21st May Magazine Leaks/Previews

[Book of Ereshkigal]

He's also entitled to tell you he thinks your opinion is stupid and criticize it.

I don't really care about the argument here, but I don't think either party has said the other can't say anything :B

[IceBuster573]

I'm entitled to the free expression of my opinion. If you don't agree with it, fine.BwdYeti and I agree on basically every point here; two of the top fan game developers in this community are saying that these sound like bad ideas. Hopefully IS proves us wrong, but it feels like FE14 will be a hit/miss. The series is clearly in a state of transition, and has been ever since FE11 (it's the starting point for what I refer to as "New Fire Emblem"). You can see the progression if you analyze closely.The integrity of the gameplay hasn't felt like a focal point of the series for a while; it's only about selling copies of the game. Perhaps they'll sort this mess out with the next few games, but my hopes for FE14 have definitely been dashed by these recent details.

Alright, I think I should at least address your point on weight. It does not account for everything. What reason does one have to use a steel sword over a Silver or Brave Sword? Weight and durability hardly did much to not make them the superior choice over steel or iron swords. This game is at least addressing that by giving actual penalties to using these weapons. A horizontal weapon progression. Now it remains to be seen just how balanced this is.

Oh and that first sentence is unnecessary. I an aware of First Amendment rights.

Edited May 20, 2015 by IceBuster573

[Jagged Jagen]

maybe but it wasn't really my point, it was more a lead in, to the real argument i mainly meant the keeping the formula almost the same for most of the series after FE 6 which most likely was partly for the new fans from the west and the advertisement from smash bros everywhere,

Ah yes, FE has been rather stagnant. As someone who likes the formula, I'm happy with that, but not all change is bad. For all my outcry on the new changes, the new Weapons Triangle sounds great and The quote-unqoute Waifu Emblem was actually a pretty nice touch. I do wonder how Kaga's departure lead to a consistent formula as well.

[Arch]

Alright, I think I should at least address your point on weight. It does not account for everything. What reason does one have to use a steel sword over a Silver or Brave Sword? Weight and durability hardly did much to not make them the superior choice over steel or iron swords. This game is at least addressing that by giving actual penalties to using these weapons. A horizontal weapon progression. Now it remains to be seen just how balanced this is.

It's interesting, in theory. We'll see how it works in practice. Perhaps this is a better way to handle weapons, but it seems like the same thing could have been achieved if they'd just kept refining the "old" system.

A unit would use a Steel Sword in Old FE because they're at a point in the game where they can't access Silver/Brave. One of the core elements of Fire Emblem used to be the limited availability of resources. Vertical progression was the entire point. All of that has been thrown out the window recently; taking out durability was a huge blow to the essence of what FE used to be about. Weight was the first casualty, I suppose. For all the people saying it's "static," there's been a huge fundamental change that's been unfolding since FE9/10 flopped in sales.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Arch

[goodperson707]

Have I done anything to infringe on that right? No? Okay. I've argued my points, if you don't agree then you don't agree.I have my opinions, they are informed by my experience. Disagree if you like, but attacking my character goes beyond simple disagreement.

You are however using your character and reputation as "One of the top fan game developers" to support your opinions and to imply that they have more weight than the rest of our non fan game making selves.

Never mind that the reputation just makes you even more biased than the rest of us for reasons for sticking to the gba formula. This series is a series of video games NOT a series of balance patches for the previous game.

[Book of Ereshkigal]

...one minute until digital issue. (maybe zero when I post this)

[Arch]

You are however using your character and reputation as "One of the top fan game developers" to support your opinions and to imply that they have more weight than the rest of our non fan game making selves.

Never mind that the reputation just makes you even more biased than the rest of us for reasons for sticking to the gba formula. This series is a series of video games NOT a series of balance patches for the previous game.

I think it's funny that you're trying to tell me what a series of video games is. Like I'm some child who's never played anything but a ROM hack before.

I've never said that my opinions are more valid than anyone else's. Why can't I engage in a discussion about game design, informed by my own experiences? You're informed by your experience of playing games, I'm informed in different ways. If offering a different perspective is arrogant, then excuse my rudeness. But from my perspective, this is bad. It's not just about GBAFE, it's what the series has been about since FE1! There's a fundamental change happening. Will the series be better for it? Maybe. I don't happen to think so. It'll probably sell better, though.

Do I happen to prefer GBAFE's approach to some design elements? Yes, I do. I also really enjoyed the GCN/Wii era, but that didn't sell well enough to warrant making more games in that style. Love the SNESFE too. DSFE has been bad thus far.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Arch

[Ryo]

...one minute until digital issue. (maybe zero when I post this)

It's out now :P

[Book of Ereshkigal]

Oh and that first sentence is unnecessary. I an aware of First Amendment rights.

Doesn't the first amendment only apply to government censorship tho

It's out now :P

ASDFGHJYUKYJHGEDs I wanna seeeeee

Edited May 20, 2015 by L95

[Shadow Stalker X]

Doesn't the first amendment only apply to government censorship tho

ASDFGHJYUKYJHGEDs I wanna seeeeee

You're not the only one.

[Book Bro]

I didn't really see anything arrogant about what Arch was saying. It's not like he said IS are idiots or the game is trash, he just expressed doubts about the changes in mechanics due to his experience. He even said he hopes he's wrong.

[VincentASM]

....Ffff, I was casually refreshing the wrong 2chan thread for the past half hour.

BTW, if any new pics pop up, a new thread should be made.

[Jagged Jagen]

....Ffff, I was casually refreshing the wrong 2chan thread for the past half hour.

BTW, if any new pics pop up, a new thread should be made.

New thread? Ok

[Cysx]

/abandon thread

[Rutger]

It's interesting, in theory. We'll see how it works in practice. Perhaps this is a better way to handle weapons, but it seems like the same thing could have been achieved if they'd just kept refining the "old" system.

A unit would use a Steel Sword in Old FE because they're at a point in the game where they can't access Silver/Brave. One of the core elements of Fire Emblem used to be the limited availability of resources. Vertical progression was the entire point. All of that has been thrown out the window recently; taking out durability was a huge blow to the essence of what FE used to be about. Weight was the first casualty, I suppose. For all the people saying it's "static," there's been a huge fundamental change that's been unfolding since FE9/10 flopped in sales.

The thing is that this is not the first time IS is trying something new and scraping established concepts. Just look at FE4. But I totally understand your point, don't worry about that. It's just that we can't know for sure if the new changes are good or bad until the game is out.

[IceBuster573]

I didn't really see anything arrogant about what Arch was saying. It's not like he said IS are idiots or the game is trash, he just expressed doubts about the changes in mechanics due to his experience. He even said he hopes he's wrong.

He certainly did not say the game is trash, but saying "the series is swirling down the toilet" has a similar effect.

Oh and mobile kinda makes it hard to go back and quote him...

[Arch]

He certainly did not say the game is trash, but saying "the series is swirling down the toilet" has a similar effect.

That's just my opinion, bro. DSFE has been pretty bad so far, and my hopes aren't very high for this next one. I haven't played a "good" new FE game since I was a freshman in High School. I'm a college graduate now, lol. What else can I do, except call it as I see it?

The problem is that they made a faithful remake of FE1, and have been following that design closely ever since. They scrap the good ideas (rescue, steal, multiple magic types, etc.), and double-down on the bad ones (reclassing enabled FE13 to become GrindEmblem).

If I wanted to grind, I'd go to a rave.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Arch

[Tamanoir]

It's interesting, in theory. We'll see how it works in practice. Perhaps this is a better way to handle weapons, but it seems like the same thing could have been achieved if they'd just kept refining the "old" system.

A unit would use a Steel Sword in Old FE because they're at a point in the game where they can't access Silver/Brave. One of the core elements of Fire Emblem used to be the limited availability of resources. Vertical progression was the entire point. All of that has been thrown out the window recently; taking out durability was a huge blow to the essence of what FE used to be about. Weight was the first casualty, I suppose. For all the people saying it's "static," there's been a huge fundamental change that's been unfolding since FE9/10 flopped in sales.

I don't think that Steel Sword is a good example though...

Sword users had generally low con which made Steel Sword pretty unappealing.

Though the Sword/Blade were an interresting addition. Power or Acccuracy avoid.

Obviously, I'm still worry all this changes ends up being insignificant late game.

[BrightBow]

I definitely like the comparison to a poor romhack. My first impression was that they were basically imitating the weight system on an engine that wasn't designed for it by using their existing abilities to apply stat boasts to weapons. Of course it could end up being a lot more interesting then that but something like this...

-Steel Sword: Avoid -5, double attack threshold -3

...is really just the same as having an Steal weapon be heavier then an iron weapon.

And what they did with the Brave Swords comes down to the same thing that TRS did with the Gatling Bow and other weapons, using the weight system.

Still, no matter how this turns out, it will probably be still an improvement. Even if this actually ends up as "the same as back in the day but needlessly complicated", at least it's there.

Edited May 20, 2015 by BrightBow

[Cysx]

I definitely like the comparison to a poor romhack. My first impression was that they were basically imitating the weight system on an engine that wasn't designed for it by using their existing abilities to apply stat boasts to weapons. Of course it could end up being a lot more interesting then that but something like this...

-Steel Sword: Avoid -5, double attack threshold -3

...is really just the same as having an Steal weapon be heavier then an iron weapon... except that in this example, the defensive penalty is barely worth talking about.

And what they did with the Brave Swords comes down to the same thing that TRS did with the Gatling Bow and other weapons, using the weight system.

Still, no matter how this turns out, it will probably be still an improvement. Even if this actually ends up as "the same as back in the day but needlessly complicated", at least it's there.

Except in the case of weight, it would specifically be a problem for some units only. Wether this is bad, or not, however...

Edit:Unless you're referring to the games that didn't have any stats to counterbalance it of course.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Cysx

[BrightBow]

Except in the case of weight, it would specifically be a problem for some units only. Wether this is bad, or not, however...

Edit:Unless you're referring to the games that didn't have any stats to counterbalance it of course.

I was actually. Specifically Tear Ring Saga since FE3-4 were really bad with the numbers.

Edit: Not that the difference actually matters. If some units suffer more from weight then they should, then the problem lies with the numbers involved, not the system itself. The Tellius one is really the only weight system that is fundamentally broken.

Edited May 20, 2015 by BrightBow

[Arch]

I was actually. Specifically Tear Ring Saga since FE3-4 were really bad with the numbers.

I remember, once upon a time, repurposing Con to create a working Str/Mag split in GBAFE. Used the FE9/10 approach of having Str buffer weapon weight. It totally broke everything, all the sudden the red cav could double with his Steel Sword at base stats and the green cav became utterly inferior.

FE12 is particularly bad with this, too, as there is literally no counterbalance. Luke doubling with his Steel Sword makes post-Prologue a total joke at standard Normal/Hard difficulty levels. It only goes downhill from there.

FE13, after halfway through the game, difficulty was basically destroyed by pair up. I'm doubtful of IS's ability to create a comprehensive experience; even if these changes all end up being good things, given their track record, they'll probably all fall to the wayside by mid/lategame.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Arch

[BlueL]

You answered it yourself. Babying. Babying isn't necessarily bad if the payoff is REALLY good (FE4 Master Knights, for example, are something that are entirely worth the effort), but even when they're caught up they don't necessarily have any real benefits that puts them worth using over another class (especially in case of General they're pretty much entirely outclassed by Great Knight, and they lack significant statistical and gameplay advantages to counterbalance their poor movement), and the payoff doesn't justify the effort.

Hell

If you like archers and knights already wouldn't you like them to be better anyway

Well I was referring more to archers when I said babying then knights. I agree, at least in the second half of the game, that General's poor movement (especially in GBA era) isn't worth the effort. It's better to just to take the Great Knights and deal with their slightly worse defense. But I disagree on archers. They do their job, being backline (is that the proper term) units and anti-flying units pretty well. An archer is much more accurately and is better at attacking from range than leaving it up to throwable axe or lance.

[arvilino]

I remember, once upon a time, repurposing Con to create a working Str/Mag split in GBAFE. Used the FE9/10 approach of having Str buffer weapon weight. It totally broke everything, all the sudden the red cav could double with his Steel Sword at base stats and the green cav became utterly inferior.

FE12 is particularly bad with this, too, as there is literally no counterbalance. Luke doubling with his Steel Sword makes post-Prologue a total joke at standard Normal/Hard difficulty levels. It only goes downhill from there.

FE13, after halfway through the game, difficulty was basically destroyed by pair up. I'm doubtful of IS's ability to create a comprehensive experience; even if these changes all end up being good things, given their track record, they'll probably all fall to the wayside by mid/lategame.

How exactly would he have not done the same if there was a weight system and he had 9/10 con like GBA cavaliers?

Edited May 20, 2015 by arvilino

[Thor Odinson]

I don't really trust IS to balance con distribution well enough to use it again, however. I think con could have been a solid system, but its distribution along with making female mounts 20-con rather than 25 like the men was bullshit. I mean if they had to have that much lower con as a handicap, you might as well at least give them the extra rescue to balance out, but noooo

Well I was referring more to archers when I said babying then knights. I agree, at least in the second half of the game, that General's poor movement (especially in GBA era) isn't worth the effort. It's better to just to take the Great Knights and deal with their slightly worse defense. But I disagree on archers. They do their job, being backline (is that the proper term) units and anti-flying units pretty well. An archer is much more accurately and is better at attacking from range than leaving it up to throwable axe or lance.

ngl the archer class's biggest issue is that archers, as a class, have really bad bases for inexplicable reasons. Snipers, who have good bases, don't really need babying and can fit easily into teams.

In FEA where you can reclass far better units than Virion into Archers after they've accumulated a shitload of stats, Archer can be a pretty good class to be in (though I prefer to just go straight into Sniper, Archer skills aren't that great), but in previous games archer stats are for some reasons low enough compared to similarly leveled units to create a significant handicap. All archers really need is just a few points higher in str/skl/spd to start themselves off better, but most games didn't do that. On top of that, in 7 and 8 and 11 (and tellius? I didn't play tellius enough times to know the weapon configuration), Javelins and Handaxes are quite powerful, and using bows for anti-air wasn't quite necessary when you can take up a javelin and ORKO them just fine anyway. I think the devs realised that was a bad idea and toned them down a notch. Bows were solid in 6, but the starting archers' stats sucked too much and part of that is archer class bases. The Nomads and Snipers, by comparison, were solid units.

The buff that archer as a class needs is fairly simple and small, a few statpoints across the offensive stats should suffice, but it's still there. They need significant offensive prowess to stay relevant due to their lack of enemy phase, which sometimes just wasn't there due to bad bases (In 7 HHM Rebecca's starting damage was around 4 hp which is pretty bad) They are better off than knights, though, who need real incentives of use via map design and level design (hoping to see them in Nohr) and ways for them not to be horribly outclassed by their mounted or flying counterparts, possibly through class-locked skills.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Thor Odinson