Weapon Durability vs Weapon Effects

[Psyruby]

I haven't tested it myself, but it feels like a pretty safe bet.

TO THE WEAPON THREAD I GO!

[Shadow Knight]

Berwick Saga also has a system like that, but it's just annoying. Having a powerful weapon randomly break after just a few uses is even more unfun than having to limit to a set number of uses before it breaks.

Definitely, but if we are talking percentages shatter percentage would be very low on average, with perhaps bronze and iron weapons having a 10 to 17% chance to shatter. Steel would have like a 10% chance, and Silver would have a 5-8% chance. I'm just talking swords for examples sake, things like bows would have a much smaller chance.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Shadow Knight

[Othin]

Definitely, but if we are talking percentages shatter percentage would be very low on average, with perhaps bronze and iron weapons having a 10 to 17% chance to shatter. Steel would have like a 10% chance, and Silver would have a 5-8% chance.

Those are extremely high; you'd have Steel weapons lasting an average of 10 uses. Berwick Saga weapons increase their chance of breaking with use and still only go up to 4% until they're completely used up and it doesn't help. No one wants a chance of an important powerful weapon suddenly breaking with any use, whether it's 10% or 1%. If it happens, it's just going to be unfun. It's a terrible system and can't possibly be fixed.

[Shadow Knight]

Those are extremely high; you'd have Steel weapons lasting an average of 10 uses. Berwick Saga weapons increase their chance of breaking with use and still only go up to 4% until they're completely used up and it doesn't help. No one wants a chance of an important powerful weapon suddenly breaking with any use, whether it's 10% or 1%. If it happens, it's just going to be unfun. It's a terrible system and can't possibly be fixed.

It would have to be tweaked for sure, 10% might be a bit high but it would make you think twice about grinding as well as favoring physical units. You'd be forced to pick your battles and positioning much more carefully and ranged units like bows would be more useful. Plus it makes budgeting gold a lot harder.

And if you have a favorite weapon there could be a forging option to make it unbreakable for a very steep price

Edited July 22, 2015 by Shadow Knight

[Gradivus.]

Agreed with Othin, that kind of luck basis would only compromise a game's quality.

Honestly, I'm kind of surprised by the whole support for effects. Weapon durability does well enough at making a player manage the use of forges, regalia, early strong weapons (such as the classic silver lance on Jeigans), effective weaponry and brave weapons better and makes money more meaningful because you want to rebuy your strong weapons and make forges, as well as buy other stuff (IS should bring back secret shops and sell statboosters in lategame). The effects just sound overly complicated and a bit tedious to deal with, and although I'm more predicting than speaking out of experience when it comes to effects, I think durability is favorable and doubt I'll change my mind on this. I like simple features more than super complex ones really.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Gradivus.

[Othin]

It would have to be tweaked for sure, 10% might be a bit high but it would make you think twice about grinding as well as favoring physical units. You'd be forced to pick your battles and positioning much more carefully and ranged units like bows would be more useful. Plus it makes budgeting gold a lot harder.

Limited durability makes you think twice about grinding. Randomly shattering weapons just makes you pray the mechanic never becomes relevant. If you want to make ranged attacks better, limit the other weapon types in ways that aren't just annoying. And there's no strategy in budgeting gold for weapons that will last for potentially dramatically varying amounts of time; it's just luck.

Look, I'll send you info on how to get a Berwick Saga ROM if that's the only way for you to see that this system is completely unfixable. Berwick Saga is a fantastic game, anyway.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Othin

[Shadow Mir]

Honestly, I'm kind of surprised by the whole support for effects. Weapon durability does well enough at making a player manage the use of forges, regalia, early strong weapons (such as the classic silver lance on Jeigans), effective weaponry and brave weapons better and makes money more meaningful because you want to rebuy your strong weapons and make forges, as well as buy other stuff (IS should bring back secret shops and sell statboosters in lategame). The effects just sound overly complicated and a bit tedious to deal with, and although I'm more predicting than speaking out of experience when it comes to effects, I think durability is favorable and doubt I'll change my mind on this.

Bold: I find it funny that you mention those, in large part because those are what I had in mind with regard to "too awesome to use".

[Gradivus.]

That's what I mean though, it ensures that you don't literally spam these weapons. There's a middle ground between using a weapon really often and completely conserving it. If you're gonna face many enemies in an EP, you'll strongly consider using a different weapon than the effective one, of which you don't have many. Though if you can avoid engaging many units, the weapon might well be worth equipping if the enemies prove to be a pain (and y'know, that's what they should do in high difficulties). I don't think those effects will do anything successful to improve the gameplay since they most likely will be more of a nuisance than a balancing factor.

Just bring back con!weight if you insist on drawbacks, the more I play GBA FE, the more I like it in comparison to a weight-less system (still don't prefer it but eh), what's really bad about it is how biased it is against Pegasus Knights, but that can be implemented differently anyway.

[Psyruby]

That's what I mean though, it ensures that you don't literally spam these weapons. There's a middle ground between using a weapon really often and completely conserving it. If you're gonna face many enemies in an EP, you'll strongly consider using a different weapon than the effective one, of which you don't have many. Though if you can avoid engaging many units, the weapon might well be worth equipping if the enemies prove to be a pain (and y'know, that's what they should do in high difficulties). I don't think those effects will do anything successful to improve the gameplay since they most likely will be more of a nuisance than a balancing factor.

Just bring back con!weight if you insist on drawbacks, the more I play GBA FE, the more I like it in comparison to a weight-less system (still don't prefer it but eh), what's really bad about it is how biased it is against Pegasus Knights, but that can be implemented differently anyway.

You can balance durability for single player. You cannot balance durability for PvP(unless you do complicated stuff that only applies to PvP). The effects may be more complicated, but it is more straight forward to know when to use the weapon in singleplayer, and it balances PvP very nicely.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Psyruby

[Shadow Knight]

Limited durability makes you think twice about grinding. Randomly shattering weapons just makes you pray the mechanic never becomes relevant. If you want to make ranged attacks better, limit the other weapon types in ways that aren't just annoying. And there's no strategy in budgeting gold for weapons that will last for potentially dramatically varying amounts of time; it's just luck.

Look, I'll send you info on how to get a Berwick Saga ROM if that's the only way for you to see that this system is completely unfixable. Berwick Saga is a fantastic game, anyway.

The strategic element for gold budgeting is simple. Do you spam low quality weapons which are likely to break or do you buy better quality weapons which last but come with certain debuffs? Do you risk having less weapons so you can budget for forging unbreakable weapons or do you spend on instead seals and other items for stats and skills.

Though you're right , 10-18% is probably too high for bronze and iron weapons. But perhaps a better way of handling it would be to add the weapon triangle into the mix. For example say axes have a "high" chance of shattering spears (maybe 10-15%) but little to no chance of shattering swords (2%) and a "high" chance of shattering when put against swords

Edited July 22, 2015 by Shadow Knight

[Gradivus.]

@Psyruby: Can you give a reasoning for why the drawbacks actually balance PvP? I'm not knowledgeable at all about FE PvP, so why are the effects of as much benefit as you're saying in a PvP setting? Also, why should PvP take priority over single player? If a feature improves a mode that is played by just part of the game's players (PvP) while compromising the quality of a mode that every player of the game plays (single player), why does its inclusion improve the game as a whole? Remember that weapon durability isn't detrimental to PvP, only irrelevant. Wouldn't it be better to include a factor that balances PvP but also adds some balance to single player?

Btw, I'm not really meaning that the effects objectively compromise the quality of single player, and it's rather just my impression of it and what my opinion is based on, don't get me wrong on this.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Gradivus.

[Shadow Mir]

That's what I mean though, it ensures that you don't literally spam these weapons. There's a middle ground between using a weapon really often and completely conserving it. If you're gonna face many enemies in an EP, you'll strongly consider using a different weapon than the effective one, of which you don't have many. Though if you can avoid engaging many units, the weapon might well be worth equipping if the enemies prove to be a pain (and y'know, that's what they should do in high difficulties). I don't think those effects will do anything successful to improve the gameplay since they most likely will be more of a nuisance than a balancing factor.

Just bring back con!weight if you insist on drawbacks, the more I play GBA FE, the more I like it in comparison to a weight-less system (still don't prefer it but eh), what's really bad about it is how biased it is against Pegasus Knights, but that can be implemented differently anyway.

The thing is, I'm one of those players that tends to hoard or even outright refuse to use weapons that he can't replace easily, if at all (case in point: regalia). And I hated the con system, and weight in general, for poor execution, especially the con system for being biased against females in general, not just pegasus knights. That being said, I kinda agree that the drawbacks can be more of a nuisance than a balancing factor.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Levant Colthearts

[Othin]

FE1-3 handled Wt really well. Reasonable sized penalties constant for every character, and simpler and more prominent than how FE14 kinda sorta recreated it.

[arvilino]

That's what I mean though, it ensures that you don't literally spam these weapons. There's a middle ground between using a weapon really often and completely conserving it. If you're gonna face many enemies in an EP, you'll strongly consider using a different weapon than the effective one, of which you don't have many. Though if you can avoid engaging many units, the weapon might well be worth equipping if the enemies prove to be a pain (and y'know, that's what they should do in high difficulties). I don't think those effects will do anything successful to improve the gameplay since they most likely will be more of a nuisance than a balancing factor.

Just bring back con!weight if you insist on drawbacks, the more I play GBA FE, the more I like it in comparison to a weight-less system (still don't prefer it but eh), what's really bad about it is how biased it is against Pegasus Knights, but that can be implemented differently anyway.

Durability also ensures you can't really be sure whether you are using the weapon effectively in a playthrough. I've said in another thread that durability is a system that can convince players that's it's not the right time to use a weapon even when it is the right time. When a situation presents itself where a rare and powerful weapon might be appropriate there's always the doubt that it's still not the right time and that the best time to use it could be later in the game hence how so many players end up with the rare weapons rotting in storage for a "better time" that doesn't even come.

With Fates drawbacks to weapons you can determine when it is the right time to use the weapon because it's based entirely on the current chapter and not on unknown future chapters. Having played Fates my run through of Conquest on Lunatic I've been able to compare drawbacks and durability's impact on my playstyle at the same time due to staves having durability. Even though I've play a lot of Fire Emblem games I wasn't able to determine the right time to use the Draw Stave(2 uses) and Vanished Disaster(the rescue staff, 2 uses) the latter has been been hanging unused in my storage since chapter 9 whereas for all the regular weapons this issue doesn't exist, though I don't believe staves should have infinite uses.

I think it'd be more accurate to call the system that will make a player doubt using a weapon based on unseeable future events a nuisance.

Edited July 22, 2015 by arvilino

[Gradivus.]

You made an argument for durability being a nuisance, but you didn't counter my statement that the effects are one aswell. Why do you think the drawbacks aren't?

I stand by my preference for durability. Unless you're in a first playthrough, you can always make a rough estimate, and if you are going blind, you have to judge by yourself if you prefer dealing with the enemies the "easier, but more risky way" by using a rare weapon to take on certain enemies, or the "harder, more cautious" way and conserve the weapon. Both ways have their benefits and disadvantages, and if you aren't willing to do the former at all, you don't have to wonder if the weapon in question will end up remaining unused. That's like not using Warp in your first FE6 playthrough even though it makes stuff easier and is available for a decent timespan and in a good amount, plus you get great users for it. I didn't use it either in my first FE6 PT, though I'm not shying away from it as of now. Generally speaking, the more experienced you are with a game, the more liberally you're going to use your resources. This isn't limited to durability weapons, it also includes rare staves, statboosters and various other stuff like early elixirs. To reiterate to the first line of this post, I think the mechanic that can only sport a real nuisance on first playthroughs (durability) is more desirable than the one that is going to be a nuisance permanently (weapon effects).

[Psyruby]

@Psyruby: Can you give a reasoning for why the drawbacks actually balance PvP? I'm not knowledgeable at all about FE PvP, so why are the effects of as much benefit as you're saying in a PvP setting? Also, why should PvP take priority over single player? If a feature improves a mode that is played by just part of the game's players (PvP) while compromising the quality of a mode that every player of the game plays (single player), why does its inclusion improve the game as a whole? Remember that weapon durability isn't detrimental to PvP, only irrelevant. Wouldn't it be better to include a factor that balances PvP but also adds some balance to single player?

Btw, I'm not really meaning that the effects objectively compromise the quality of single player, and it's rather just my impression of it and what my opinion is based on, don't get me wrong on this.

1) The Drawbacks make all weapons viable in their own use. As a Trueblade, I would want to use Quickdraw Katana for units normally faster than I can double, I would use the S rank Katana with Levin Sword to bypass the S rank's effect for raw damage output, and I would use Levin Sword if the drawback of low avoid would allow me to effectively deal more damage to a unit with low Res overtime with the 1-2 range. If the effects didn't exist, I'd just use Brave Swords or the S ranks. By having the effects you have enriched the intricacies of the game, while not making certain weapons strictly better.

2) PvP is not taking priority over single player. It is being held within the same light. Effects would both improve PvP and have the same nuances explained in part 1 for single player. You aren't losing balance in single player with effects, you are simply balancing it a different way.

The disconnect is that people think it is effects or durability, when really we could have both. The game could have totally had durability and effects, and you'd still have the durability management of past games and the effects to balance PvP and make single player more interesting, but I bet IS thought that would be too complicated and decided that effects were more important overall.

EDIT: 1) is talking about how it balances PvP interestingly, 2) is explaining why we aren't monsters that seek to destroy FE durability, only wanting effects in the main game.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Psyruby

[Othin]

You made an argument for durability being a nuisance, but you didn't counter my statement that the effects are one aswell. Why do you think the drawbacks aren't?

I stand by my preference for durability. Unless you're in a first playthrough, you can always make a rough estimate, and if you are going blind, you have to judge by yourself if you prefer dealing with the enemies the "easier, but more risky way" by using a rare weapon to take on certain enemies, or the "harder, more cautious" way and conserve the weapon. Both ways have their benefits and disadvantages, and if you aren't willing to do the former at all, you don't have to wonder if the weapon in question will end up remaining unused. That's like not using Warp in your first FE6 playthrough even though it makes stuff easier and is available for a decent timespan and in a good amount, plus you get great users for it. I didn't use it either in my first FE6 PT, though I'm not shying away from it as of now. Generally speaking, the more experienced you are with a game, the more liberally you're going to use your resources. This isn't limited to durability weapons, it also includes rare staves, statboosters and various other stuff like early elixirs. To reiterate to the first line of this post, I think the mechanic that can only sport a real nuisance on first playthroughs (durability) is more desirable than the one that is going to be a nuisance permanently (weapon effects).

Effects aren't a nuisance any more than not having capped stats is a nuisance. They're limitations you have to work around based on the immediate situation.

Durability is not about the immediate situation. Unless you're doing a speedrun or something similar where you've plotted out the entire game turn-by-turn, you don't know what the cost will be later on for using a rare weapon a couple more times right now even if you've replayed the game several times. That's not strategy; it's just guessing.

[Gradivus.]

@Psyruby My main problem with effects is that I don't think they contribute to balance in single player, and actually take away some of it. I don't believe that the purpose of nerfing Silver Lances is fulfilled by the -2 Atk and -5 CEvd, it still is inherently better than most other Lances that aren't effective against certain classes. I don't know if the debuffs stack, but if they do, the repetitive -2 Atk can lead to some stupid inconsistencies in enemy phases. I'm not willing to look into too much of the game (since I want to play it blindly to an extent) to elaborate on all other drawbacks, but I just don't think this system is going to be implemented well enough to benefit the game's balance or enjoyability, and I agree that weapon durability can (and should) exist independently.

@Othin: Just because effects affect the immediate situation (unlike durability) that doesn't mean that they are a good way of nerfing weapons. How are they preferable to Weight (con specifically)? In my opinion they're annoying because they limit you without improving the game's balance, quality or whatever you call it. I think this kind of boils down to opinions though. Your analogy to not having capped stats is totally flawed. Not having capped stats prevents you from trivializing the game; effects do not serve this purpose. Durability can be adjusted to be generous enough to allow for somewhat liberal usage (not being based on "guessing" a couple of maps earlier) while not being so forgiving as to be negligible. FE12 did this pretty well imo. Recall that a certain weapon isn't the only comfortable way to go about a map. Other ways will just be a bit harder or different, you can pretty much always strategize around the lack of a specific weapon.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Gradivus.

[XeKr]

I want to know what percentage of those voted for durability has actually played the game or if it's just being conservative/nostalgic.

By "balance", I think people are referring to the fact that they feel more comfortable using different weapons in different circumstances, especially in casual play (the hoarding phenomenon is often joked about, though there are fair strategic implications as well). I think someone lamented how situational weapons can be, but that's kinda the point. You have to pick the best weapon for the situation, which is tactical (in a sense).

The effects are like weight/con (in essence), just more complicated.

Edited July 22, 2015 by XeKr

[Carter]

While I dislike the weapon effects, I think they are better than having weapon durability.

Gold is very scarce in the Nohr side (either that, or I'm horrible at managing my gold lol), and I just couldn't afford to buy a new weapon every time one breaks. I can easily deal with the weapon effects, as they're really nothing major in comparison to an enemy debuff (as far as I can tell, anyways. Charlotte and Silas never seem to suffer from using Silver weapons).

But the steel weapons not being able to double does remind of weight on weapons. I never liked it, but it does reminds me of the GBA games, where those steel weapons would always be heavier and harder to double with!

[Shadow Mir]

While I dislike the weapon effects, I think they are better than having weapon durability.

Gold is very scarce in the Nohr side (either that, or I'm horrible at managing my gold lol), and I just couldn't afford to buy a new weapon every time one breaks. I can easily deal with the weapon effects, as they're really nothing major in comparison to an enemy debuff (as far as I can tell, anyways. Charlotte and Silas never seem to suffer from using Silver weapons).

But the steel weapons not being able to double does remind of weight on weapons. I never liked it, but it does reminds me of the GBA games, where those steel weapons would always be heavier and harder to double with!

Actually, it's possible to double with steel weapons, but you'd need 8 more speed over your enemy to do it.

[Othin]

Penalties from Silver weapons do stack, and they're generally a bad idea to use on the enemy phase. They exist for when you need a lot of player phase power right away.

FE1/2/3 style Wt is an excellent system, far preferable to Fates' confusing "double attack threshold" system. It's also the same general thing: a way to nerf certain weapons so they're more balanced without durability. Hell, FE2, one of the three games that implemented the best use of Wt in FE history, didn't have weapon durability either. The fact that Fates' effect penalties would work even better with that Wt system does not change the overall superiority of effect penalties to durability.

[Carter]

Actually, it's possible to double with steel weapons, but you'd need 8 more speed over your enemy to do it.

Really? My units might be really slow then, I haven't been able to do that XD. Maybe Charlotte or Odin, due to them having the best speed of units, but I don't take notice.

Penalties from Silver weapons do stack, and they're generally a bad idea to use on the enemy phase. They exist for when you need a lot of player phase power right away.

I never let my units take off alone (does anyone? maybe i'm just bad lol), so I always have her fight with Lazward or someone else that has an A-Support with her. Afterwards, I just trade with Charlotte to have her equip a hand axe instead to deal with javelins or other ranged weapons.

[Shadow Mir]

Penalties from Silver weapons do stack, and they're generally a bad idea to use on the enemy phase. They exist for when you need a lot of player phase power right away.

FE1/2/3 style Wt is an excellent system, far preferable to Fates' confusing "double attack threshold" system. It's also the same general thing: a way to nerf certain weapons so they're more balanced without durability. Hell, FE2, one of the three games that implemented the best use of Wt in FE history, didn't have weapon durability either. The fact that Fates' effect penalties would work even better with that Wt system does not change the overall superiority of effect penalties to durability.

Ehhh, I personally found weight in and of itself to be flawed in every game that had it for one reason or another. And even in early FEs, there were weapons that were just impractical because they were so dang heavy (Case in point: FE3 Bolganone).

Really? My units might be really slow then, I haven't been able to do that XD. Maybe Charlotte or Odin, due to them having the best speed of units, but I don't take notice.

I never let my units take off alone (does anyone? maybe i'm just bad lol), so I always have her fight with Lazward or someone else that has an A-Support with her. Afterwards, I just trade with Charlotte to have her equip a hand axe instead to deal with javelins or other ranged weapons.

That's what the site says, at least. However, they don't make it easier for the enemy to double you.

[Psyruby]

I like how Attack Threshold works, but hate how hard it is to explain. Wt affected both sides of battle, which is way simplier but denies some interesting balance(at least if I am reading it right.) AT allows you to be denied doubling, but not more likly to be doubled and vice versa.