What makes a good/fair/well-done difficulty?

[Baldrick]

I would say that doesn't really apply to LTC, but if you can grind in non-bosskill defense chapters in HHM since it doesn't add to your turncount anyway, RE grinding in SS is technically alright.

[Florete]

I would say that doesn't really apply to LTC, but if you can grind in non-bosskill defense chapters in HHM since it doesn't add to your turncount anyway, RE grinding in SS is technically alright.

Not for LTC, but that's not the entire discussion here. And killing enemies in non-boss kill defense chapters isn't grinding.

Although even for LTC, extra turns taken outside chapters don't add to your final turn count, anyway.

[Baldrick]

You're right, it isn't. You could call it exp farming/training in an inefficient manner.

That's the point I was making. You can grind for 1000 turns in the Tower, but your displayed turncount will still be the same. It's not viable for efficiency, though.

[dondon151]

CoD is actually pretty difficult if you're not prepared for it.

so are ghost ship, father and son, etc.

you're going to have to do better than that...

Edited March 17, 2014 by dondon151

[-Cynthia-]

I think for CoD it's that you need Restore staves on hand- for Ghost Ship you really don't need any special purchases I think. If you didn't remember to buy Restore staves and lots of 1-2 range weaponry back in Chapter 20 or something CoD becomes a real problem. The world map purchases in FE8 reduce the need for preparedness in that sense.

Edited March 17, 2014 by -Cynthia-

[Florete]

so are ghost ship, father and son, etc.

As I said before, it's been a while since I actually played FE8 HM, so correct me if I'm wrong, but as I recall, it's really just strong and buffed up enemies in those maps, unlike CoD where it's as Cynthia said, particularly if you lack multiple units with good Res.

you're going to have to do better than that...

Wow, it's like everything is a competition with you.

[Chiki]

For me, probably FE9 MM, at least from what I've played.

the take-home point here is that we're so accustomed to the opinions that FE8 HM is so easy and FE7 HHM is the perfect difficulty when both conceptions are demonstrably false.

This isn't a mathematical proof. It's a matter of opinion. You can demonstrate it as much as you can "demonstrate" that FE13 is a bad game: in other words, not at all objective and subject to opinion. Mathematicians, on the other hand, do unanimously agree on proofs.

Edited March 17, 2014 by Chiki

[dondon151]

Wow, it's like everything is a competition with you.

how is disagreement equivalent to treating something like a competition

i don't think that the premise of a bumbling, barely competent player is a good metric for judging difficulty.

This isn't a mathematical proof. It's a matter of opinion. You can demonstrate it as much as you can "demonstrate" that FE13 is a bad game: in other words, not at all objective and subject to opinion. Mathematicians, on the other hand, do unanimously agree on proofs.

i didn't say that it was a proof. what is a matter of opinion doesn't exclude the possibility of it being wrong. if i were to say that FE12 H3 were less difficult than FE8 HM, then of course that's still my opinion, but if i can't present an argument to support that opinion, then people would be less inclined to believe it.

so of course i can't "prove" that FE8 HM is more or less difficult than FE7 HHM, but i can definitely debunk the previously existing paradigm where FE7 HHM is considered to be the perfect difficulty and FE8 HM is considered to be a joke.

Edited March 17, 2014 by dondon151

[chococoke]

EDIT: here's a misconception that i forgot to clear up.

11 spd marcus doubles all cavaliers in chapter 25. he only has trouble on cavaliers before then if he misses his average spd at --/9 or so.

I'm not denying Marcus kills everything and trivializes HHM. All I'm saying is that Seth does so even more, though. How many units in FE8's lategame does base Seth double and kill? Better yet, does it even matter, since he's guaranteed access to at least one legendary weapon?

[PKL]

The one thing I hate of FE9 MM is how it buffed enemy def to way too extreme levels. Otherwise, it's alright.

[Refa]

I'm not denying Marcus kills everything and trivializes HHM. All I'm saying is that Seth does so even more, though. How many units in FE8's lategame does base Seth double and kill? Better yet, does it even matter, since he's guaranteed access to at least one legendary weapon?

Seth stops consistently doubling around Chapter 9 at base stats.

EDIT He might double some of the garbage AS enemies late game, but considering even Eirika can do that, it's not really saying much for Seth...

Edited March 17, 2014 by Refa

[Florete]

how is disagreement equivalent to treating something like a competition

Notice I quoted "you're going to have to do better than that" when saying that. It was for a reason.

i don't think that the premise of a bumbling, barely competent player is a good metric for judging difficulty.

So in your mind, anything less than perfection and knowing exactly what is coming is "bumbling" and "barely competent"? In case you forgot, I did state earlier that the comparison is an experience thing and knowing what's coming will likely make HHM the easier mode. But not everyone is an expert.

Personally, I don't think the premise of a perfect player who has foresight and in-depth knowledge of game mechanics is a good metric for judging difficulty. Why? Because you play through the game your first time before your fifth time.

For the record, I will mention that I think FE8 HM is more difficult than people often give it credit for.

[Baldrick]

There's also the fact every game gets easier the more you play through it. With perfect play and research, even Lunatic modes aren't really a challenge because it requires 0 reflexes and the AI is pretty dumb. You'll get the best idea of how challenging a game is going in blind.

[dondon151]

Notice I quoted "you're going to have to do better than that" when saying that. It was for a reason.

i still don't see it.

So in your mind, anything less than perfection and knowing exactly what is coming is "bumbling" and "barely competent"?

did i say that? please tell me where i said that. you've created a false dichotomy where there is nothing between perfection and barely competent. one doesn't need to be perfect in order to go into CoD somewhat prepared. i should mention here that there also exists the possibility of going into FE8 maps unprepared, because the player is not allowed to return to the world map after moving to the location of the next chapter.

There's also the fact every game gets easier the more you play through it. With perfect play and research, even Lunatic modes aren't really a challenge because it requires 0 reflexes and the AI is pretty dumb. You'll get the best idea of how challenging a game is going in blind.

i think this is false for several reasons. the first reason is based in my personal experience (boo) where i've still found certain hard modes challenging despite having a knowledge of the game more detailed than all but a few people on this forum. evidently, even with very high levels of research, the hardest difficulties are not a walk in the park, and i'm sure that PKL and horace will agree with me on this.

the second reason is that by definition, a fire emblem game with some random element that can't be prepared for is more difficult than even the hardest existing hard mode. so imagine, say, FE8 NM, give FE13 L+ skills to the enemies, and then by definition, it has to be more difficult than FE12 H3. such a thought experiment would be infeasible in practice, but i guarantee you that no one would agree that FE8 NM+ is more difficult than FE12 H3, even though the former can't be perfectly prepared for.

the third reason is that several FE games require the player to have completed NM first before starting an HM file, so there is the expectation that the player is not, in fact, going in blind.

Edited March 17, 2014 by dondon151

[-Cynthia-]

I think FE6 HM and FE10 HM are around the 'perfect' difficulty for me. Maybe FE10 because FE6 gets on the frustrating side sometimes with its love of siege tomes and status staves.

[Baldrick]

It all depends on your definition of difficulty and the level of research. We probably have different views so w/e.

How does it follow from what I said that any game with unknown elements is automatically harder than any game without unknown elements? What I am saying is a game with all elements known is easier than the same game with some of its elements unknown.

What if you lend a friend your cart with hard mode unlocked I wasn't referring to hard modes exclusively there. In unlocked modes, you won't be completely blind, but you can be blind to the quirks exclusive to that mode and have no sources beyond what the game tells you.

[Florete]

did i say that? please tell me where i said that.

Show me where I mentioned a bumbling, barely competent player.

[dondon151]

Show me where I mentioned a bumbling, barely competent player.

So in your mind, anything less than perfection and knowing exactly what is coming is "bumbling" and "barely competent"?

review of context:

- cynthia mentioned that players would find CoD difficult if they forgot to buy 1-2 range weaponry, restore staves, pure waters, etc. and lacked units who were strong in magic durability (hawkeye and pent both have excellent magic durability, so there's 2 guaranteed candidates right there)

- i characterized such completely unprepared players as "barely competent"

- red fox represented me as saying that all non-perfect, non-omniscient players are "barely competent"

so we have one of two problems here: either red fox misrepresented me (because i clearly did not state that all non-perfect players were "barely competent"), or she created a false dichotomy between a perfect and a "barely competent" player.

Edited March 17, 2014 by dondon151

[Baldrick]

I think for CoD it's that you need Restore staves on hand- for Ghost Ship you really don't need any special purchases I think. If you didn't remember to buy Restore staves and lots of 1-2 range weaponry back in Chapter 20 or something CoD becomes a real problem. The world map purchases in FE8 reduce the need for preparedness in that sense.

Going in quasi-blind, you wouldn't know you needed restore staves and pure waters. The context is obviously a quasi-blind player because anyone with foreknowledge can easily buy them. So either you missed that context, or you are claiming that players who don't perfectly prepare for CoD (because they don't know it's coming) are "barely competent".

[PKL]

Smart players buy restore and pure waters anyway. You don't know when you might need them!

[XeKr]

Smart players buy restore and pure waters anyway. You don't know when you might need them!

In my experience, smart/well-informed people notoriously find it difficult to think from the perspective of others who may be lesser informed. (not too sure on present literature, but the cognitive bias “curse of knowledge” might be a thing). I think you discredit the insight needed, despite how simple it may seem.

[-Cynthia-]

Smart players buy restore and pure waters anyway. You don't know when you might need them!

They aren't worthwhile purchases in every game really- FE9 and 10 use status staves so infrequently that the dropped Pure Waters and Restores should be sufficient.

[CT075]

going by absolute standards (not ltc or anything) valni alone should be reason enough to say that fe8 HM is easier than fe7 HHM

if we're not counting that then i've always personally had more trouble with fe8 HM than fe7 (this includes as recently as like two months ago where i ran through both on a lark)

[dondon151]

In my experience, smart/well-informed people notoriously find it difficult to think from the perspective of others who may be lesser informed.

this is also the basis behind the reasoning of why dumbing down the tier lists to reflect less experienced playstyles wouldn't work.

Going in quasi-blind, you wouldn't know you needed restore staves and pure waters. The context is obviously a quasi-blind player because anyone with foreknowledge can easily buy them. So either you missed that context, or you are claiming that players who don't perfectly prepare for CoD (because they don't know it's coming) are "barely competent".

barely competent players wouldn't grab restore staves in preparation for father and son, either, and they might just suicide their entire team except for lord and marcus/seth. the presupposition of a "quasi-blind" player is rather useless because hardly any people play through a fire emblem hard mode that blindly and there are any number of trivial things that can trip such a player up.

[Florete]

review of context:

- cynthia mentioned that players would find CoD difficult if they forgot to buy 1-2 range weaponry, restore staves, pure waters, etc. and lacked units who were strong in magic durability (hawkeye and pent both have excellent magic durability, so there's 2 guaranteed candidates right there)

- i characterized such completely unprepared players as "barely competent"

- red fox represented me as saying that all non-perfect, non-omniscient players are "barely competent"

so we have one of two problems here: either red fox misrepresented me (because i clearly did not state that all non-perfect players were "barely competent"), or she created a false dichotomy between a perfect and a "barely competent" player.

I had forgotten that I'd referenced Cynthia in my post, but consider that, aside from Genesis where you don't need them as much and might not go to anyway, CoD is the only chapter in the game where you need a significant amount of Res and Res-boosting material, and the HHM version is completely different from all other modes of the game, meaning there's absolutely no reason to expect it on a first run and it's not particularly unlikely to forget about it later, especially if you don't play it again for a long time, and more so if you re-play through other modes of the game first.

So while I admit I misunderstood your comment in the first place, I still don't agree with a lack of complete preparedness for such a curve ball to be "barely competent." Thus, we can now go back through the "barely competent = not perfect" shenanigans and end up back where I ask you to show me where anyone mentioned a bumbling, barely competent player.

And that's the problem here. You don't judge a game's difficulty by how the experts play it. If you did, every game would be easy. It would be like judging the average playtime of a game by how fast the speedrunners beat it.