Low-manning: FE games encouraging small teams, and what could/should be done?

[Espinosa]

why not have 2 units instead who are >L20

this just encourages more low-manning. it's like the pokemon problem.

I think I have a solution for Pokemon, and one for FE based on the same theme.

You can't exactly solo in Pokemon if your moves have at most 5 PP (that's hardly the case, but if it is you probably won't run to the PokeCentre every second). Similarly, imagine FE characters being able to carry only a very limited number of weapon uses, e.g. 5 Javelin (so you don't even get to attack three guys in a row), 6 Iron Sword, 3 Silver Lance, etc. How you would circumvent that is probably trade a low-manning dude a new set of stuff each turn and leave the durable folks enemies will ignore with about-to-break equips, but if it's fixed when a chapter begins you're simply forced to utilise your full army to the max.

[arvilino]

^That would get incredibly annoying though. I don't think it'd be too convenient to have 7-8 Iron swords in storage or in someones inventory under that system for every one you'd normally have, it'd take forever to scroll past stuff.

Plus Villages and enemy drops would be hindered by it, a 3 use Hammer dropped by an enemy or from a village isn't really going to be that desirable.

Edited July 22, 2013 by arvilino

[BBM]

I think the problem with FE13 (and pokemon, for that matter), if I'm reading correctly, is that caps are too high. If enemies have stats in the 20s, the solution is to get your small team stats in the 30s. If their's are in the 30s, get a few units into the 40s. But if you simply can't out-stat them no matter how few units you use, due to caps, getting more units to cap is better.

[Othin]

I've had an idea, what if after gaining each level in a chapter a characters EXP gain decreases exponentially until the end of the chapter? For example if it halved(including the minimum gain in cases like FE13) after each level up within the same chapter.

You wouldn't really be able low man as effectively as in order for a character to level up 3 times in a chapter as you'd need twice as much for the 2nd level and four times as much for the third. You'd be encouraged to use a larger team in each chapter as the units low man team won't even end up that much stronger than a large team.(This would also minimize the effectiveness staff spamming or other actions with EXP like dancing).

I like this idea.

Basically, anything that makes it hard to dump a ton of levels onto one character. Berwick Saga did something similar with being extremely punishing Exp-wise for having a level advantage over your enemies: characters fighting a Soldier just three levels lower would gain no Exp, no matter what. Characters can't just snatch all the kills to cap their level and tower over enemies - and perhaps just as important, maxing level doesn't mean they'll tower over enemies, because growths are too low for them to ever get that much strength.

[Espinosa]

Staffspamming priests barely ever gain over one level in one chapter though (unless we're talking about Physic/Barrier abuse in FE7 defence maps, but I don't see how it's gamebreaking in any imaginable way). I guess one thing that this system would reinforce is the dominance of the Jeigan and supplementary prepromote units (Isadora in FE7 for example, or Say'ri in FE13 iirc), so kinda far from preventing low-manning I'd say (especially considering Jeigan usually wants just one level, often less, by getting one bosskill per chapter).

[Othin]

If keeping utility units from getting "screwed" even seems to be an issue, the reduction could be implemented purely as a part of the combat Exp equation and therefore not affect it.

Also, perhaps it would be more fair if it was based around 100 Exp rather than any level gain? Since otherwise it'd really penalize units going into battle near level-up.

[Espinosa]

Agreed on that. An unnecessary restriction that would encourage the player to overthink extra in order to enter every chapter with as few exp points as possible - 100 exp points as the limit makes a big difference.

Stll it wouldn't prevent low-manning unless Jeigan and the prepromotes were really underwhelming, because the growth units would really slow down.

[BrightBow]

I put my vote on: "Stat reduction through fatigue".

But personally I would also advocate to change the mechanics so that high avoid or defense doesn't just turn you completely invincible.

Like, take the Dungeons & Dragons rules. (I hope I don't mess this up now.)

Even a high level fighter will still have a chance to get hit. And when he gets hit, he will take damage.

Because his levels got him tons of HP and he is harder to hit but doesn't actually receive less damage from attacks.

So he is absurdly more powerful and durable then his level 1 self. But get enough of such level 1 scrubs together, and they will can still take him down.

Not sure how to go on with that. But at least I would definitely stop the inflation of the defense stat and give durable units more HP instead.

That's very similar how it was in the early games anyway. I am not sure what was supposed to be wrong with that system.

Edited July 22, 2013 by BrightBow

[arvilino]

Agreed on that. An unnecessary restriction that would encourage the player to overthink extra in order to enter every chapter with as few exp points as possible - 100 exp points as the limit makes a big difference.

Stll it wouldn't prevent low-manning unless Jeigan and the prepromotes were really underwhelming, because the growth units would really slow down.

The pre-promotes would have to be toned down(think Jeorge from FE11), but they wouldn't really be underwhelming since with the growth units being slowed down the pre-promotes wouldn't need as great a gap between them and the unpromoted growth units, with a smaller gap they'd be able to have lower stats and still be relevant units for a longer period(since unpromoted units are leveling slower and won't catch up as quickly) without them being too strong allowing low-manning.

Edited July 22, 2013 by arvilino

[Othin]

Agreed on that. An unnecessary restriction that would encourage the player to overthink extra in order to enter every chapter with as few exp points as possible - 100 exp points as the limit makes a big difference.

Stll it wouldn't prevent low-manning unless Jeigan and the prepromotes were really underwhelming, because the growth units would really slow down.

Yeah, now that you mention it, it makes it harder for characters to become overleveled, but it doesn't do much specifically against the ones that are already overleveled, instead slowing down the faster-Exp-gaining characters trying to catch up.

With that in mind, I want to reiterate the option of sharply cutting Exp gains for being overleveled. In FE4, you could get Exp gains down to 0 when fighting a foe 10 levels lower or killing a foe 15 levels lower, but that mainly showed up for characters with Paragon who had no trouble getting excessive levels anyway.

The penalties could be made harsher to be more relevant like in Berwick Saga. Say, make no Exp from fighting a foe 5 levels lower or killing one 10 levels lower? In a game with levels going up to 20/20 or higher, that'd be noticeable, especially since it'd be preceded by a sharp drop. Of course, the key is to also copy the part about making penalties from being at a higher level lower than the gains from being at a lower level, so you can implement that without being behind by that many levels award double the base Exp gain.

[arvilino]

^Would that actually stop the pre-promotes from low manning though? I think if pre-promotes could low man a game the issue is from having them being too strong rather than an issue with the EXP system.

For example unless Haar somehow only gained miniscule amounts EXP from all combat and BEXP in FE10 his usual performance would not really be impacted by how EXP was calculated for him, especially given his stats are quite high for both what his starting level is and the chapter(s) he joins during.

Edited July 22, 2013 by arvilino

[Espinosa]

So I guess we all agree that it's more of a problem of how strong the Jeigan character is.

For example, how much does FE6's Marcus suffer from getting 0 exp from killing a mook instead of 3? Not a whole lot most probably.

Also, even if you gain no experience at all from defeating some enemies, that doesn't mean you should field such units that do gain some exp so that they get the kills instead. This is essentially going back to the argument between people who want to complete the game as fast as possible (efficiency play) vs. the people who find themselves obliged to train up weaker units whether it helps later on or not in the slightest.

[dondon151]

FE6 marcus does suffer quite a bit, actually; it would probably amount to 5 chapters in performance or so.

[Othin]

The important thing is that it acts as a leash. If pre-promotes can low-man the entire game at base, or just by keeping pace with enemy levels once they catch up, of course you've already got a problem, so that needs a fix. The benefit is that you only have to worry about that more obvious case, not what happens if your characters get way ahead in levels, because they can't get way ahead. They can start way ahead if you set them to start ahead, like a Jagen, but they can't stay ahead because they can't grow until enemies start catching up.

Edited July 22, 2013 by Othin

[Anouleth]

But it just makes pre-promotes even more binary. Which I don't think is a good thing.

[Othin]

But it just makes pre-promotes even more binary. Which I don't think is a good thing.

Wait, how so?

[Espinosa]

FE6 marcus does suffer quite a bit, actually; it would probably amount to 5 chapters in performance or so.

Do you mean the difference caused by having +1 speed by virtue of level-ups through bosskills and soloing the opposition? I guess it will make a noticeable difference every once in a while.

What I was thinking of when I wrote that is that on my unfinished FE6 LTC run (paused after chapter 16 after realising I could've stolen Narshen's Blue Gem without losing any turns, which gave me a meltdown) I could barely beat your turn counts (without growths I believe), mostly only in cases when I chose to not recruit some characters (Cath, but also Gonzalez, Echidna, Ray, Garret and I think also Hugh), and that's with massaging every Marcus's level-up to have at least one of speed or strength (he sometimes proc'd both somehow).

The absolute minimum turn counts are almost impossible to get in some of the game's chapters though (right from the beginning actually).

[Anouleth]

Wait, how so?

Because it makes them fall off even harder as the game goes on. That's binary gameplay. Either they're really really strong (in the earlygame), or really really weak (in the lategame). It's part of the reason why I think Sothe is badly designed, because he falls off so sharply after Part 3 ends.

[shadykid]

Because it makes them fall off even harder as the game goes on. That's binary gameplay. Either they're really really strong (in the earlygame), or really really weak (in the lategame). It's part of the reason why I think Sothe is badly designed, because he falls off so sharply after Part 3 ends.

I don't know, some people prefer it that way

[AnonymousSpeed]

Maybe we should make it so characters level very quickly (Ah-la RD), EXP gains drop decently but don't cease after a 5 level lead, give BEXP, and if player wants to low-man the game...

So be it. I think the answer is to encourage high-manning by making lower-level units easier to train, rather than severely penalize the player trying to do a solo-challenge run.

[shadykid]

Maybe we should make it so characters level very quickly (Ah-la RD), EXP gains drop decently but don't cease after a 5 level lead, give BEXP, and if player wants to low-man the game...

So be it. I think the answer is to encourage high-manning by making lower-level units easier to train, rather than severely penalize the player trying to do a solo-challenge run.

but this only makes it easier to create a few elite units to crush every chapter, rather than encourage a more balanced team

Edited July 23, 2013 by shadykid

[Snowy_One]

Before I read this topic here are my suggestions.

1) 'Minimum team size': Fairly straight forwards. In order to start a map you MUST deploy at least X units. Course, this doesn't prevent players from just ignoring the extra characters, but it at least makes it so then don't just Jeigan-abuse the whole game.

2) More required characters: Sort of goes with the first, but imagine if, instead of just the lord and a few select others (usually) being both forced and required to survive, ALL characters had to survive unconditionally AND 5-7 were automatically FORCED to be deployed with extra slots left over for filler. Suddenly relying on one or two hyper-units isn't so great because you now have a whole team that needs to survive (so you can't just toss aside units you don't care for), a weak unit WILL eventually be deployed regardless of their power (so you have to protect them and leveling them will pay off when they are next deployed by force), AND leveling a hyper-unit can backfire (if your hyper is on the required list, suddenly you have extra slots and potentially a bunch of weak units to fill it).

3) Steeper EXP penalties: Simple answer. Take a value, (say 3) and add it to the chapter number. Every unit with a level above said value gets 1/2 EXP rounded down, possibly to 0 if promoted. Units below a 1-3 margin of the value get bonus EXP (equal to the difference in their level and the required minimum maybe?) for every action they do. Makes it a LOT easier to level weaker units, especially Est-types, and puts a steep penalty on chewing though the game with supers.

All three can be combined even! Characters X, Y, Z, A, B, C and D are required and 2 more must be deployed in addition with weaker units getting a strong boost and stronger units getting a penalty.

Now to read the topic.

[Othin]

Because it makes them fall off even harder as the game goes on. That's binary gameplay. Either they're really really strong (in the earlygame), or really really weak (in the lategame). It's part of the reason why I think Sothe is badly designed, because he falls off so sharply after Part 3 ends.

I don't think so, because Berwick Saga, using that system, had Ward, the least binary Jagen in existence. He's unlikely to ever grow from base, yet those bases simultaneously avoid breaking the earlygame and remain enough to assist as a very subpar but still usable unit all the way to the final chapter.

Granted, a lot of factors go into this. But it certainly wouldn't be possible if enemies had to keep up with uncontrollably-growing player characters.

[shadykid]

I don't think so, because Berwick Saga, using that system, had Ward, the least binary Jagen in existence. He's unlikely to ever grow from base, yet those bases simultaneously avoid breaking the earlygame and remain enough to assist as a very subpar but still usable unit all the way to the final chapter.

Granted, a lot of factors go into this. But it certainly wouldn't be possible if enemies had to keep up with uncontrollably-growing player characters.

I assume shitty growths is the main component of "a lot of factors"?

[Othin]

I assume shitty growths is the main component of "a lot of factors"?

Very low growth rates and Exp gain in general are probably the biggest parts, yes.