon rank.

And in FE12, the caps of mounted classes often make them unviable. The 23AS of Dracoknight, for example, is simply unusable later on in Lunatic. I think that dondon is right; characters should have the opportunity to reclass, but many reclassing options are just completely unusable for certain characters and just aren't needed.

Here are my issues with reclass, though I like the idea in itself.

1. Too much freedom. I feel it should be isolated per character. Would take more work, but it would definitely mae characters more unique-feeling, something that fans would seem to not mind an individuality flavor to everything.

2. Even with the limited classes of FE11 and 12, there was still redundancy, such as Draco-Paladin, and Warrior-Berserker. Who here has honestly ever used Warrior over Berserker?

3. Make class changing more for the character to deal with the situation rather than limit them through overbearing enemies. As Anouleth states, lategame enemy stats make low speed cap classes unviable (unless you count flying in to ORKO Sorcs alone with a Brave weapon, then sure). Then there's the opposite. That just feels like a cheap cop-out, like the game just threw a gotcha moment at ya.

4. Give me a reason not to use highly mobile units, which for almost the entirity of FE12 when I CAN class change seems I have no reason not to (the game throws like 3 terran problematic maps at you). I recall for most of my FE12 playthroughs, most, if not all of my units, were mounted from basically...chapter 7 up to chapter 19. That's quite a huge chunk of the game where all my units are basically the same class. That is not only boring, but it makes me hate FE12 because it's Mounts: The Game: Back With Meth-Fueled Vengeance.

5. Could IS at least try to make some units viable? I can live with growth units, but don't just throw me a unit with awful bases on top of growths that won't save them, and then nothing else. It's actually kinda what I liked about FE10. A unit like Eddie basically had bad bases considering his class, but had Wrath to save his ass, and let him be useful in a specific fashion until he got his groove on. Like, that's a reason I'm glad skills are back. It can let a growth unit have a gimmicky start rather than an unusable start. If they have a horrid start, I would like something like growths in the 80s and 90s in their growths or something. Anyways, back to my point of viability. FE11 with class change at least almost succeeded with class change on this aspect (like Hunter Roger, enough speed to be useful despite his horrid weapon rank start, but would still help for when he promoted back to General for C rank lances while still having a good bow rank, along with not-ass speed), and FE12 just couldn't because a majority of FE12's units are unsavable no matter what class they're in. Something like Reclass is more fun when I have more unis who can be viable with it, no matter how short a period of time.

But still, there's some thinking. Class Swap along with the Skill system. I suppose I wouldn't mind FE10's skill system, granted they don't pull a part 3 on you and just throw clearly godlike units out of the blue at you that just rob everyone else blind ad make half the cast feel useless. The Skill system combined with Class Swap would be the most ridiculous thing on earth, but it also soundslike it could potentially be the most fun thing on earth if done properly. Like, no free Wrath Resolve just because like in FE9. Like how it sort of rewarded you further for keeping Wrath or Resolve on a character so you could stack the other onto it for spectacularly ridiculous results in FE10.

As for just a brand new mechanic to this game? Howzabout a mana system and spells that do something other than "hit stuff's res stat"? FE2 did this in a way, and it actually came out pretty awesome. Would like to see an expanding on that. Beats this whole "let's make mages suck even worse with each new installment" hard-on IS seems to have at the moment.

Who is going to reclass say, Etzel to a Berserker?

Only the godlike...

Edited October 12, 2011 by Grandkitty

[Anouleth]

Here are my issues with reclass, though I like the idea in itself.

1. Too much freedom. I feel it should be isolated per character. Would take more work, but it would definitely mae characters more unique-feeling, something that fans would seem to not mind an individuality flavor to everything.

2. Even with the limited classes of FE11 and 12, there was still redundancy, such as Draco-Paladin, and Warrior-Berserker. Who here has honestly ever used Warrior over Berserker?

Maybe a nice solution would be to increase base weapon rank. If Warrior could use stronger bows, then it would have the flexibility to both chip and fight at 1-range. Or for example, if Myrm had D Rank Swords, then it's starting damage would be less crappy and there would be a stronger reason to pick it over Cavalier. Maybe Archer could have D Rank Bows to give it at least some advantage versus Hunters.

3. Make class changing more for the character to deal with the situation rather than limit them through overbearing enemies. As Anouleth states, lategame enemy stats make low speed cap classes unviable (unless you count flying in to ORKO Sorcs alone with a Brave weapon, then sure). Then there's the opposite. That just feels like a cheap cop-out, like the game just threw a gotcha moment at ya.

I didn't say it was a bad thing. I think it's a good idea to force a tradeoff between movement and combat skill. I don't think that it's cheap to have certain classes incapable of certain things.

4. Give me a reason not to use highly mobile units, which for almost the entirity of FE12 when I CAN class change seems I have no reason not to (the game throws like 3 terran problematic maps at you). I recall for most of my FE12 playthroughs, most, if not all of my units, were mounted from basically...chapter 7 up to chapter 19. That's quite a huge chunk of the game where all my units are basically the same class. That is not only boring, but it makes me hate FE12 because it's Mounts: The Game: Back With Meth-Fueled Vengeance.

I think FE10 was on to something good by giving mounted units lower stats. It kind of happened in FE4 as well, where characters like Alec and Noish might move further than Holyn and Ira, but the foot units made up for it with far better combat. Kind of kicked in the head by Sigurd and Lex, though.

[grandjackal]

Maybe a nice solution would be to increase base weapon rank. If Warrior could use stronger bows, then it would have the flexibility to both chip and fight at 1-range. Or for example, if Myrm had D Rank Swords, then it's starting damage would be less crappy and there would be a stronger reason to pick it over Cavalier. Maybe Archer could have D Rank Bows to give it at least some advantage versus Hunters.

Well, speaking FE11 and 12 wise, I thin the issue is that 5 move is just too awful. Give it 6 and Hunters have 7 (like how Fighters and Pirates have 6 move, and mercs and myrms have 7 Move), THEN give Archer D Bows. As for cavs, nothing is going to make up for the fact you straight have 9 move. 9 move is way too good on generally anyone. Kinda why I'm interested to see this new 6 move Cavs they got in FE13 apparently.

I think FE8 did it best with mounts (Barring Seth...). Early on, You had Vanessa and Franz, and Franz helped more with turncounts with mounted rescue than his actual combat (his actual combat early on I think is actually rather meh), though with combat he could basically grow up to be Seth rather quick, and Vanessa was basically "a flier", which that alone is good enough. Then comes Forde and Kyle, who are the typical Red and Green cav (well ok, Forde just kinda sucked and Franz was the speedy cav). While both had their use as mounts and were clearly unique in their stats, they still weren't fantastic (I don't care what anyone says, I'm of the opiniont hat if they weren't on horses, Kyle and Forde would be straight garbage). You got Duessel, and while he only had an average 6 more, he still had the mobility lead due to being promoted befor emost of your other units are, and he kicked ass despite having such huge con you could only ferry him around with an umpromoted Vanessa (another reason to like her despite the fact she's awful at everything else). Tana and Cormag showed up (In Ephraim route anyways, getting Cormag in Eirika route kills more turns than he could possibly save), and were basically untis that showed up and were pretty good and became awesome near the end (and IMO nullify the point of having Forde or Kyle on your team).

Franz was the dependable early guy with his ferrying, was a great combatant early, and continued to kick ass lategame though he had a flaw (where his resistance is kind of annoyingly low, but that's the worst of it), Vanessa was the unique early flier who continued her use through likes like being hte only ferry for a high class dude like Duessel, Kyle and Forde were your midgame ferries at a time where you had a ton of mounts thus a ton of transport, Cormag and Tana were the later-midgame untis that showed up and were decent and grew into asskickers (Cormag already starting as one, Tana having the better finish), and Duessel was hte unique slightly higher than usual move for a slight while and kicked ass but needed a specific ferry to have actual mobility. It feels diverse with FE8.

...Huh? Syrene? Don't remember a Syrene, moving on.

I didn't say it was a bad thing. I think it's a good idea to force a tradeoff between movement and combat skill. I don't think that it's cheap to have certain classes incapable of certain things.

I would agree with you, but it does it in a very lazy way, that way being "Haha, speed is the all-important god-stat". Like, speed needs to be fixed because having to beat one thing with more of hte same thing is a serious design flaw. I actually have another idea. Skill is the stat that lets you double, and Speed is the defensive stat against it? Like if you have 11 Spd to their 14 Skl, you avoid being doubled, and vice versa?

I think FE10 was on to something good by giving mounted units lower stats. It kind of happened in FE4 as well, where characters like Alec and Noish might move further than Holyn and Ira, but the foot units made up for it with far better combat. Kind of kicked in the head by Sigurd and Lex, though.

Roads maing their mobility retarded along with units like Sigurd and co kicked it in the head, but FE10 didn't exactly fix it either. A good majority of the reason FE10 mounted units "suck" is due to poor availability from a majority of them (the Crimeans). Nothing stopped from Haar dominating, nothing stopped Titania from being ridiculous. Only credit I can give is they at least tried to limit mounts with more unique terrain (though I dunno wtf they were thinking with removing Wyvern bow weakness for...the ever so common thunder magic).

Really, FE10's handling of mounts only comes to show that FE10 would have been a million times better if it didn't seperate armies into parts. It wouldn't exactly break Jill, it would actually give units like Fiona and Astrid time (though they'd still suck) to grow out of their STEEP holes, and the availability granted to the units as they came (for example let's say after part 2 Geoffery and Keiran had to stay back, but you kept the rest of hte Crimean fools) would have downplayed Titania and Haar's awesomeness (slightly), since an earlygame would have actually existed that mattered to EVERY army, and at the same time giving dudes like Calill/Danved/Makalov some time to actually...Do stuff.

I know that story-wise it wouldn't make sense, but the story wasn't helping the game's flow anyways, so I don't care.

[dondon151]

Kinda why I'm interested to see this new 6 move Cavs they got in FE13 apparently.

We don't know that cavaliers have 6 move. For all we know, Frederick isn't even a paladin.

Mounts are also pretty good in FE10. Availability problems aside, the actual good ones (Haar, Titania, Jill) are really good. Oscar (T) is also pretty good.

Edited October 12, 2011 by dondon151

[eclipse]

Too much freedom.

You can choose not to reclass. . .

[Anouleth]

I think that for newer players, you don't really want to bamboozle them with a huge range of choices. I think there is such a thing as too much freedom and some players can be terrified into indecision for fear of making the "wrong" decision. This is why so many players delay promotion until level 20, because they're afraid of making the game unwinnable, while an experienced player can take matters down to the wire in the knowledge that it won't hurt them earlier on.

[Momo]

Here are my issues with reclass, though I like the idea in itself.

Other than the first one, those are more about the classes themselves. Berserker being better than Warrior has nothing to do with reclassing, high move units being better has nothing to do with it, etc.

[grandjackal]

We don't know that cavaliers have 6 move. For all we know, Frederick isn't even a paladin.

I thought there was video proof. We noticed a cavalier in one vid only moving 6 while your average footsoldier was moving 5.

Also yeah, not sure Frederic's a paladin either.

You can choose not to reclass. . .

Then why have it in the first place?

Other than the first one, those are more about the classes themselves. Berserker being better than Warrior has nothing to do with reclassing, high move units being better has nothing to do with it, etc.

If I can class swap my whole team to dracoknights and they're still good then yes, it entirely has to do with class swapping because I can effectively make my army all of the best unit in the game, and yes it is a flaw when choices in class swap on top of it are redundant/obvious.

[Rewjeo]

I thought there was video proof. We noticed a cavalier in one vid only moving 6 while your average footsoldier was moving 5.

Also yeah, not sure Frederic's a paladin either.

I think we saw Fred moving 7 spaces and that lead us to think maybe cavs would only have 6.

Then why have it in the first place?

So people can use it? Just because you CAN choose to not use it doesn't mean you have to not use it.

[Strawman]

It might make sense if a character could reclass to related classes. Like a soldier can reclass to lance knight and lance armor. Reclassing to lance knight offers more mobility and worse stats while reclassing to lance armor gives more durability and strength and mobility and speed. And later on once you get to 2nd tier the class changes would also net you other weapons. That way a characters stays within what makes sense, and can adapt to the situation.

Though I'm not very fond of reclassing myself. Like a character should only be one class, it what makes the character who they are. An exception would be branched promotions, I love those, but reclassing not so much.

[BwdYeti]

I would agree with you, but it does it in a very lazy way, that way being "Haha, speed is the all-important god-stat". Like, speed needs to be fixed because having to beat one thing with more of hte same thing is a serious design flaw. I actually have another idea. Skill is the stat that lets you double, and Speed is the defensive stat against it? Like if you have 11 Spd to their 14 Skl, you avoid being doubled, and vice versa?

This actually sounds kind of intriguing, although Spd should still be the stat for doubling; Skl or Lck or something would be better as the one for defending against doubling

Could also cause some interesting situations where both units in a fight double each other o:

[Rewjeo]

while reclassing to lance armor gives more durability and strength and mobility and speed

Are you missing a word in there? Because I don't see how donning a 200 pound suit of armor is letting me move any faster.

Though I'm not very fond of reclassing myself. Like a character should only be one class, it what makes the character who they are. An exception would be branched promotions, I love those, but reclassing not so much.

I don't get this. Does it really destroy Wolf's (virutally nonexistent in FE11) character to make him a general instead of a horseman? Very few characters are actually defined by their classes, and those that are can't be class changed, specifically Julian, Rickard, Bantu, Tiki, and Nagi. I won't even throw Marth in there because I don't see how it would change his character to make him a cav or a mage or whatever instead. Same thing with the ballisticians. Hell, IS even reclassed them, and did that ruin their character? I guess there are a few that are, like Karel, defined by their class, but in general it's not a big deal. I support the limited class selection, though, because some (Zerker!Yumina, for instance) changes really do contradict the character.

[Momo]

Then why have it in the first place?

Because some people like it? I don't like archers, but I would never suggest they take them out of the game.

If I can class swap my whole team to dracoknights and they're still good then yes, it entirely has to do with class swapping because I can effectively make my army all of the best unit in the game, and yes it is a flaw when choices in class swap on top of it are redundant/obvious.

No, that's a problem with class balance. If all you had to do was make all your units a certain class, than that class is broken and needs to be nerfed.

[BwdYeti]

I don't get this. Does it really destroy Wolf's (virutally nonexistent in FE11) character to make him a general instead of a horseman? Very few characters are actually defined by their classes, and those that are can't be class changed, specifically Julian, Rickard, Bantu, Tiki, and Nagi. I won't even throw Marth in there because I don't see how it would change his character to make him a cav or a mage or whatever instead. Same thing with the ballisticians. Hell, IS even reclassed them, and did that ruin their character?

This is much more a problem with FE 11 characters having almost no personality, like you said for Wolf. If they actually did then yeah it would conflict

And the Ballisticians changed class once over three years, not potentially every chapter :R

[Momo]

If your character's personality is based entirely on what they do for a living, you have a bad character.

Example: Wil

[Aethereal]

If your character's personality is based entirely on what they do for a living, you have a bad character.

Example: Wil

Physical attributes and past experiences are also important to a character's class. If magic was something any one could pick up, why wouldn't they? Additionally, if any character is capable of switching from one thing to another, how do they lose the ability to use a weapon? I understand that fighters could be trained in axes, while mercenaries could be trained in swords. But if I have a lightly armored foot unit, who used axes yesterday, why can't he today? It devalues the classes, by making them nothing more than another controlled variable, rather than a representation of a character's personal history, physical characteristics, and personality.

[Momo]

Physical attributes and past experiences are also important to a character's class. If magic was something any one could pick up, why wouldn't they? Additionally, if any character is capable of switching from one thing to another, how do they lose the ability to use a weapon? I understand that fighters could be trained in axes, while mercenaries could be trained in swords. But if I have a lightly armored foot unit, who used axes yesterday, why can't he today? It devalues the classes, by making them nothing more than another controlled variable, rather than a representation of a character's personal history, physical characteristics, and personality.

This kind of game -> story difference is in like, every single game ever. It's like asking why Link is capable of being both a Master Swordsman and a skilled Marksman with absolutely no prior training.

Also, apparently anyone can use magic, Mages are just guys that use it as a main thing. Garcia and Dolza's supports are all about learning how to do it.

[eclipse]

Physical attributes and past experiences are also important to a character's class. If magic was something any one could pick up, why wouldn't they? Additionally, if any character is capable of switching from one thing to another, how do they lose the ability to use a weapon? I understand that fighters could be trained in axes, while mercenaries could be trained in swords. But if I have a lightly armored foot unit, who used axes yesterday, why can't he today? It devalues the classes, by making them nothing more than another controlled variable, rather than a representation of a character's personal history, physical characteristics, and personality.

. . .and this is a bad thing why? If I want to keep it true to the story, I can. . .but if I want to screw around with it (like having Merric gun for Archanaea's first-ever Valkyrie), I can do that, as well.

[BwdYeti]

Also, apparently anyone can use magic, Mages are just guys that use it as a main thing. Garcia and Dolza's supports are all about learning how to do it.

*are all about failing miserably at it

And Aethereal's right, a character's class is an important part of their background and mindset, why they chose the weapon and style they use. Especially for a character like a knight or mage or any prepromote who's trained and fought like that for years. How can you have consistent characterization when the player can brush all that away on a whim?

This kind of game -> story difference is in like, every single game ever

'everything is terrible so it's okay to be terrible'?

I'd rather not be okay with this

Edited October 13, 2011 by BwdYeti

[Momo]

*are all about failing miserably at it

And Aethereal's right, a character's class is an important part of their background and mindset, why they chose the weapon and style they use. Especially for a character like a knight or mage or any prepromote who's trained and fought like that for years. How can you have consistent characterization when the player can brush all that away on a whim

You don't need to constantly spout stuff about your profession to be a character. For instance, Oliver. He's a creep. Does him being a Bishop have anything at all to do with his personality? No.

'everything is terrible so it's okay to be terrible'?

I'd rather not be okay with this

But it's more fun this way, so it doesn't matter.

[Aethereal]

You don't need to constantly spout stuff about your profession to be a character. For instance, Oliver. He's a creep. Does him being a Bishop have anything at all to do with his personality? No.

Nah, it doesn't, but that's what I was saying. It also has to do with their history, and physical attributes. In Oliver's case, the Senators of Begnion were all bishops, because Begnion was the land of the goddess, ruled by the voice of the goddess. I don't know if it's explicitly stated anywhere that senators have to be men of the church, but the 4+ (can't remember exactly how many) they do show are all bishops. I can only imagine that that's an intentional trend. It makes sense that Oliver is a bishop, by the standards set forth by the game. There are a lot of characters (Most) that you could choose a reclass option for, that simply does not make sense for them.