Question about Great Shield

[ThePurpleKnightmare]

I am planning to use Cynthia as a General as a support for Lucina, they are sisters so I like to pair them together, I just want to know should I be using Great Shield on Cynthia? It doesn't say anything about protecting others or procing as a support, but I just wanna be sure.

[Czar_Yoshi]

Pavise doesn't do anything in the back, no.

[Rxmonste]

What he said, your back units can't proc any skill but they can at least crit.

[Dragrath]

as was said above proc skill can't happen for a suport unit but Great knight gives dual gaurd+ and falcon knight gives lancefaire which would work well for a general support (not sure what else she will have who is her father?)

[Czar_Yoshi]

Chrom.

[omega zero]

I was watching some Apo gameplay on youtube. I was pretty baffled to see that Pavise+ doesn't reduce Dual Strike damage. Is there a reason for that or is it an oversight?

Edited March 12, 2015 by omega zero

[Book of Ereshkigal]

I don't think any variants of Pavise/Aegis reduce dual attack damage? Could be wrong though.

[Czar_Yoshi]

Dual Strikes aren't affected by Counter, Miracle or PavGis.

[omega zero]

It might have been done intentionally to make Pav+/Aeg+ weaker.

Anyways, from what I've seen Pav+/Aeg+ aren't even that bad, except for when you need to kill something fast due to positioning/protecting/rushing issues.

It's Luna+ that's 'what-were-they-thinking' scary.

Dual Strikes aren't affected by Counter, Miracle or PavGis.

I'm wondering if there's a reason behind this fact.

Edited March 12, 2015 by omega zero

[Czar_Yoshi]

Probably just gameplay balance. I'm sure they'd have the full range of extra effects if pairup was more like having multiple party members out in an RPG (say, TTYD), but as-is supports are more like pieces of equipment that turn into units when not being used.

It's more likely that they disabled player procs and enemy procs went away alongside those. Having pocket Vengance DSes would be incredibly overpowered, as would being able to heal without coming up front.

Edited March 13, 2015 by Czar_Yoshi

[Knusperkeks]

I think the mechanic works as it is because the developers thought it's too much of a pain to script the game's algorithms in such a way that accounts for a paired-up units' weapon type. That's one reason.

Further: To hit a dual strike requires two die rolls: First for the Dual Strike to happen and second for the Dual Strike to hit. A procc would add a third die roll on top of it, so they probably went ahead and said "forget about it" to recover processing power of the hardware.

Sounds lazy I know, but remember that we're talking about the same people who sacrificed feet because they were scared the hardware didn't have enough computing power.

The ability to have Vegeance from the backline is more powerful, even if its diminished by Aegis/Pavise, so this is effectively a nerf to endgame pairs if we compare it to the current state of the game.

Edit: I believe the main reason might be that the developers didn't want paired up support units to die to counter damage at all.

Edited March 13, 2015 by Knusperkeks

[Irysa]

I think the mechanic works as it is because the developers thought it's too much of a pain to script the game's algorithms in such a way that accounts for a paired-up units' weapon type. That's one reason.

That's already accounted for in weapon triangle bonuses for units in the back though.

Further: To hit a dual strike requires two die rolls: First for the Dual Strike to happen and second for the Dual Strike to hit. A procc would add a third die roll on top of it, so they probably went ahead and said "forget about it" to recover processing power of the hardware.

The RN string is predetermined, they don't "roll extra die" for actions. All they would have to do is check the next number. This is no different in computational power than unequipping your partner so the game doesn't check the next RN for your DS chance.

Edited March 13, 2015 by Irysa

[Knusperkeks]

That's already accounted for in weapon triangle bonuses for units in the back though.

I should have written weapon types and skills.

The RN string is predetermined, they don't "roll extra die" for actions. All they would have to do is check the next number. This is no different in computational power than unequipping your partner so the game doesn't check the next RN for your DS chance.

You mean the game checks whether a dual strike happens right before the player phase begins? I didn't know that.

What if the developers had trouble checking for paired up units skills and implement counter-measures? For example, maybe Dragonskin didn't perform against paired up units' lethality in tests and thats why they made it like this?

I did mention it, but having up to 8 chances to procc vengeance is just crazy.

Edited March 13, 2015 by Knusperkeks

[Irysa]

No what I mean is, there is a string of random numbers in preset order that is generated. These come from some kind of seeding that we don't fully understand yet.

The game does not "check whether a dual strike happens before the player phase begins", it simply checks numbers down this list relevant to the things that are currently happening. If I choose to attack someone then (and this is entering theoretical territory since I can't 100% prove it, but I do have a basis for it) the game checks 2 RNs for the hit values (I won't get into explaining this in detail), 1 RN for the crit value if the attack hits, and then another bunch of RNs for various skills if that attack hit as well, then an RN for Dual Strike. If the numbers are less than or equal to the relevant chance for something to happen then they happen. So in the case of a unit with no proc skills attacking with a partner in the back, the game just checks 3 RNs for the Hit/Crit then would check the 4th RN for whether or not the DS occurs. If the DS is 50% chance then the 4th number being in the range of 0 to 49 will result in the DS occuring. That particular RN (lets assume its exactly 49) would be sitting in the same place no matter what, but the way it gets used up may vary depending on the order of your actions.

There are a bunch of things that throw a wrench in this basic explanation of the RNG, in particular that the string appears to advance by an indeterminate amount for every instance of combat there is, but results from using digital bookmark save backups and casual mode map saves indicate that the string is still static once it's been generated whilst in a map in Awakening.

Edited March 13, 2015 by Irysa

[Knusperkeks]

Yes, I've tested it a bit. If you use a battle save and have "stored" a critical strike for the next round of combat, then the crit will be performed on any enemy in that particular round, no matter whom you attack.

In the past I had enemies trigger the critical cut in animation but still miss my unit with the critical hit. That means crit has it's own die roll (or RN, whichever you like more) somewhere.

Edited March 13, 2015 by Knusperkeks

[Irysa]

Im pretty sure those units were proccing skills, not crit. Crits can't miss.

But regardless, my point is there is no extra computational power required to check an extra number. An extra number is not spontaneously generated for each calculation, the string is already there.

[Knusperkeks]

There is nothing to procc if all they have is gamble.

[Lord Raven]

Crits deinitely can't miss man

[Irysa]

Are you not thinking of Lunatic+ skills? Those cause the "critical" esque thing but can still miss (except hawkeye).

[Knusperkeks]

Hm, I was so sure that I didn't see the Luna+ icon at the corner of the screen. I guess that barb must have had Luna+ then.

Edited March 13, 2015 by Knusperkeks

[Irysa]

Vantage+ does it as well. I don't remember if Hawkeye does though.

[Knusperkeks]

The point I was making is that I (thought I) didn't see any such ability symbols in the corner of the map when the units engaged, that's why I thought crits could miss in the first place, but if you are all so sure, I realize my oberservations must have been erroneous.

Edit: Hawkeye does never show it's icon anywhere.

Edited March 13, 2015 by Knusperkeks

[shadowofchaos]

In the past I had enemies trigger the critical cut in animation but still miss my unit with the critical hit. That means crit has it's own die roll (or RN, whichever you like more) somewhere.

Hm, I was so sure that I didn't see the Luna+ icon at the corner of the screen. I guess that barb must have had Luna+ then.

The first enemy unit that has a cut-in is a Luna+ Masked Marth in Chapter 4 or Validar with Vengeance on Chapter 6. That barbarian, Luna+ or not, did not proc a cut-in.

Edited March 13, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[Czar_Yoshi]

Yes, I've tested it a bit. If you use a battle save and have "stored" a critical strike for the next round of combat, then the crit will be performed on any enemy in that particular round, no matter whom you attack.

This isn't strictly true. The same RN will be used, but if you switch from attacking an enemy with a high crit rate to one with a low crit rate and that RN is no longer below your crit rate, you won't crit.

I initially wondered if programming limitations might have had something to do with it but am not so sure now- the most likely way they still could be a thing is if having the supporting unit die to Counter causes a softlock or something. Most of the other reasons I can think of to make DSes partially functional as a way of stabilizing the code would have other, easier fixes.

[Knusperkeks]

The first enemy unit that has a cut-in is a Luna+ Masked Marth in Chapter 4 or Validar with Vengeance on Chapter 6. That barbarian, Luna+ or not, did not proc a cut-in.

Now I'm certain I made a mistake in my observation.

This isn't strictly true. The same RN will be used, but if you switch from attacking an enemy with a high crit rate to one with a low crit rate and that RN is no longer below your crit rate, you won't crit.

I initially wondered if programming limitations might have had something to do with it but am not so sure now- the most likely way they still could be a thing is if having the supporting unit die to Counter causes a softlock or something. Most of the other reasons I can think of to make DSes partially functional as a way of stabilizing the code would have other, easier fixes.

Well I can tell you what I did, it doesn't disprove what you say. But it explains how I came up with my idea:

• Battelsave -> Unit A will get a crit on enemy X on the next round.
• Unit A attacks enemy X, and gets a critical hit.
• Load battlesave -> Unit A attacks unit Y, gets a crit.
• Load battlesave -> Unit A attacks unit Z, gets a crit.
• Load battlesave -> Unit B attacks unit Y, result is irrelevant. Unit A attacks unit X or Z, gets a crit on either of them.