Famitsu 14th May: Phoenix Mode and No More Weapon Uses

[Shadow Knight]

Because I don't think anyone has pointed it out, I am huge fan of strategies that rely on units breaking their own weapons in order to enable them to swap their weapons by themselves in situations where it isn't possible to get someone else to tradeswap them. It also allows for AI manipulation in that units with weapons about to break are considered unarmed by enemies. Micromanaging weapon uses is definitely something I've come to appreciate a lot, and I always attempt to keep low use weapons just in case I need them to break to facilitate a strategy.

Removing weapon durability removes this tactical element.

Agreed, though I am interested to see how they balance this out. But it is disappointing, the weapon uses added a major strategic challenge and for the most part made FE pretty unique.

[iavasechui]

If weapons are no longer breakable in all modes then I'll likely treat all weapons aside from the lowest tier as limited.

[Jagged Jagen]

If weapons are no longer breakable in all modes then I'll likely treat all weapons aside from the lowest tier as limited.

I hate that we have to self impose a challenge that is a major part of the FE identity (Hell Robin's Smash move set is based off this) But I will not play If with unlimited use weapons.

Edited May 13, 2015 by DeoGame

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Actually I didn't have the time to pay attention on this topic... and tbh it would be better, if I never read this.

FE is on the best way to ruin all the strategical elements.

I summarize all the removes in the latest games:

• staves like sleep and silence
• magic weapon triangle and light magic
• ballistas
• weapon weight
• long range magic for anima mages
• limit of weapon uses

If this will be way of Intelligent Systems, I have lost completly the interest in FE!

[shadowofchaos]

[*]weapon weight

Weapon weight stopped being relevant since FE10.

The point when we pretty much started to ignore it.

Nowadays, people just use features and complexity to justify "depth" when nostalgia-ing when they really don't miss it all that much.

When was the last time you actually thought about the Dark vs. Light vs. Anima triangle BESIDES when Micaiah getting attacked and was at an accuracy disadvantage to 90% of magic users ever?

Anima triangle didn't really mean all that much considering it's mage vs. mage.

Edited May 13, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[eclipse]

Infinite warp! Infinite rescue!

So excited!!!!!!

But Warp wasn't in Awakening.

This would be interesting, if those staves exist/return, and staves counted as weapons. Pretty sure we won't see infinite-use Elixir/promotion items/stat boosters!

I still haven't really seen anyone say who Phoenix mode is supposed to attract to the series. Assuming it's the easiest mode.

I mean if it's supposed to be for players who like experimenting with the game that's a different story, but I sort of doubt they would actually take that into account when thinking up new modes.

I'll save my theorycrafting for later.

I have to say I'm actually a bit surprised by the amount of people who are okay with casual mode but bothered by phoenix mode. Many of you called those of us who begged the question of where the line was to be drawn on accessability to be acting in bad faith. I would have thought there would have been more consensus after such a focused dismissal, but it looks like this is practically an even larger topic of contention than casual mode was.

I'd hesitate to call those folk hypocrital neccessarily, but it is pretty interesting nonetheless.

I'll reserve my judgment of Phoenix until I play the game several times. Perhaps there's some mechanics that necessitate resurrecting characters immediately (like an objective where multiple characters must be on different points of the map at the same time).

Tbh I'm wondering more about the 3-10 tomes and the status effect staves.

Infinite-use siege tomes can die in a fire. Unless they're in MY hands only.

Mostly on stuff like warp, rescue and such in the older games. Or legendary, or heck theres probably someone whos used it on a favorite Prf.

Used it on a forged Waste, because remaking that thing would be stupid-expensive.

I do wonder, with the unbreakable weapons and lower difficulty, what's the point of the Nohr game. I thought it was supposed to be more difficult with limited gold, but what's there to spend gold on? As someone who intends to major in business studies, breakable weapons was one of my favorite mechanics. It required strategic thinking, risk vs. reward and taught basic economics to gamers (mostly younger back when FE was rated E). That, among other reasons is why I'm going to miss breakable weapons and I fear that it goes against the Nohr principal. If the economic message behind Awakening was that you're royal and have DLC, then who cares, the Nohr path/Classic Games was more you're travelers hoping to keep things budgetary with some extra gold along the way. But with the lack of Weapon Durability, it seems Nohr is a bit more of a cop out. Shame.

That's a hell of a lot of assumptions given a very limited amount of information. I think you'd be much better served if you changed your mindset from "this won't work and here's why" to "given this information, what kinds of in-game features could exist, assuming that the developers are sane".

In the case of no weapon durability, I wonder if it would be possible for thieves to steal non-equipped weapons, or have weapons disappear due to other circumstances. Maybe shops will be very few and far between, or maybe it'll take a LOT longer to get from one weapon rank to the next, or perhaps the item system will be something like Gaiden's.

In the case of Phoenix Mode, perhaps there's enemy attacks which can hit multiple units, or an objective that requires multiple allied units to complete.

Regardless, the lack of info is maddening, but I refuse to judge IS until I actually play the game.

Just got done reading all the comments. A lot of people here have different opinions on these topics, but none are really accepting the other's point of view or are being way to pushy with their opinions. Can't we be civil and talk about these new features maturely?

Ideally, yes. However, things tend to boil over when person A realizes that person B will never listen.

---

All the new stuff looks very interesting, and I'd like to see how it resolves! I have enough faith in IS that they wouldn't make drastic changes unless the game itself warranted it.

[NekoKnight]

Massive eyeroll for Fetus Mode but it's optional so I can't complain too much. Though for people who don't want to employ even a grain of strategy in this strategy game, I encourage them to, um, not play. Maybe the Fire Emblem of this game will be a Warp Whistle that maxes out the stats of all your characters and teleports you to the last level.

I am very disappointed for the loss of weapon durability and it looks like another way to streamline the game and remove strategic depth. Even if they were to balance it around making weapons rarer, it would still be far less interesting. Are people thinking this through? Unlimited Killing Edges? Unlimited Brave Weapons?

Making TMs unlimited in Pokemon was a positive development because most TMs couldn't be repurchased, and unlike trading weapons in Fire Emblem, only one Pokemon could learn a TM and then it was gone forever.

I'm getting the urge to play Rekka again.

[Blue Sun]

I get the feeling that all of these added features (Phoenix Mode, removed Weapon Durability, nine Save Files, Dragon's Vein, Dragon's Pulse, etc.) implies something sinister about the game's difficulty even for Hoshido (what with Nohr already being difficult as of right now and Lunatic Mode returning of all things). Seriously, knowing Fire Emblem this seems less like accessibility to an extent and more like the infamous Suspicious Videogame Generosity trope. I know that I can't be the only one who thinks this way. Also, has anyone paid attention to the ratings of these games? That's higher than literally everything else in the franchise.

Edited May 13, 2015 by BlueSunStudios

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Weapon weight stopped being relevant since FE10.

It's still relevant in the early game of part 1 and in 2-1.

In FE11 it's very relevant for magic users because of their 0% strength growth. They can't use tomes like bolganone or thoron without AS penalty. However I agree with that the strength rule in FE11 doesn't work well for mages at least.

The point when we pretty much started to ignore it.

Nowadays, people just use features and complexity to justify "depth" when nostalgia-ing when they really don't miss it all that much.

Yes I'm a person, who favors all the nostalgic game mechanics from the older games. I even prefer game mechanics over the story.

FE is a round based strategical game for me so I expect to see as many strategical elements as possible.

Well, I've to admit FE10 was my first FE game so it should explain a little bit, why I have different expectations about the game mechanics than a person, who's played for example FE13 at first.

[Jagged Jagen]

Massive eyeroll for Fetus Mode but it's optional so I can't complain too much. Though for people who don't want to employ even a grain of strategy in this strategy game, I encourage them to, um, not play. Maybe the Fire Emblem of this game will be a Warp Whistle that maxes out the stats of all your characters and teleports you to the last level.

I am very disappointed for the loss of weapon durability and it looks like another way to streamline the game and remove strategic depth. Even if they were to balance it around making weapons rarer, it would still be far less interesting. Are people thinking this through? Unlimited Killing Edges? Unlimited Brave Weapons?

Making TMs unlimited in Pokemon was a positive development because most TMs couldn't be repurchased, and unlike trading weapons in Fire Emblem, only one Pokemon could learn a TM and then it was gone forever.

I'm getting the urge to play Rekka again.

I really don't get why they've removed vulnerability either. I'm currently on a Rekka Playthrough and enjoying every moment. Had to be Eliwood normal though, new copy and everything.

[Ryo]

Isn't Dragon's Vein and Dragon's Pulse the same thing, just with different translation?

And how do we even flatten a mountain exactly? What does earthquake even do?

[goodperson707]

Weapon weight stopped being relevant since FE10.

The point when we pretty much started to ignore it.

Nowadays, people just use features and complexity to justify "depth" when nostalgia-ing when they really don't miss it all that much.

When was the last time you actually thought about the Dark vs. Light vs. Anima triangle BESIDES when Micaiah getting attacked and was at an accuracy disadvantage to 90% of magic users ever?

Anima triangle didn't really mean all that much considering it's mage vs. mage.

This pretty 100 freaking precent This.

Yeah really on the magic triangle bonuses i barely remember them In the gba games i liked dark magic cause i could play around with Nosferatu/Luna/eclipse cause though not always useful they had cool effects and where fun to fool around with. But then we still have that don't we.

Light magic Imo in the Gba games seemed to be just so that bishops didn't overshadow the sages/druids. they were heavier and weaker and had less uses, a small crit bonus isn't going to make up for that especially since the thunder tomes had a small crit bonus as well and sages had on average higher skill anyway. In sacred stones two magic and staffs sages and druids the only reason to even be a bishop is for slayer but i dont really remember ever using the light tome i gave my sages i jsut trained it up for the heck of it . I kinda forget radiant dawn/path of radiance but Light seemed to take the utility magic from dark which wasn't even in PoR.

Really i don't see why we need a true triangle i barely remember it mattering at all in combat. And light magics purpose is kinda fulfilled by dark magic any way

Edited May 13, 2015 by goodperson707

[Book Bro]

I'm just hoping the full article will go in depth into these changes so we can understand a little better why they exist. I'm not sure another month+ of pure speculation will be healthy for the forum. :P

[Tangerine]

I am very disappointed for the loss of weapon durability and it looks like another way to streamline the game and remove strategic depth. Even if they were to balance it around making weapons rarer, it would still be far less interesting. Are people thinking this through? Unlimited Killing Edges? Unlimited Brave Weapons?

When was this ever actually a factor? You essentially have unlimited weapons in the other FEs, you can stock up on them until the next shop rolls around or even forge more. The new system, if properly balanced, has the potential to be much more interesting as a resource management system. If Killer weapons are in limited supply, you can't just buy a bunch and have your whole army rolling extremely high crit setups as soon as a shop opens up, you have to choose who you want to be running the Killer weapon and potentially trade it should another unit need the crit boost. This goes for all weapons. If done right, it's even more balanced than what we had.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Tangerine

[Irysa]

Having essentially unlimited is not the same as unlimited, but that's a nitpick. Regardless, limited use weapons do break, and them breaking at bad times can be awkward to plan around. Having a large supply of really good weapons doesn't diminish the fact that you would have to load your inventories out differently to accomodate for weapons potentially breaking. Additionally, your access to these "essentially" unlimited killer weapons and the like only comes in at later points in the game typically, and earlygame you have a finite resource of these powerful weapons. Jeigan silver lances are a good example, as are earlygame Killer Edges from Navarre-archetype characters. We can't buy those until later in the game, but can be reasonably given them early on and have strategic considerations in their best use because of their use limits.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Irysa

[TKHikaru13]

Am I the only one thinking Phoenix mode seems pretty reasonable for at least the Nohr path?

Like we've got no clue just how hard Nohr will be. What if it's like lunatic+ turned up to eleven? What if there are other things that ramp up Nohr's difficulty? Quite a few people are getting Nohr, maybe the optional phoenix mode is a way to give the newbies at least a leg up in Nohr.

I'm pretty pleased with weapon durability leaving. One of the most frustrating things for me in Awakening was not being able to use Nowi and Panne as much in the early segments because there was no way to replenish their stones. Removing that makes life a lot easier when it comes to transforming units. I don't have to avoid using powerful units because their weapon's gonna break.

Plus, it's another form of mercy for Nohr. It's already been confirmed that Nohr has limited resources. Nohr would eventually become borderline impossible if your weapons broke without a way to repair them or get new ones.

[Tangerine]

Having essentially unlimited is not the same as unlimited, but that's a nitpick. Regardless, limited use weapons do break, and them breaking at bad times can be awkward to plan around. Having a large supply of really good weapons doesn't diminish the fact that you would have to load your inventories out differently to accomodate for weapons potentially breaking. Additionally, your access to these "essentially" unlimited killer weapons and the like only comes in at later points in the game typically, and earlygame you have a finite resource of these powerful weapons. Jeigan silver lances are a good example, as are earlygame Killer Edges from Navarre-archetype characters. We can't buy those until later in the game, but can be reasonably given them early on and have strategic considerations in their best use because of their use limits.

Not needing to save a Killing Edge in the early game makes a sword unit stronger, but not being able to buy them for your whole army in the late-early to mid game significantly alters the balance of the game in a positive way. If done right, this is a positive change.

[mimgrim]

Don't care about Phoenix mode. It's whatever. Doesn't affect me.

I am, however, worried about weapon durability. There is potential for it to work. But it would require a re-haul to the system. Durability is what made iron weapons so relevant in many of the FE games and why it made infinite weapons (if the game had them) so broke in their games. It can be done, but I have only so much faith in IS. And I hope IS proves me wrong.

Edited May 13, 2015 by mimgrim

[Irysa]

Not needing to save a Killing Edge in the early game makes a sword unit stronger, but not being able to buy them for your whole army in the late-early to mid game significantly alters the balance of the game in a positive way. If done right, this is a positive change.

Not having to conserve your earlygame Killing Edge or Silver Lance doesn't just make units stronger, it makes decisions about what to use and when to use it somewhat meaningless. The problem with examining lategame is that in basically every single Fire Emblem to date, it is pretty trivial, if not normal to reach points in the game where the importance of stronger weapons is diminished by how strong characters grow relative to the enemies. Earlygame allows for much more focused and impactful concerns compared to lategame because of how much more limited the player is in terms of resources and unit stats. So going by series trends, it's reasonable to assume that the game keeps this as a status quo. Unless this is addressed with great importance, there is a prominent risk of the scenario you outline simply not existing, even if we only ever got one Killing Edge/Silver Lance.

Rather than positive, I would say "potentially interesting", but I have little faith in it being executed in said interesting manner.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Irysa

[Leif]

Don't care about Phoenix mode. It's whatever. Doesn't affect me.

I am, however, worried about weapon durability. There is potential for it to work. But it would require a re-haul to the system. Durability is what made iron weapons so relevant in many of the FE games and why it made infinite weapons (if the game had them) so broke in their games. It can be done, but I have only so much faith in IS. And I hope IS proves me wrong.

The change would work if weapons like, Steel Swords or Silver Bows, were rare. Legendary weapons would be even harder to come by. They could bring weight back, so a unit could hang on to an iron sword to double attack, or use the steel sword to land a stronger strike.

I believe most of the units that we get will start out with basic weapons. Kazahana, the female myrmidon, only gets an iron blade instead of the traditional killing edge. We may get one killing edge sword or one brave sword in an entire playthrough, so we won't have an army of brave wielding units.

If IS is balancing Pair up, I think they will address the infinite brave weapon situation in Awakening...

Edited May 13, 2015 by Leif

[Xyr]

All this debate going on now about unlimited blades but we won't find out if it works or not until we get our hands on the game, so personally I'll just wait to see how it is managed mechanically in gameplay when it gets here. But Phoenix mode. My first thought was "is this a joke?" it would significantly change one of the most important strategic elements of the game because regardless of casual or classic mode, zombie mode would be....like managing an army of zombies. May be this doesn't mean that winning every battle becomes just a matter of time, which leads to the other option being that battles are that hard. This is looking very interesting.

[Suichimo]

The change would work if weapons like, Steel Swords or Silver Bows, were rare. Legendary weapons would be even harder to come by. They could bring weight back, so a unit could hang on to an iron sword to double attack, or use the steel sword to land a stronger strike.

I believe most of the units that we get will start out with basic weapons. Kazahana, the female myrmidon, only gets an iron blade instead of the traditional killing edge. We may get one killing edge sword or one brave sword in an entire playthrough, so we won't have an army of brave wielding units.

If IS is balancing Pair up, I think they will address the infinite brave weapon situation in Awakening...

There was a single Steel Sword in FE2. I imagine they're basing the infinite weapons off of that.

[HF Makalov Fanboy Kai]

The change would work if weapons like, Steel Swords or Silver Bows, were rare. Legendary weapons would be even harder to come by. They could bring weight back, so a unit could hang on to an iron sword to double attack, or use the steel sword to land a stronger strike.

I believe most of the units that we get will start out with basic weapons. Kazahana, the female myrmidon, only gets an iron blade instead of the traditional killing edge. We may get one killing edge sword or one brave sword in an entire playthrough, so we won't have an army of brave wielding units.

If IS is balancing Pair up, I think they will address the infinite brave weapon situation in Awakening...

lets not forget that in previous games, braves were weaker then silvers, but in awakening they were also stronger

[Leif]

There was a single Steel Sword in FE2. I imagine they're basing the infinite weapons off of that.

That makes sense. I'd have infinite weapon uses and have maps that require lots of strategic planning, than have finite weapon uses and poor map design. Compare Awakening's maps to Thracia 776's. Look at chapter 7 in Thracia and Chapter 7 in Awakening. Both were similar, with there being a straight line from point A to B. However, there was a sense of desperation in Thracia's chapter because when "X" amount of turns were hit, a ton of reinforcements came after you from the north. Awakening only had a few Dragon Knights come in from the south, which was the only challenge from that map. I didn't panic when the dragon knights started attacking in Awakening, like I did when I was bum rushed by the cavaliers in Thracia 776. So if they focused more on clever map design this time around, I'll be a happy camper.

lets not forget that in previous games, braves were weaker then silvers, but in awakening they were also stronger

Yes, Awakening was incredibly broken in that regard. I think they are attempting to balance the game a bit better. Why else are they introducing Phoenix mode?

Edited May 13, 2015 by Leif

[KMT4ever]

Weapon weight stopped being relevant since FE10.

Nowadays, people just use features and complexity to justify "depth" when nostalgia-ing when they really don't miss it all that much.

When was the last time you actually thought about the Dark vs. Light vs. Anima triangle BESIDES when Micaiah getting attacked and was at an accuracy disadvantage to 90% of magic users ever?

Anima triangle didn't really mean all that much considering it's mage vs. mage.

Good point on both of these, although Awakening should have had the intra-anima triangle to give fire and thunder magic some sort of use. The only time I can remember ever caring about the magic triangle was a few times in the GBA games where my mages were outclassed by early shamans.

As for weapon durability the game can be balanced around that. Everyone might have basic iron weapons and tomes, but anything above that is limited in quantity. You might get 2 of each steel weapon and 1 each of silver/killing/brave in the entire game. Later on when units promote and become able to use two weapon types things will become complicated.

Though for people who don't want to employ even a grain of strategy in this strategy game, I encourage them to, um, not play.

Yes. I wouldn't dare call myself anything better than an average player, but I still like to think my way through these games.