Mechanics that you want

[GreenOyster]

I loved the FE9 support system. Bring that back

Fix. Bows. A bows damage should not be dependent on strength. If it has to be dependent on any stat, it should be skill, as a skilled archer can hit a more vulnerable point in his target. Bows should have longer range and more power to make up for their inability to counter on EP. I like the idea I've heard here about crossbows, 1-2 range, really powerful, accurate, and heavy, but unable to double.

Mages also need more use - better caps, more range, resistance should be harder to obtain. IMO, mages should be glass cannons, able to nuke non-magic, non-pegasi units from range, but low on defense. Like archers, increased range on mages could check the over-usage of flyers and armored/mounted units, respectively.

[paladin21]

Fix. Bows. A bows damage should not be dependent on strength. If it has to be dependent on any stat, it should be skill, as a skilled archer can hit a more vulnerable point in his target. Bows should have longer range and more power to make up for their inability to counter on EP. I like the idea I've heard here about crossbows, 1-2 range, really powerful, accurate, and heavy, but unable to double.

Bows damage comes from the tension of the bow, and the stronger one is, the faster the arrow shall be shot and the higher the damage dealt. That's the reason X-bows ignore user's strength in the games they appear (RD, TRS and Berwick Saga, there might be other similar games, but I can't remember them now). When hitting vulnerable points in the target, you cause a critical hit, thus increasing the damage, and critical hits chance come with the user's skill. I do agree, however, with increasing range for some bows.

Mages also need more use - better caps, more range, resistance should be harder to obtain. IMO, mages should be glass cannons, able to nuke non-magic, non-pegasi units from range, but low on defense. Like archers, increased range on mages could check the over-usage of flyers and armored/mounted units, respectively.

I thought that's what they actually were right now. Just maybe adding some 1-3 range magic would be nice.

[Vicious Sal]

Great online play, like, way better than Fe11 & 12.Supports with story, what people said, mix Fe9 & 10

[Progenitus]

At the very least IS should revert back to the old stat system, which was flawed but way better than what the DS used. The current one has skl/lck being completely useless and res isn't really much better (if only because a few points of res doesn't do anything against magic enemies with liek 40 att).

[Anouleth]

At the very least IS should revert back to the old stat system, which was flawed but way better than what the DS used. The current one has skl/lck being completely useless and res isn't really much better (if only because a few points of res doesn't do anything against magic enemies with liek 40 att).

Resistance is somewhat relevant. At least, I know that there are situations in which Paladin is preferable to Dracoknight specifically for the higher resistance. And even against 40ATK enemies, the 3 resistance makes a difference: with Pure Water buff, you can scrape a 3HKO from those 40ATK enemies. Luck is kind of important too to avoid criticals. But Skill? When the difference between capped skill and no skill is only like 20 hit, it really is negligible.

[Othin]

Resistance is somewhat relevant. At least, I know that there are situations in which Paladin is preferable to Dracoknight specifically for the higher resistance. And even against 40ATK enemies, the 3 resistance makes a difference: with Pure Water buff, you can scrape a 3HKO from those 40ATK enemies. Luck is kind of important too to avoid criticals. But Skill? When the difference between capped skill and no skill is only like 20 hit, it really is negligible.

If only actual characters were relevant, eh?

[Dark Sage]

At the very least IS should revert back to the old stat system, which was flawed but way better than what the DS used. The current one has skl/lck being completely useless and res isn't really much better (if only because a few points of res doesn't do anything against magic enemies with liek 40 att).

I wouldn't say resistance is irrelevant, it's just that IS forgot to give the characters acceptable resistance growths. I do agree with you with everything else though. Skill and Luck are completely terrible stats in the DS games.

[Celice]

The remake might have just been following the original game where Magic basically kicked everything's ass no matter what. So many people treat the remakes as if they're not... >_>

[BwdYeti]

On the other hand, I don't see strength like "how much weight you can lift", but "how much damage you can deal when you hit".

S'why I think Str should be left out of the equation.

It's like if you train different muscle sets, you'll always want to get stronger, but you can train to hit faster and with that speed hit harder (with doesn't mean you'll hit more often, just that when you attemp to strike, the blow will go faster), or you can get able to lift heavier things, which will make you an awesome contender for the olympic gold in weightlifting, or you can throw big rock to crush your enemy like a human catapult (if you somehow manage to hit them).

I would think using weapons that are too heavy for you would train you in wielding heavier weapons?

And you're right going from 5 to 10 con is pretty strange (though it would be 5 to 8 t1, or 7 to 10 t2, so not really that out there), but not any weirder than tripling your Bld. Maybe the Con gain could only be applied to the AS formula but not rescuing, or something? There's a lot of ways to go with it.

And yes definitely at not using DS FE's hit/avo formulae

Edited September 26, 2011 by BwdYeti

[Thor Odinson]

I'd say that con not applying to rescuing would work. I mean, since it has the ranked system with the +n where 0≤n≤3 the number for the original con would be retained and could still be used as a stat applied in rescuing. though which then, I'd argue to have a higher cap for n as the bodysize itself is still original con, but just the arms' ability to lift said weapon increased. And honestly, it's not that hard to gain the muscle for that.

[Othin]

Rescuing could simply be determined as any mounted unit is able to carry any unmounted unit, with perhaps certain exceptions such as Ballisticians, no Con/etc. stat necessary.

[Anouleth]

How would you determine what unmounted units can rescue each other, then? I wouldn't want to get rid of unmounted rescuing entirely, because it's very useful and entertaining.

Perhaps one solution would to assign each class a "size" where characters can only rescue units of lower size and shove units of equal or lower size. So for example, Fighters/Armours would always be able to rescue Mercenaries/dismounted Cavaliers who can always rescue Myrmidons/Archers who can always rescue Mages/Clerics. Maybe females have 1 less size than their male equivalent.

Edited September 27, 2011 by Anouleth

[Othin]

How would you determine what unmounted units can rescue each other, then? I wouldn't want to get rid of unmounted rescuing entirely, because it's very useful and entertaining.

Perhaps one solution would to assign each class a "size" where characters can only rescue units of lower size and shove units of equal or lower size. So for example, Fighters/Armours would always be able to rescue Mercenaries/dismounted Cavaliers who can always rescue Myrmidons/Archers who can always rescue Mages/Clerics. Maybe females have 1 less size than their male equivalent.

I'm proposing that they can't. That would be an interesting alternative, but I don't think giving females different size restrictions is necessary.

That said, I'm still intrigued by the possible implications of keeping the character's Wt the same while adjusting their Bld to use heavier weapons.

[Thor Odinson]

That. There's plenty of chicks out there bigger than guys, so if the character in question happens to be a bigger than her fellow dudes, she shouldn't be restricted by her sex.

I think that mounted units should rescue anyone, and unmounted use a (bld+wt)/2>wt formula, though if your wt is lower than the rescued guy's wt despite you having a high enough bld, you get a serious move reduction.

Since honestly, it's not that hard to pick up a person heavier than yourself. I think I can pick up 200 lbs guys and walk around with them (125 lbs here) but I can't see anything in front of me and it's harder to walk as fast.

[Anouleth]

That. There's plenty of chicks out there bigger than guys, so if the character in question happens to be a bigger than her fellow dudes, she shouldn't be restricted by her sex.

It's not a restriction. Lower size is as much of an advantage as having higher size. Remember, kids, it takes two to rescue!

In addition, it makes sense that the largest and burliest men would be bigger than the largest and burliest women. So for example, a male Fighter would outweigh a female Armour. Obviously, women wouldn't automatically have lower con than all men. So the female Armour might have the same size as a male mercenary and more than a male myrmidon.

[Rewjeo]

I don't think unmounted units would need CON. I mean, given the current system, it seems like they're giving the other unit a piggy back ride or something. It seems to me that it would make more sense for the unit rescuing to be protecting/leading the other one and possibly helping support them, depending on whether or not they're injured. I think rescuing should give a movement penalty and maybe an avoid penalty, except in the case of mounted units. Maybe still some penalty there, but smaller. Or maybe I'm just thinking weird right now, I dunno.

[Phoenix Wright]

That. There's plenty of chicks out there bigger than guys, so if the character in question happens to be a bigger than her fellow dudes, she shouldn't be restricted by her sex.

I think that mounted units should rescue anyone, and unmounted use a (bld+wt)/2>wt formula, though if your wt is lower than the rescued guy's wt despite you having a high enough bld, you get a serious move reduction.

Since honestly, it's not that hard to pick up a person heavier than yourself. I think I can pick up 200 lbs guys and walk around with them (125 lbs here) but I can't see anything in front of me and it's harder to walk as fast.

I guess for a video game this theory works, but obviously on a battlefield you'll never try to rescue someone who weighs more than you, because you'd both end up dead.

When rescuing in FE, I don't think most/all stats should be cut in half. I think movement and speed should be cut in half due to fatigue, and strength cut by a fourth for the same reason. It's more realistic this way. It won't really matter though, because units that rescue another unit usually don't get into battles the next enemy turn.

EDIT: I think all mounted units should receive no penalties for rescuing. The horse/Pegasus/wyvern can definitely carry the extra weight. This might make some chapters too easy, though (I personally don't think so, but it might)...

Edited September 27, 2011 by Phoenix Wright

[Thor Odinson]

Well, yeah, that's why there's a hefty move deduction (if bld ≥ wt of other person then -1 move, else -(wt-bld) move). I can't imagine Amelia rescuing Hawkeye and still be able to move, or something. So it exists, but the penalties are so big nobody would want to do it.

[Rewjeo]

My question, though, is: What exactly is a unit doing when it rescues someone? I mean, I doubt that we're physically picking that person up because that just makes no sense, assuming we don't have a mount. What makes sense to me wouldn't involve much fatigue (certainly less than, say, combat) so I don't see why non-movement stats would be reduced.

[Thor Odinson]

Well, I guess, a way to balance out is that nonmounts get no stat deduction except move, but a mounted unit will not lose move, but might lose several stat parameters. I'd imagine horse would be shittier at dodging if there's another guy on him.

[Celice]

My question, though, is: What exactly is a unit doing when it rescues someone?

Envision them not literally carrying someone, but giving supportive fighting, defending away attacks and shiz. Having to alter your normal way of fighting to give protection can lead to the reduction in stats and movement. There isn't as much freedom covering another person directly as there is just flying solo.

[paladin21]

I don't think mounted units being able to carry anyone without penalties is a good idea. Even though the mount is stronger than a character, I can't imagine Duessel with his heavy armor, taking Gilliam, and his heavier armor, for a ride with the horse as good as new. Sure he's supposed to have a great mount, one of the best, but even a horse has it's limits. In the GBA games they were given 25 Con and they could carry up to two characters (their rider plus the rescued). I think that should be kept, maybe modifying the mount's Con to be somewhat higher but getting some movement reduction if they carried more than a fraction of it.

For example, let's give Duessel's horse 40 Con, and movement reduction starts at 25 Con. If Duessel (15 Con) rides alone, there's no penalty. If he carries someone like Eirika, Tana or even Ephraim umpromoted, the mount would resist that much weight, but rescuing Gilliam, Dozla or Garcia would get the mount more tired than normally, getting penalties. It's like when you're carrying things, up to a limit of weight, you have no problem, but there's a limit where you can't go at the same speed, but you can still carry that weight.

[Progenitus]

Envision them not literally carrying someone, but giving supportive fighting, defending away attacks and shiz. Having to alter your normal way of fighting to give protection can lead to the reduction in stats and movement. There isn't as much freedom covering another person directly as there is just flying solo.

Then what happens when flying units rescue?

Hell how does mounted units rescuing other mounted units in the GBA games make any sense?

[Rewjeo]

Envision them not literally carrying someone, but giving supportive fighting, defending away attacks and shiz. Having to alter your normal way of fighting to give protection can lead to the reduction in stats and movement. There isn't as much freedom covering another person directly as there is just flying solo.

And therefor the person helping the other unit has decreased skill? Given how combat has traditionally worked in FE (one on one dueling, although that IS changing now) it just doesn't make sense to me that they would be worse at fighting, which is why I like the idea of a movement penalty. Although I think the penalties in general should depend on the health of the rescuee. If they're at full health, well then the movement shouldn't be affected and it shouldn't stop the other person from fighting, but if they're near dead I could see the rescuer's combat being affected.

[Anouleth]

I think that rescuing penalties should remain as they are in FE6-10. It works fine, I think, and I don't think it needs to be made more complicated than SPD and SKL halved.

Then what happens when flying units rescue?

Hell how does mounted units rescuing other mounted units in the GBA games make any sense?

Actually, the animation shows the rescued unit dismounting (although it's very hard to see).