Would it be bad if a later FE has lower growths? And tweaked caps?

[The Void]

That is, the growth rates were more akin to Gaiden or Binding Blade.

Think of it where aside from certain characters, the growths of the characters wouldn't really be all that high beyond what they're supposed to specialize in. And the caps would tweaked for each character.

[Topaz Light]

Honestly, I think what's more impactual is the player's units' stats relative to their opponents', but it would be neat to return to a time of lower stat standards. Ideally, it would prevent anyone from reliably becoming a gamebreaker so you'd have to apply strategy to win. In addition, restoring Skills to their sparser FETellius distribution style would place a greater emphasis on a unit's individual skills; perhaps there'd be a sort of a tradeoff between better skills VS. better stats, and players would have to decide what was ultimately more important to them in each unit; what would best serve their team and help them meet their goals.

tl;dr: It could be pretty great, actually, if the game was properly built around it.

Edited June 9, 2013 by Starlight36

[RJWalker]

Well not too low.

As for skills, Fe10 did it best.

Edited June 9, 2013 by Ranger Jack Walker

[Rewjeo]

I, personally, wouldn't object to lower growths, but I'm guessing the high growths were a very conscious choice. It feels better to constantly see 4-5 stats go up a level than to see 1-2, and so IS probably put them in on purpose to make people like the game more, thus boosting ratings and sales.

[Rapier]

I really like high growths and green numbers. I think FE10 is well balanced enough (stat and growths wise, except for a few chars like Miccy), so I'd be satisfied with these kind of growths.

I just find it nice to have a complete wimp get awesome stats later on. They don't need to be powerhouses or gamebreakers. Just specialize them in some areas and make it so that they aren't very lacking in the other areas (like the Myrmidon class, for example. They specialize in Luck and Speed, but they might have a good Str growth as well).

[Scarlet]

As for skills, Fe10 did it best.

How did FE10 do skills best?

You can redistribute the normal ones however you want (which may or may not be a good thing depending on your point of view), but the mastery skills might as well all be named Lethality, as nobody can seriously survive any of them except lolBane, Flare and Corona. That's just lame.

[The Void]

Well not too low.

As for skills, Fe10 did it best.

Wasn't that the game where you can remove skills and put them on somebody else?

No thank you.

[Sasori]

I actually like lower growths more. I prefer having capped stats be something special, instead of something that will happen all the time.

I found fe10 to be pretty bad with this. The high growths, the not so high caps and the easily abuseable bexp system made green stats a little too common in my opinion.

Awakening had high growths as well, but the caps are a lot higher so it takes longer to actually reach them.

[NinjaMonkey]

Wasn't that the game where you can remove skills and put them on somebody else?

No thank you.

What is wrong with that exactly?

How did FE10 do skills best?

You can redistribute the normal ones however you want (which may or may not be a good thing depending on your point of view), but the mastery skills might as well all be named Lethality, as nobody can seriously survive any of them except lolBane, Flare and Corona. That's just lame.

Better than FE9, where all of them (except Aether) are worthless.

Edited June 9, 2013 by NinjaMonkey

[Scarlet]

Better than FE9, where all of them (except Aether) are worthless.

Depends on your point of view. Personally, I'd prefer skills to be semi-worthless over them being so overpowered that stats and weapons don't even matter anymore.

[Aless]

Depends on your point of view. Personally, I'd prefer skills to be semi-worthless over them being so overpowered that stats and weapons don't even matter anymore.

PoR was underpowered where the skills weren't particularly great AND you could only get 5(?) occult scrolls to teach them. RD was OP because every uit got their mastery skill and they were complete overkill.

That being said FE10 did the system better excluding this as you could swap skills between characters but there was incentive to keep them with the originals as for them it was "free" so you could build a pretty fun skill set like that.

[The Void]

I don't support skills being able to be moved between characters.

[Knight]

I think FE 7's growths were best.

[Mighty Kamina]

I wouldn't mind lower growths. I don't know about you guys but in games with lower growths (FE5 if you don't abuse scrolls, FE6, etc) it always feels more satisfying to get a level up when 3-5 stats increase rather than that being the norm. (FE13) It also makes capping stats feel more special.

On the subject of skills I think characters should get their own personal skills that can't be transfered to other characters.

Edited July 1, 2013 by Kamina

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

Growth in post Manster FE5 is actually extremely good

The sad thing is, FE5 is notorious for it joke enemies for most of the game which make those stats kinda less satisfying to have T.T

[arvilino]

I think FE 7's growths were best.

Eh I didn't like the 20% speed growth on Dorcas and 30% Strength growth on Guy. Just felt like the characters were too easily screwed over by them(especially to meet speed or 2HKO thresholds). When the stats are lower each stat gained is worth more so not getting a certain stat can get pretty annoying(especially if you do FE7 ranked and have the misfortune of your characters missing being able to double certain enemies by a single point of speed).

Edited July 1, 2013 by arvilino

[Parrhesia]

FE8ish growths, FE9 skills, no reclass (somehow my mentality with reclass was calling for an FE13-style system (without skills) before FE13 even existed, then when FE13 did exist suddenly I don't reclass, it's weird).

[dondon151]

Eh I didn't like the 20% speed growth on Dorcas and 30% Strength growth on Guy. Just felt like the characters were too easily screwed over by them(especially to meet speed or 2HKO thresholds). When the stats are lower each stat gained is worth more so not getting a certain stat can get pretty annoying(especially if you do FE7 ranked and have the misfortune of your characters missing being able to double certain enemies by a single point of speed).

growths farther away from 50% have lower variance, so you are in fact less likely to get screwed in said stats.

[Junkhead]

Dude, FE2 growths were terribad, and that's an understatement.

I think the best growths were from FE7-FE9 and maybe FE6 and FE11. Growthrates started getting strange around FE10, 12 and later FE13.

[-Cynthia-]

I thought skills were pretty well done in FE9, they gave characters unique attributes aside from stats that gave them advantages/disadvantages compared to their counterparts (such as Tormod with Celerity compared to other mages). If skills were reassignable, there wouldn't be much point in using Tormod at all. Granted, the individual skills in that game could use some fine tuning.

[MacLovin]

It'd be more akin to TRS

[Tables]

As someone who plays primarily for challenge and gameplay and finds the novelty factor of eight +stats wears off quickly when it's so common, I prefer lower growths. For those who do say getting 4-5 stats at a time is a lot more satisfying, I ask, which is more satisfying: 5 stats in a 2-3 stat average game, or 7 stats in a 4-5 average game? I much prefer the former, and I reckon it's more common to boot (too lazy to do maths around it right now).

That said, you can appease everyone, in a way, by decreasing the value of stats. Sound crazy? Look at FE4. HP there starts high, goes up crazy fast, and is terribly weak. STR and DEF are also of relatively less importance compared to later games. Why any how? Well, the two are linked, as well as high weapon damage. If every weapon had about twice the damage it did in FEA, and every character's HP was twice what it is, the value of STR/MAG/DEF/HP/RES would roughly halve. Then you can tweak some of the other formulae (hit and avoid in particular, maybe crit, maybe not), and suddenly you can make SKL/SPD/LUK's value's change. And in this way, you can have your regular 4-5 stat level ups, but with the gameplay effect of characters changing relatively little as a result, and the game still feeling like a normal FE*. I'm not saying it's the best solution, but it could work.

*You can take this to an extreme, if you want, and get something that feels quite different just because the numbers are of a different magnitude. Imagine Chrom joins with 200 HP, about 65 STR, weilding Falchion with 50 mt and similar other stats, and the enemies are there with 250 HP, 80 STR and their 70 might Iron Axes. You can probably tell, it would play out more or less the same (with some tweaking to levelups, whatever) but with such different numbers, it doesn't quite seem like Fire Emblem any more.

Edited July 2, 2013 by Tables

[RJWalker]

Growths are a little too high I think. Bring them down the highest growth being, say 50% or 55% for the class's dominant stat (like Speed for Swordmasters or Strength for Wyvern Lords) and the lowest growth being 25% or something.

[LunaSaint]

I liked fe6/fe7 growths. 3 Stats being a solid level made the 5-6 statters feel brilliant. The lower stats in general and lofty feel of caps also give every character space to have strengths and weaknesses.

Also, I like FE9's sedate approach to skills (though Awakening's was good too). FE4 and FE10 had tons of skills and quirks that made most stats irrelevant.

Edited July 2, 2013 by LunaSaint

[Usana]

I don't really want to see lower growths in general since I always get RNG screwed with low growths(so if 50% was for the dominate stat I would lack dominate and non-dominante). However I would like to see differentialization in stats. What I mean is make it so that there are strong differences between the dominante and non-dominate stats. So a dominate stat may approach 100% since it defines that class and stats non-vital to the class would be like 10-40 tops. Perhaps a secondary stat or two could hover 50 or so. Basically I just hate it when I have a unit that is supposed to be defined by its speed and it has a growth of 60-70 and I end up with a character so badly rng screwed they are barely usable. I like more guarentee and less screwing. At least in the stat(s) you are supposed to have high. Some variance is good. But 60 is damn poor chance wise. I would almost never take a 60% chance to hit if missing would equal death. Really bad odds. Of course secondary stats which don't define the class and are merely important could be much lower around 40-50. While I would grumble about a low str agile monster as long as I picked the class for speed I wouldn't rage quit. And stats the class clearly doesn't have a focus in could be lower still.

Though speaking of high growths what would really make me smile is classes whose most dominate stat had 105 growth(or somesuch). Even with HP a +2 makes me go yipee! So a very small chance of a plus two would make me smile when it happened. Obviously could cause the above issue in making me feel gimped if my character ends up unusually low stat wise because I never got a +2 and my opponent got like 20 +2's!

All in all though I can play with small or plentiful stat boosts on level up as long as I level up frequently and don't feel like I am spending days just trying to gain 1 level. My biggest problem with finishing games is the end game where units have pretty much topped out/take forever to gain levels. I basically burn out really easily if I don't have me my frequent levels. At that point it just sort of feels like you are grinding and that doesn't amuse me.