Weapon Durability vs Weapon Effects

[Peppy]

Considering how this game handled weapons, did you prefer weapons having these effects along with infinite uses or did you like it when it was just weapon durability?

Edited July 22, 2015 by Peppy

[Jedi]

Dno I'll tell you when I get the game lol.

[NinjaMonkey]

Weapon durability for sure.

[Azz]

I voted for Weapon Effects.

Honestly, maybe I am just a noob(I never taught I would use that word), but I feel that with weapon effects, there is more strategic planning involved then just using your most powerful weapon to beat the bad guy.While yes some weapons are really bad and can fuck you up but it is a risk reward thing.

[Psyruby]

Effects, makes the game more fun and balanced. I like weapons not being strictly better for having higher rank. They are a bit better until you get to A rank. A ranks are good, S ranks are godly.

[Ryo]

I would actually want a mixture of the two system, with the negative effects toned down a bit.

[Silent Mercenary]

I like that they tried to make it fairer, but with most of the high-rank weapons having debuffs, I'll mostly stick to (forged) Iron and personal weapons, even more so than in games with durability.

The new weapon effects, specially for 1-2 range weapons, seem like an addition to encourage bow usage outside of flier kills. I hope Proximity Shot has a big downside, otherwise there'll be no reason to use anything but Yumi or Killer Bows.

[Bovinian]

I'm more curious whether the "no durability" crowd consists more of people who think lack of durability is necessarily detrimental to game balance, or more those who just hate not being able to use OP weapons with no drawbacks. I know both of these opinions exist.

I hope Proximity Shot has a big downside, otherwise there'll be no reason to use anything but Yumi or Killer Bows.

I agree with this. I think IS did a pretty good job of making bows viable, and having a widely available Proximity Shot will just destroy this accomplishment in the opposite direction.

[NekoKnight]

I would actually want a mixture of the two system, with the negative effects toned down a bit.

This. Some weapons are not worth using with their drawbacks and you end up using iron weapons more often than not because they don't have penalties. I do like the weapons that affect doubling rates. I feel like that was a very progressive move.

[Jagged Jagen]

If you don't mind, I'd like to make a case for why Weapon Durability is a special, integral part of Fire Emblem's Gameplay and Identity.

For me, the inclusion of a weapon durability system has always been rather special in numerous ways. The first of which being the added layer to realism within the series. Fire Emblem, for all its quirky characters, fantasy world, and inclusion of mythical creatures has always been notable in that the core mechanics were for the most part grounded in reality. When a character dies, they're dead for good, a weapon's weight can effect units in numerous ways, by rescuing someone, you put yourself at greater risk by taking the effort to do so, an older more experienced unit has potential early on, but can be surpassed by a weaker unit after time and training. These are many systems that combine realism with fantasy, and weapon durability was no different. Quite simply, things break, and this was reflective of said fact.

Beyond realism fusion, Weapon Durability has also been a core part of Fire Emblem's identity, spanning across 12/14 games (Gaiden and Fates the 2 exceptions) so it's had time to grow into its own balanced system. Your Killer/Brave weapons for all their power were offset by rather low durability, bringing to question exactly when to use the proper weapon. It was an overall unique way of balancing weapons in a way that was impactful but not punishing. With FE's limited resources, each weapon bought could be at a great cost calling to question whether a purchase is worthwhile or not, especially when considering the lower durability.

With Fates now here, Weapon Durability has been removed and from what I've seen thus far, its presence is missed. While there are stat penalties, none of them seem to fully balance the weapon system the way durability did. Sure, in early game they may very well be problematic, but this is simply more front loaded in terms of difficulty. Remember, the level cap in Fates is 99, meaning any penalties will likely be negligible by a certain point within the game. Eternal Seals granted aren't cheap, but with Gold DLC in the play and some reports that Nohr's resources aren't as limited as implied (granted far more limited than the 3rd/Hoshido path) means that the system may be obsolete later in the game.

All in all, Weapon Durability was a special part of FE. In fact, Masahiro Sakurai himself built an entire smash representative around the mechanic because he knew how special it was. And with some of the potential balance issues with the new system, I can't help but long for the old durability system. Sure it may be intrusive/annoying at times, but its proven that it works and built its way into the very core of Fire Emblem.

[Great Geargia Gateway]

I can't vote both?

Still, I like Durability a little more, because it was realistic and no negative effects, but IS they never enforced the durability well enough. If they were skills that lowered the opponents held weapon's durability when they successfully hit, or using your own as cost to increase damage or boost an effect or something. If they did more with it, then they would encourage people to play harder modes or something... Idk. IS are just horrible with ideas.

The only thing durability effected was the main campaign (Unless their use number was very little in multiplayer).

Edited July 22, 2015 by Great Geargia Gateway

[Psyruby]

If you don't mind, I'd like to make a case for why Weapon Durability is a special, integral part of Fire Emblem's Gameplay and Identity.

For me, the inclusion of a weapon durability system has always been rather special in numerous ways. The first of which being the added layer to realism within the series. Fire Emblem, for all its quirky characters, fantasy world, and inclusion of mythical creatures has always been notable in that the core mechanics were for the most part grounded in reality. When a character dies, they're dead for good, a weapon's weight can effect units in numerous ways, by rescuing someone, you put yourself at greater risk by taking the effort to do so, an older more experienced unit has potential early on, but can be surpassed by a weaker unit after time and training. These are many systems that combine realism with fantasy, and weapon durability was no different. Quite simply, things break, and this was reflective of said fact.

Beyond realism fusion, Weapon Durability has also been a core part of Fire Emblem's identity, spanning across 12/14 games (Gaiden and Fates the 2 exceptions) so it's had time to grow into its own balanced system. Your Killer/Brave weapons for all their power were offset by rather low durability, bringing to question exactly when to use the proper weapon. It was an overall unique way of balancing weapons in a way that was impactful but not punishing. With FE's limited resources, each weapon bought could be at a great cost calling to question whether a purchase is worthwhile or not, especially when considering the lower durability.

With Fates now here, Weapon Durability has been removed and from what I've seen thus far, its presence is missed. While there are stat penalties, none of them seem to fully balance the weapon system the way durability did. Sure, in early game they may very well be problematic, but this is simply more front loaded in terms of difficulty. Remember, the level cap in Fates is 99, meaning any penalties will likely be negligible by a certain point within the game. Eternal Seals granted aren't cheap, but with Gold DLC in the play and some reports that Nohr's resources aren't as limited as implied (granted far more limited than the 3rd/Hoshido path) means that the system may be obsolete later in the game.

All in all, Weapon Durability was a special part of FE. In fact, Masahiro Sakurai himself built an entire smash representative around the mechanic because he knew how special it was. And with some of the potential balance issues with the new system, I can't help but long for the old durability system. Sure it may be intrusive/annoying at times, but its proven that it works and built its way into the very core of Fire Emblem.

Durability does not balance PvP at all is the real issue. It may balance story mode, but PvP would suffer. I would never not use Brave Weapons in PvP. Durability be ****ed, they will die before I run out. The weapon penalties, on the other hand, hard balance PvP. There is a time, certain units, and place to use Brave, Silver, Steel, Iron, and many of the other weapons with unique up and downsides.

It probably would have been better to have durability for main game and penalties for PvP.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Psyruby

[Bovinian]

If you don't mind, I'd like to make a case for why Weapon Durability is a special, integral part of Fire Emblem's Gameplay and Identity.

For me, the inclusion of a weapon durability system has always been rather special in numerous ways. The first of which being the added layer to realism within the series. Fire Emblem, for all its quirky characters, fantasy world, and inclusion of mythical creatures has always been notable in that the core mechanics were for the most part grounded in reality. When a character dies, they're dead for good, a weapon's weight can effect units in numerous ways, by rescuing someone, you put yourself at greater risk by taking the effort to do so, an older more experienced unit has potential early on, but can be surpassed by a weaker unit after time and training. These are many systems that combine realism with fantasy, and weapon durability was no different. Quite simply, things break, and this was reflective of said fact.

Beyond realism fusion, Weapon Durability has also been a core part of Fire Emblem's identity, spanning across 12/14 games (Gaiden and Fates the 2 exceptions) so it's had time to grow into its own balanced system. Your Killer/Brave weapons for all their power were offset by rather low durability, bringing to question exactly when to use the proper weapon. It was an overall unique way of balancing weapons in a way that was impactful but not punishing. With FE's limited resources, each weapon bought could be at a great cost calling to question whether a purchase is worthwhile or not, especially when considering the lower durability.

With Fates now here, Weapon Durability has been removed and from what I've seen thus far, its presence is missed. While there are stat penalties, none of them seem to fully balance the weapon system the way durability did. Sure, in early game they may very well be problematic, but this is simply more front loaded in terms of difficulty. Remember, the level cap in Fates is 99, meaning any penalties will likely be negligible by a certain point within the game. Eternal Seals granted aren't cheap, but with Gold DLC in the play and some reports that Nohr's resources aren't as limited as implied (granted far more limited than the 3rd/Hoshido path) means that the system may be obsolete later in the game.

All in all, Weapon Durability was a special part of FE. In fact, Masahiro Sakurai himself built an entire smash representative around the mechanic because he knew how special it was. And with some of the potential balance issues with the new system, I can't help but long for the old durability system. Sure it may be intrusive/annoying at times, but its proven that it works and built its way into the very core of Fire Emblem.

I don't think some parts of your argument really line up. You claim that because of the high level cap, your units's stats will become high enough to the point that the penalties will no longer matter. But unlike something like PoR/RD's weight system where your units' Strength eventually surpassed a constant weapon weight value, in Fates the penalties are still relative to the increasing stats of your enemies so they will never become completely irrelevant. You bring up gold DLC, but with that you could buy like 20 new weapons at the price of an Eternal Seal, rendering weapon durability pretty pointless. If you managed to become so overpowered that even with the penalties you still dominate your opponents (which has become more difficult to do because of different EXP scaling), you don't need to use anything other than Iron weapons in the first place.

If you ever actually do reach a point where your units are at level 99, unless you spent the entire game grinding (which would make durability irrelevant like I stated above), you would be way done with the main story. At that point, the only type of balance that matters is against other players in PvP, where the penalties will still matter because your opponents' stats will be just as high as yours.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Bovinian

[Jagged Jagen]

Durability does not balance PvP at all is the real issue. It may balance story mode, but PvP would suffer. I would never not use Brave Weapons in PvP. Durability be ****ed, they will die before I run out. The weapon penalties, on the other hand, hard balance PvP. There is a time, certain units, and place to use Brave, Silver, Steel, Iron, and many of the other weapons with unique up and downsides.

It probably would have been better to have durability for main game and penalties for PvP.

Fair enough, as much as I love permadeath and Durability as systems, they're best suited for single player.

I don't think some parts of your argument really line up. You claim that because of the high level cap, your units's stats will become high enough to the point that the penalties will no longer matter. But unlike something like PoR/RD's weight system where your units' Strength eventually surpassed a constant Con value, in Fates the penalties are still relative to the increasing stats of your opponents so they will never become completely irrelevant. You bring up gold DLC, but with that you could buy like 20 new weapons at the price of an Eternal Seal, rendering weapon durability pretty pointless.

If you ever actually do reach a point where your units are at level 99, unless you spent the entire game grinding (which would make durability irrelevant like I stated above), you would be way done with the main story. At that point, the only type of balance that matters is against other players in PvP, where the penalties will still matter because your opponents' stats will be just as high as yours.

I wasn't fully familiar with the cost of eternal seals so I do apologize. I'm not fully certain where a unit will statistically lie at the regular 20 level cap, but if it's the case where the penalties stay important throughout the duration of the campaign, the new system may be better balanced than I had thought. Thanks for the rebuttal.

[MCProductions]

I will say I have yet to actually play Fates, but I love FE Gaiden for it's approach to weapon mechanics, and honestly got excited when I heard this game ditched durability in favor of weapons having their own gimmicks like Gaiden. I hate feeling like I can't use the silver sword I got in chapter 5 or the starting rapier because I might need it later, so I love this system because it's no longer a question of "will I need this later?", instead, I ask myself, which weapon is more effective for the present situation. FE4, for all the things I don't like about that game, handled weapons similarly due to the broken as all heck weapon repair store, which honestly wouldn't be as broken if the legendarys weren't so OP.

Is weapon durability integral to the series, not at all IMO, since FE2 didn't have it at all, FE4 gave access to easy repair jobs,FE13 had Armsthrift, and most FE games give you so much money that weapon durability is hardly ever an actual concern

IS, bring back 1-5 range bows next game please if you keep these FE Gaiden mechanics. These bows being missing is my sole disappointment with what I've read about the games balance.

Edited July 22, 2015 by MCProductions

[Othin]

The effects could use some balancing but they're so great. I love having so much more of an emphasis on choosing weapons based on the current turn or upcoming ones rather than relying on vague worries about future chapters; the strategic choices are more meaningful and at the same time it's a lot more relaxing. I never want to go back. And with all the improvements to the skill system, it feels like a safe bet that they really will improve the effects as well.

As for Proximity Shot, isn't that enemy only? Unless anyone knows of a way to get it, I'm quite certain it's a non-issue.

[Tori]

While I did favor weapon durability in the older games, with how Awakening handled weaponry, you never really had to worry about weapon durability after a couple chapters. Durability felt more like a minor chore than an interesting and important part of the gameplay. In many of the GBA games, making sure your units even had enough weapons to fight was a fairly big worry, and one you had to plan for. Awakening made that much less of a worry, but in turn, made durability much less important to the gameplay overall.

And with how Fates has built up and improved on a lot of Awakening's mechanics, it felt like a good move to give more strategy to weapon uses and take away durability. There's a lot of interesting weapons and I'm already planning a lot around which ones to use and where. Bronze weapons no longer having critical hits and weapons not meant for combat like sticks each have interesting options. A lack of critical hits could help with feeding kills to weaker units, and weapons not meant for combat could help for units you feel will gain a lot more kills with critical hits and skill attacks.

However, there are some weapons that have downgrades that far outweigh any usefulness they have. Xander’s Guiding-lance is an absolutely horrible weapon, and the Expert Yumi seems far too weak and inaccurate to just have a range of 3. And with ballistas coming back in the form of the ballistician, there's probably gonna be even less use for it. The fact that there's really only one wind and dark magic spell now really bothers me.

All in all, if they bring weapon durability back in future games, they might increase durability and have the effects of certain weapons be much more minor. If they don't and stick with Fate's system, I feel they'll build and improve on it and make the balance between usefulness and strategy a bit more fair.

[Augestein]

I'm fine with both. Really though, both of them have aspects I like to much to vote one over the other.

[Dark Sage]

The two shouldn't have to be mutually exclusive.Tear Ring Saga and Berwick Saga combine both already and they're awesome.

[Othin]

Bronze weapons no longer having critical hits and weapons not meant for combat like sticks each have interesting options.

Bronze weapons have lacked critical hits since their introduction, I believe.

The two shouldn't have to be mutually exclusive.Tear Ring Saga and Berwick Saga combine both already and they're awesome.

While I do love both games, and I do think they put weapon durability to some good uses, it can be a big source of frustration and encourages potentially unnecessary micromanaging, so there are upsides and downsides. I'm not certain it'd be better this way, but I could see both games being improved by removing weapon durability and re-balancing the weapons other ways.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Othin

[Baldrick]

¿Porque no los dos?

But if we were to have only one, I think weapon effects makes for a more interesting choice than weapon durability.

This. Some weapons are not worth using with their drawbacks and you end up using iron weapons more often than not because they don't have penalties. I do like the weapons that affect doubling rates. I feel like that was a very progressive move.

That's not unique to Fates. It used to be known as Weapon Weight. shotsfired

[Shadow Mir]

Bronze weapons have lacked critical hits since their introduction, I believe.

True, other than in Awakening.

[Psyruby]

The fact that there's really only one wind and dark magic spell now really bothers me.

I'm more annoyed that excalibur is pretty BAD for Sorcerers overall. With a cap of 29 speed, they most likely won't get the double against opponents, and almost all units will double them just for holding it.

[Othin]

True, other than in Awakening.

Oh, huh. I forgot about that.

[Tori]

I'm more annoyed that excalibur is pretty BAD for Sorcerers overall. With a cap of 29 speed, they most likely won't get the double against opponents, and almost all units will double them just for holding it.

I can definitely agree with you there. Its best use could probably be for flying units that can't counterattack, but that's a fairly niche situation. Nosferatu not being able to attack twice or inflict critical hits makes it a lot less useful too, and I feel like I'd only really use it after forging it to have a lot more might.