Save states, yay or nay?

[Alertcircuit]

I do because I'm not patient enough to restart an entire chapter if one movement goes wrong. As I get better I'm sure I won't need them as much.

[sirmola]

Personaly, i find that making you redo 30 minutes of work because the boss got a lucky crit is simply bad game-play design in an otherwise great game. Begining of turn saves, Savepoints and map saves fix this in games where they exist, but it makes the games considerably less fun for me to have to redo a chapter in games that do not have these features, and fun is what really matters. THe lack of map saves is also why i play casual in awakening. Idealy there would be a mode with map saves and permadeath, but absent that, i play casual because 30 minutes of repeat game-play is just no fun.

[Ownagepuffs]

I use them Genealogy style. I save at the beginning of each turn. Why? Because ever since Lloyd got a damn 13% crit on Jaffar in Cog I decided the RNG can go eat a dick. I wasn't about to start over fucking COG over some RNG bullshit.

Beginning of each turn is fair enough. Because mistakes are made on a turn by turn basis. If turns 1-4 are successful and I mess up turn 5 why should I waste time repeating 1-4?

On rare occasion I will save if I get a good level up but I don't RNG abuse bad level ups into good ones.

[Topazd]

Rather surprised about the results of the poll. I was under the impression that using save states was almost vilified in the community in general.

Everyone is free to play as they wish to, of course, but using states kind of cripples the essence of FE for me. The absence of them makes me consciously avoid giving the enemy potential chances of lucky crits (and confronting bosses with 10+% crit rates and not expecting to get screwed over by the RNG is dumb). It's a different matter altogether if it's an implemented gameplay mechanic like in FE4 (or used for the purpose of optimizing for LTC runs), but otherwise I just feel like I'm cheating myself by using states.

The lack of in-chapter saves can also make things genuinely more intense. Perhaps it's just my own philosophy though, I tend to want to play games the way they were originally intended to be played.

Edited July 3, 2014 by Topazd255

[Chiki]

Most players admitting they abuse save states. What a sad day for strategy. :<

[Gaia]

Wow. I'm surprised. I figured most people wouldn't use save states. IMO I feel it's better to play the game the way it was intended. I only really see save states being necessary in something like an LTC.

[Moira]

Most players admitting they abuse save states. What a sad day for strategy. :<

the question isn't "do you abuse save states" the question is "do you use save states"

[Ownagepuffs]

the question isn't "do you abuse save states" the question is "do you use save states"

This.

[solrocknroll]

This.

Yeah, just because people use save states, doesn't mean that they use them every time a unit moves.

I for one, use them like in FE4, and occasionally when I test if a 70%~ git actually hits. EDIT: wow a typo that worked I meant hit but why change it

And I wish that when I put that early in page 2, it hadn't made people assume I "abuse" them. I can play skillfully if I need to.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Rinoa Heartilly

[CT075]

i think the idea is that a good strategist should be able to deal with a random 70% miss or something

[Loki Laufeyson]

Wow. Thanks. I guess I'm "pretty pathetic" and have "low skill."

Nah, that guy is just a prat.

the question isn't "do you abuse save states" the question is "do you use save states"

Indeed.

i think the idea is that a good strategist should be able to deal with a random 70% miss or something

Also true. But one neednt be an insufferable prat about it, ja?

I actually dont use save states much at all due to the fact i tend to play FE on hard copies of the games/consoles. However, when futzing around on an emulator or playing FE6, i have used them. Mostly to uhh...stop playing in the middle of the game cuz i need to get dressed and go like, in the world and do junk. Its kinda handy to have that there in case my pegknight gets squished in a chapter in FE6 cuz fuck that game's hit rates. I, dont by any means, abuse them. Nor do i even rig the RNG in any FE i ever play.

[Junkhead]

I think playing the game strategically is a better way to appreciate the game. It's much more fun, than just feeding your weak characters kills until you can throw them out there so they can kill everything, all by themselves.

It's telling the game you respect it for the strategic premise it's trying to give you and forgiving it for not doing an excellent job at "balancing" and allowing stuff like that to happen- But don't get me wrong, I don't look down on people playing the game the way they want to play it, in any way.

[sirmola]

I think playing the game strategically is a better way to appreciate the game.

But that's the point. using savestates is not exclusive with strategic play as long you only savestates sparingly as a replacement for the mid-map save feature that doesn't exist. Saying that i use savestates to avoid spending 30 minutes doing what i just did is NOT the same as saying that i rng abuse level ups or unlikely events. There is a difference between difficult(which requires strategic play) and punishing(which is just tedious). Here is a good video that discusses the issue:

Edited July 4, 2014 by sirmola

[Loki Laufeyson]

That video's example of Awakening is false because the game always warns you when reinforcements are coming.

[Skynstein]

That video's example of Awakening is false because the game always warns you when reinforcements are coming.

Yeah but if you don't know the position of the ambush units as well as their movement the reinforcements can ruin a run especially if you play with permadeath.

Savestates... The hate against them comes from console players, because console didn't have technical capacity for instant saves. On PC games, instant saves are the norm and PC players who came from a classic background tend to view instant saves as normal. Nintendo emulator in VC has them, and I don't see anyone crying about it. In fact, playing NES games with savestates is nice because those games didn't even have saves.

Playing without instant saves requires more skill? It does. Otherwise, Ironman challenge in X-COM wouldn't really be a challenge. But sometimes the games just throw some bullshit at you and you may not be able to counter it.

FE would benefit from instant saves. No wonder they added it in some installments. If X-COM (both classic and remake) has them, FE could have them too.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Bird Jesus

[Tryhard]

Yeah, I do. I'm bad at FE, I don't care. That said, I try to keep them to a minimum.

[Constable Reggie]

The video mentioned "without any specifics of where they'd show up", so it's still right. A "reinforcements are arriving" message is not a good enough indicator for several falcoknight reinforcements (that can basically reach any point on the map) on ch16 for example.

[sirmola]

I found the more important point that the vidio made to be that you needed to restart the chapter. (plus, in fe 5 and 6, their point about the reinforcements as example of bs does hold no matter how you slice it)

[Jedi]

Tacticians always prepare for the unexpected. Fe is a strategy simulation. "bs" as you call it is simply that of an enemy ambush are you in real life going to know that oh I feel they have reserve troops! Let's leave some men over there.

I never got why reinforcements bugged people for this very reason.

To the topic at hand I'll use savestates in drafts and that's it

[Tryhard]

Tacticians always prepare for the unexpected. Fe is a strategy simulation. "bs" as you call it is simply that of an enemy ambush are you in real life going to know that oh I feel they have reserve troops! Let's leave some men over there.

I never got why reinforcements bugged people for this very reason.

I doubt you have the ability in real life to restart the battle either because you lost one unit.

I think people have for a long time discussed their issues with ambush spawning.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Tryhard

[Liezerota]

I use a save state at the beginning of every chapter, just in case the emulator were to crash.

[shadowofchaos]

Tacticians always prepare for the unexpected. Fe is a strategy simulation. "bs" as you call it is simply that of an enemy ambush are you in real life going to know that oh I feel they have reserve troops! Let's leave some men over there.

I never got why reinforcements bugged people for this very reason.

To the topic at hand I'll use savestates in drafts and that's it

Because the goal isn't to defeat the player.

It's a game. To make it fun.

There is a big difference between "strategy" and actual strategy that people find fun.

Just take a look at Pokemon.

[Roivann]

ITT: Your way of having fun is wrong

[Moira]

Are we really going to argue about how accurate Fire Emblem is as a strategy game because there are plenty of things that don't make sense. For instance, why would we have some of our troops not fight, and not for resting reasons obviously. Maybe those unused troops could be the ones watching for these reinforcements we should be expecting?

[lazydoggamer]

Tacticians always prepare for the unexpected. Fe is a strategy simulation. "bs" as you call it is simply that of an enemy ambush are you in real life going to know that oh I feel they have reserve troops! Let's leave some men over there.

I never got why reinforcements bugged people for this very reason.

To the topic at hand I'll use savestates in drafts and that's it

It wouldn't be such a huge issue if the reinforcements didn't move the moment they arrive and kill your units that you thought were safe. There's no strategy involved with that, just trial and error.