Nerfing mounts.

[General Horace]

jointime is probably a big factor, Kyle and Forde really aren't very strong in FE8, but since most cavs join between prologue-Chapter2, yeah, its easy to get them exp to snowball

Edited August 11, 2013 by General Horace

[Jedi]

jointime is probably a big factor, Kyle and Forde really aren't very strong in FE8, but since most cavs join between prologue-Chapter2, yeah, its easy to get them exp to snowball

Also considering that most "Jeigans" are mounted already its kind of silly we get 2 to 3 cavaliers along with them usually.

[Tables]

"How to balance mounts"

"Re-add more types of mounts so they completely nullify foot units still"

Mounts have too much as is and you want to give them more? I'd actually think less mounted classes and variety would make them more evened out with the rest, along with only getting 2 to 4 of them a game. Unless the idea of dismount was reintroduced and enforced.

You're missing the point. Adding one for each weapon type just means you have more variety in classes. Right now honestly it's really cavs unpromoted and troubadours occasionally, splitting that up so they don't have two weapons is something of a nerf. If the new cavs have great stats then sure, they'd still be OP, but the other part of my suggestion was weakening them stat wise.

[Sasori]

I do think mounted units are a little bit too strong. High movement, above average stats and good weapon control. Making their stats a little worse would already help a lot, but more anti horse terrain could also help.

Fe10 was a step in the good direction. Mounts (aside from titania) did't really dominate, got penalty to movement when indoors and where locked to 1 weapon type until third tier.

[Refa]

If its not as stupid as FE13 Pair Up bonus, its actually pretty cool

Maybe only give +1 - 2 Bonus?

But surely unmounted units deserve stupid high bonuses. :p

didn't stop kent and sain

well all of the enemies in lyn mode had worse negative bases

[Quintessence]

IMO, one of the main reasons why cavs are so OP is their high availability. This, along with average/all/around stats, high movement and a wide weapon control make them pretty much a need in any playthrough.

Think of cavs during a war in an open battlefield: they're a common target for enemies, what can make them more vulnerable over foot units, also the ride horses. Imo, they should nerf their defenses to reduce their durability, and make bows and magic deal x2dmg against them (because an archer or a mage can snipe da horse instead of the rider and eventually make the horse fall and kill the rider).

Their stats can stay as they are, but at least nerf their defs. I agree with a wider variety of classes because as horace and others said, a cav that wields lances and swords can replace a knight and a mercenary. Foot units should be buffed to make them a priority over mounts.

Regarding availability, look at FE10's Part 1: the only mount comes late and is pretty much useless due to not being available, being underlevelled, and being available on maps where he/she is almost useless (who's dat unit). Well, it's obvious that an earlyP1 cav would've breaked it because the maps are way too small. But yeah.

Also, make more indoor maps where mounted units are unavailable or forced to leave their horses, pegasus or wyverns, and thus nerf their stats considerably.

[The Void]

I suggested Archers/Hunters/Snipers being able to do effective damage on mounts in another topic.

[Irysa]

Reduce mounted unit AS by one point for each square over the usual foot infantry range it travels in that game. Maybe more or less, change the range etc. Would mean you actually can't just run around everywhere and kill everything.

You could also make them not double on the enemy phase (no charging into battle yo)

[Quintessence]

I suggested Archers/Hunters/Snipers being able to do effective damage on mounts in another topic.

Sounds like a good idea to me

[Phoenix Wright]

don't think i'm up for it, but an interesting idea, i think. got it from the fire emblem subreddit:

"I was thinking about the mount system in Fire Emblem, in particular Awakening, with it's every character can be almost anything system. Wouldn't it be interesting to have mounts have their own support levels? It would make sense in game for the characters to tame their mounts especially with pegasus knights because they're supposed to share a very special bond with their pegasus. The idea is that each person has to connect with their mount before becoming a mounted unit, so a knight would have to meet and get to know their horse/griffon/pegasus before having the ability to become a mounted unit. Of course some starter characters would start out with their own.

This could help with mounted units being so powerful by making the base relationship (say d) able to be mounted but have worse stats because the rider and mount aren't 'in tune' yet.

What do you think?"

[Othin]

dondon's ideas both sound great. Both doubling and Pair Up are incredibly powerful mechanics, and restricting access to one or both could go a long way towards meaningfully balancing classes.

An alternative is to just keep working with dismounting. Lock mounts out of indoor maps and spike up the penalties for other terrain, then give them still-increased penalties over foot units even when dismounted. With enough terrain-heavy maps, mounted units and foot units could end up splitting the game about 50/50 in terms of which would have more mobility, even taking into account the mounted units' ability to dismount. Bringing in terrain skills from TRS could also contribute to this. With that kind of even split, as long as the mounted units are otherwise about even with foot units rather than having better stats or weapons, they should be balanced.

[FEAnon]

Echoing what the others have said, it's just a matter of weaking them stat wise and restricting them to only one weapon at tier one. Better terrain variety in maps would also help to curb their movement advantage as well, although you could reduce their movement by one if you were so inclined.

[PKL]

The ideal would be to make it so that there's a reason to use both mounts and foot units. If you nerf mounts to be terrible, then the game just becomes foot emblem. It would be practically the same as Mount emblem but the name changes to Foot Emblem. And there's a lot less canto and rescue chains...eww.

[shadykid]

The ideal would be to make it so that there's a reason to use both mounts and foot units. If you nerf mounts to be terrible, then the game just becomes foot emblem. It would be practically the same as Mount emblem but the name changes to Foot Emblem. And there's a lot less canto and rescue chains...eww.

so it's FE12?

nothing wrong with that

[Baldrick]

I don't think a game would ever become Foot Emblem, at least not for efficiency players. They'd find a way to use the mounts to their full potential.

[shadykid]

I don't think a game would ever become Foot Emblem, at least not for efficiency players. They'd find a way to use the mounts to their full potential.

every mounted unit is Fiona 2.0

no more BEXP either

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

so it's FE12?

nothing wrong with that

PKL never played Foot Emblem

Only Warp Emblem Rescue of Light and 1 Panel Shorts

[The Void]

Do any of you suppose that mounts might not have to have their stats and weapon access nerfed if there are less of them and mounts are treated as more of a rarer unit? With mounts being required to be purchased or found for at least a few mounted characters?

[Paper Jam]

Maybe cavaliers' OPness just comes from the fact that they're available so early and, in comparison to your other crappy foot units, seem like the only reasonable choice for a long term member. I think that delaying the introduction to mounted units until maybe 6~7 chapters in will give your foot units more time to become somewhat useable and give you less of a reason to kick someone out in favor of a mount. To use FE6 as an example (The game I just happen to be playing through), I never really saw Noah/treck as game breaking units in comparison to alance.

That's the way it was in FE10, isn't it? You get your first Cavalier in chapter... 7, I believe.

[Jedi]

That's the way it was in FE10, isn't it? You get your first Cavalier in chapter... 7, I believe.

You still get Jill earlier then that, kind of a moot point there. I know she's not a cav but Wyvern is even better.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Folgore Red II

[Baldrick]

You still get Jill earlier then that, kind of a moot point there. I know she's not a cav but Wyvern is even better.

The game does do an effective job of curtailing Jill's dominance as well, though. In 1-6-1 Sothe, Volug and Tauroneo are better, she's probably not strong enough to kill the boss on 1-6-2, then all she has are two indoor chapters. 3-6 needs to be a team effort, in 3-12 and 3-13 she's useful but not as much as Titania/Haar were for several chapters. And in Part 4 it depends on what route you put her on.

[Chiki]

Jill with transfers is easily the best unit in the game.

[Baldrick]

Jill without transfers is more canon because not everyone has FE9.

Define "best". Jill's performance might be inflated the strength of her competition for resources and a deployment slot relative to other units.

[Espinosa]

If Jill has no transfers, can't you rig the first couple of level-ups and achieve the same level of performance with the same stat boosters?

[Chiki]

Jill without transfers is more canon because not everyone has FE9.

Define "best". Jill's performance might be inflated the strength of her competition for resources and a deployment slot relative to other units.

If I'm saying "Jill with transfers," I'm already talking about a context in which a person does have FE9.

But on easy/normal mode, Jill w/o transfers might probably still be better than Haar.

Jill's optimal promotion time is 1-E, I think. But it's definitely after 1-6-2. She just needs a lot of level ups to get her stats up to par; level ups which she can't get if she doesn't promote. If you dump all your resources into Jill and give her some amazing transfers, she can become durable enough to practically solo 3-6 with some Physic help from Micaiah and some Concoctions / Elixirs.

She kinda has to get the Boots in any LTC playthrough where she's used (to get that reliable 3-13 2 turn); as a result, she has a 2 move advantage over Haar in Part 4. This advantage over Haar may seem silly to you, but the advantage is still there regardless. It's impossible to 2-turn 3-13 otherwise, unless you use Boots Tauroneo, which no serious LTC player will ever do. Giving Boots to Tauroneo is like giving it to Lyre, except you save 1 turn from it. Both are completely useless in Part 4.

She has unique utility in chapters 1-6-1, 1-6-2, 1-E (I need her for the Speedwing in 5 turns here, due to her flight which allows her to ignore ledges), 3-6 (allows a 7 turn here), 3-12, 3-13, and all the part 4 chapters she's in over Haar. Haar only has unique utility in, as far as I remember, 2-E, 3-3 and 3-4. It isn't a stretch to imagine that a transfers promoted Oscar can replicate what Haar can do here, in chapters 3-8 and 3-10. Titania is basically a Haar without flight, so Haar doesn't seem to be really that good compared to Jill--whereas Jill is unique.

It's also worth noting that it's almost impossible to give Haar a speed transfer without RNG abuse and a bunch of Speedwings in FE9 if I recall correctly, whereas it's much more likely for Jill to get a speed transfer without even needing any Speedwings.

So really, Jill wins in parts 1, 3 and 4, whereas Haar wins in part 2--and that's only by one turn in one chapter. Jill's just more useful and unique when she's around.

One thing I forgot to mention here is that giving Jill the 2 Seraph Robes, Energy Drop, Dracoshield and Speedwing has little to no opportunity cost. That is, I'm not sure who else wants them. Nolan? He doesn't have flight and Jill has 2 move over him. Jill is the best choice. Volug? Lol. He takes too much time using Olivi Grass. Sothe is nearing his caps anyway so it'd be a waste to give him anything.

If Jill has no transfers, can't you rig the first couple of level-ups and achieve the same level of performance with the same stat boosters?

No, I tried a no transfers HM playthrough and it didn't go so well even with rigging... but maybe I can pull it off with the new strategies I've made.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Chiki