Its too bad there's still no archer lord

[Othin]

Crossbows always make for a good addition, but it's important to consider the role of an archer: reaching farther enemies and avoiding counters while giving up counters themselves. In many FE games, at least past the beginning of the game, most characters have such great enemy phase and access to powerful 1-2 range weapons that this role is meaningless. But consider the beginning of a difficult Hard Mode, when you don't yet have effective enough 1-2 range and enemy counters are enough of a threat that the ability of an archer to avoid them is highly valuable. I haven't played much of FE12, but it seems like the decreased effectiveness of common 1-2 range weapons and the added difficulty of enemies on harder modes could allow that same role to remain useful throughout the game, which is the sort of thing the series should really do to address it. My current FE12 file actually has a team with like 10 characters either currently or eventually capable of using bows; I should probably continue that and see how it works out.

Edited October 10, 2011 by Othin

[thanibomb]

How do you figure?

There's more to a game series than name and console.

Well the reason I made this thread is because I'm disappointed at how there is no official bow lord in the Fire Emblem saga. The Tear Ring and Berwick Sagas may be based off of the FE saga, but they aren't officially Fire Emblem titles.

[Ciarre]

Maybe Liz could be a co-bow lord or a staff lord.

[Othin]

Well the reason I made this thread is because I'm disappointed at how there is no official bow lord in the Fire Emblem saga. The Tear Ring and Berwick Sagas may be based off of the FE saga, but they aren't officially Fire Emblem titles.

And I'm asking you why you care that it's unofficial. Are you really that turned off by the name? I assure you, in terms of gameplay, TRS and Berwick Saga are thoroughly FE games, as much as FE2, FE4, and FE5.

[thanibomb]

And I'm asking you why you care that it's unofficial. Are you really that turned off by the name? I assure you, in terms of gameplay, TRS and Berwick Saga are thoroughly FE games, as much as FE2, FE4, and FE5.

What makes you think I'm turned off by their names? I've played both sagas and love them both, but that doesn't make TRS or BS official Fire Emblem titles. Its like comparing Devil Kings to Samurai Warriors or Sengoku Basara to Dynasty Warriors - the games are all pretty similar gameplay wise, and some of them even have the same developers/designers, but that doesn't make them the same series.

If TRS and BS were considered official FE spinoffs then there wouldn't be lawsuits filed against them by Nintendo and IS.

[Othin]

I apologize for jumping to conclusions.

That said, I'm still not sure you're talking about the same thing I am. Indeed, the Sagas are not official FE games; I have not argued this point. However, while I admit that I don't know much about any of the other series you mentioned, how many of them were intended by the developer(s) to be a continuation of another series? I'm guessing none of them, while this is clearly the case for the Saga games, particularly as demonstrated in Kaga's initial attempt to call Tear Ring Saga "Emblem Saga". That is a key difference that cannot be dismissed.

With all of that in mind, I must ask you (in part again), this time more out of curiosity than as a challenge: Having already played a game designed to have the gameplay of an FE game with the feature you want, what would be so different about getting that same feature in what you consider a "real" FE game?

Edited October 10, 2011 by Othin

[IGdood]

Assassin Lord. I play too much Assassin's Creed.

[thanibomb]

I apologize for jumping to conclusions.

That said, I'm still not sure you're talking about the same thing I am. Indeed, the Sagas are not official FE games; I have not argued this point. However, while I admit that I don't know much about any of the other series you mentioned, how many of them were intended by the developer(s) to be a continuation of another series? I'm guessing none of them, while this is clearly the case for the Saga games, particularly as demonstrated in Kaga's initial attempt to call Tear Ring Saga "Emblem Saga". That is a key difference that cannot be dismissed.

With all of that in mind, I must ask you (in part again), this time more out of curiosity than as a challenge: Having already played a game designed to have the gameplay of an FE game with the feature you want, what would be so different about getting that same feature in what you consider a "real" FE game?

Its alright. :P

Well Devil Kings was meant to be an official spinoff of the DW saga, but it had far worse sales and reception than its counterpart. Sengoku Basara is basically the same game as the other two, but it was adopted by Capcom instead of Koei and was based off an anime series to boost sales (SB 3 and on was also spread to more gaming consoles to widen the demographic, much like TRS). Although no lawsuits were filed since the games are different enough to be "original" games, they're similar enough to the FE saga and TR/BS Sagas to be used as examples.

And its not so much that I haven't "experienced" playing a bow lord before, I just want to see one actually be introduced in the official series. Its more of an "I want to see this guy/girl on the cover art and have the stories based around them" kind of thing than an "I want to experience this new playstyle that I've never seen before." Bow units are my favorite in every FE game so I want them to get as much spotlight as possible. I know I'm being superficial/selfish but I'm tired of seeing the same old blue haired, sword wielding, young and just protagonist as the main lord in every FE game.

[CrashGordon94]

A Bow Lord would be pretty cool, but might be better as a choice rather than THE Lord (like Eirika vs. Ephraim) since Bows are rather contested at the moment.

Perhaps we could have the choice between a male Bow user and a female Axe user as the potential Lords.

[Anouleth]

*rolls*

Perhaps we could have a choice between a male sword user who gets staves on promotion and a female lance user who gets Anima on promotion and wears heavy armour.

[Mikethfc]

I don't think it should have a lord And how'd you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers. By hanging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society. No what this FE needs is to be run by an anrcho-syndicalist commune, who take it in turns to act as sort of an executive officer for the week but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly.

Failing that, if whenever the lord kills somebody they sat "Do you see him repressing me? Do you see the violence that's inherit in the system?" That would be quite funny the first time at least.

[Strawman]

You guys are genius. What FE needs is that the very beginning of the game, like before any of the story starts or anything, you get to choose a Lord out of like 7 or 8 choices(1 for each weapon type, assuming no knives, the 8 is if Staff is included). And each weapon type has a male of female choice. That way you'd get your archer lord, female axe user, dark magic lord, whatever.

[Othin]

You guys are genius. What FE needs is that the very beginning of the game, like before any of the story starts or anything, you get to choose a Lord out of like 7 or 8 choices(1 for each weapon type, assuming no knives, the 8 is if Staff is included). And each weapon type has a male of female choice. That way you'd get your archer lord, female axe user, dark magic lord, whatever.

Sarcasm?

[Strawman]

Sarcasm?

Lol.

Except unlike MU, this character would be more story relevant because they would be your actual main lord, wouldn't have customization(since MU's customization wasn't good anyways), each would look unique according to their profession.

And yeah, this wasn't actually a completely serious suggestion, but it would be interesting.

[Othin]

In theory, yeah, that would be ideal. But MU also demonstrates how customizable characters tend to have less of their own, fixed identity, which isn't so great for a main character. Which you might already have been saying, so whatever.

I do feel like the same applies to any good fan suggestion for the FE series - it has great potential, but it'll never be used in nearly the way anyone wants. Just the unfortunate reality of any suggestion like that for a series that's shut itself off to new ideas. But who wants to let that stop them from coming up with ideas?

[Anouleth]

In theory, yeah, that would be ideal. But MU also demonstrates how customizable characters tend to have less of their own, fixed identity, which isn't so great for a main character. Which you might already have been saying, so whatever.

I do feel like the same applies to any good fan suggestion for the FE series - it has great potential, but it'll never be used in nearly the way anyone wants. Just the unfortunate reality of any suggestion like that for a series that's shut itself off to new ideas.

Actually, there was a feature almost exactly like his suggestion in FE12. It seems like the only differences are that he mentions extra options like Female axe user, and doesn't mention options like being able to choose between Myrmidon and Mercenary or Cavalier and Knight. FE12 MU does look different based on his starting class, and if not the main character is a very close second. He has a huuuuge amount of dialogue in FE12.

So really, I don't get what you're complaining about. Obviously, the FE12 MU isn't exactly like his suggestion, but it would be ridiculous to expect IS to get everything exactly right.

Edited October 16, 2011 by Anouleth

[Phoenix Wright]

The Lord character, following this suggestion, would be exactly as MU, except for one difference (two if you count the obvious that the Lord class will have different animations for the weapons he'll use), the player can't control the way he looks. The background to the Lord character would be "Jeigan character taught Lord character how to fight."

[RNG Princess]

I want a flying lord, preferably a pegasus lord but that would be too broken because of flight+move. I wouldn't mind a bow lord or any other type of lord, a variety of non-sword lords is good once in a while ^^'. For the record I like Miccy, she's a very useful unit (at least in NM she can almost be like Ike) even in HM she's always useful theres a difference at how to use units and she's better off as a healer.

[Shin]

Having a choice of lords could be interesting. Kinda like an expanded version of Hector/Eliwood modes. It could possibly extend to story differences - Lord A might go a different route to Lords B and C. Chapters could vary, maybe even recruitable characters. Maybe Mr Axe-man doesn't feel like fighting for Lord D. It'd take a little work and a lot of writing, but it could be interesting.

[thanibomb]

Yay for extra story modes!

[uguu]

Its alright. :P

Well Devil Kings was meant to be an official spinoff of the DW saga, but it had far worse sales and reception than its counterpart. Sengoku Basara is basically the same game as the other two, but it was adopted by Capcom instead of Koei and was based off an anime series to boost sales (SB 3 and on was also spread to more gaming consoles to widen the demographic, much like TRS). Although no lawsuits were filed since the games are different enough to be "original" games, they're similar enough to the FE saga and TR/BS Sagas to be used as examples.

umm no

Devil kings is literally just sengoku basara 1 localized. They changed the names and plot and everything so people wouldn't think it was just a rip-off of dynasty warriors in the US because USsians are retards who wouldn't know they're both (extremely) vaguely based on real Japanese history. Also, the anime series came out after the second game.

One reason I think IS might make all the lords sword users is that swords are an extremely popular weapon type. If they were to give the lord a bow or dark magic or something people would be less likely to use one of the few other characters who use that weapon type. And this is pretty much true so.

[Celice]

One reason I think IS might make all the lords sword users is that swords are an extremely popular weapon type. If they were to give the lord a bow or dark magic or something people would be less likely to use one of the few other characters who use that weapon type. And this is pretty much true so.

It's more likely just a trend of tradition. Intelligent Systems has liked to keep central thematic points, so as to keep the same Fire Emblem feel--and then diverge from these traditional roles into the new stories. A couple games don't follow the tradition out-right, but a majority do. It's not just Lords and swords--it's the overall atmosphere of each game which is repeated.

[Thor Odinson]

@Hika: Dynasty Warriors is actually based on the three-kingdoms era in Chinese history, not Japanese.

[uguu]

@Hika: Dynasty Warriors is actually based on the three-kingdoms era in Chinese history, not Japanese.

ok I wasn't paying attention. But the thing about Devil Kings being localized dumbly IS because there was something capcom didn't want people to think it was a rip-off of SOMETHING (since baka gaijins) was true I'm pretty sure, I just forget what. oh wait no just looked it up I made up stuff whoops.

Kobayashi: In Japan, Devil Kings is called Sengoku Basara, and it focuses on Japanese history in the same sense that Dynasty Warriors focuses on Chinese history. So it's similar in that sense, but with a Capcom style, a Capcom flair to it. We took the concept, and said, "What can we do to differentiate this to make this different from the Dynasty Warriors games?" And we decided the secret maybe lay in some other games Capcom has done. We said, "Let's give the characters a kind of Devil May Cry flair -- some really cool moves, like the kind of things you might see in Devil May Cry. Let's the characters and make them all vastly and distinctly different from one another, like Street Fighter II." That's the Japanese version. Then, we said, "Okay, let's release it in North America -- what can we do to make it different again?" So we said, "Okay, we'll make it dark." Call it Devil Kings. The main character sold his soul to the devil. We'll darken up the background, give more moves, more ability to power your character up, and things like that for the American market.

IGN: Plus it's not historically accurate?

Kobayashi: The Japanese version of the game is based on Japanese history. There are some fantasy elements that didn't actually happen, of course, but enough of it is there. With the U.S. version, we've taken that element out entirely. Some of the backgrounds may retain that eastern flair. Many of them don't and are brand new; many of the enemies are brand new; and it's no longer based around the idea of feudal Japan at all. That part of the game has now been changed to be darker, devilish.

[thanibomb]

umm no

Devil kings is literally just sengoku basara 1 localized. They changed the names and plot and everything so people wouldn't think it was just a rip-off of dynasty warriors in the US because USsians are retards who wouldn't know they're both (extremely) vaguely based on real Japanese history. Also, the anime series came out after the second game.

One reason I think IS might make all the lords sword users is that swords are an extremely popular weapon type. If they were to give the lord a bow or dark magic or something people would be less likely to use one of the few other characters who use that weapon type. And this is pretty much true so.

Yes so it is still just like FE and TRS. TRS was basically FE under a different name.

And just because you are required to use Hector or Ephraim doesn't stop you from picking other axe and spear users respectively. Yes, swords are usually the most popular weapon class, but there's nothing stopping you from having two bow users or two mages on a team.