Acacia Sgt Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 I don't think anyone will say that a horse automatically makes a unit good. But is there any example of a unit that is / would be worse with a horse? I mean, Fiona is utter garbage, but would a hypothetical Soldier!Fiona with completely identical bases, growths and caps be better in any way? Well, she could participate in 1-8, and not be confined to the southwest corner of the map in 3-6, from what I remember. Would that be considered as better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solrocknroll Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 (edited) Well, she could participate in 1-8, and not be confined to the southwest corner of the map in 3-6, from what I remember. Would that be considered as better? She also wouldn't face movement penalties in 1-7 lol fiona isn't the best example for "better with a horse, worse without" but she's still my favorite character in radiant dawn edit: She also can't go down ledges in 3-12 or 3-13 or up the ledges in 1-E every single DB chapter she's in has penalties for her lol Edited August 27, 2016 by Enigmar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acacia Sgt Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 She also wouldn't face movement penalties in 1-7 lol To be fair, the Movement penalty is just -2, which simply makes her have the same movement as the foot units. So it's not really a change if she was just a foot unit to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ping Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 I always thought she didn't participate in 1-8 because Plot ;) Your crew in that chapter, besides Tormod and the laguz, mostly consists of the Dawn Brigade and characters that aren't part of Daein's military. Jill and Tauroneo aren't present either. Zihark is, but I guess he's still working as a mercenary? But I guess I forgot about all the fucking ledges in RD ;) So yeah, Fiona actually does get screwed by riding a horse. Interesting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solrocknroll Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 (edited) yeah idk if this is an unpopular opinion but ledges are the literal devil and I hope they never come back ever Edited August 27, 2016 by Enigmar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Refa Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 Having a mount does not automatically make a unit good It does automatically make a unit better, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acacia Sgt Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 I always thought she didn't participate in 1-8 because Plot ;) Your crew in that chapter, besides Tormod and the laguz, mostly consists of the Dawn Brigade and characters that aren't part of Daein's military. Jill and Tauroneo aren't present either. Zihark is, but I guess he's still working as a mercenary? But I guess I forgot about all the fucking ledges in RD ;) So yeah, Fiona actually does get screwed by riding a horse. Interesting! It is for the plot... a plot that calls for the mounted units to sit it out. Tauroneo is the exception because there's always something that makes him not participate. He is only playable in 1-6, but then he's not for the rest of Part 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magical Glace Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 It's really annoying that Jill is banned in 1-8. Having a flyer able to pick up the civilians would help immensely, since Vika fails at that. That's probably a popular opinion though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Water Mage Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 While having a mount already helps a unit become better, due to better movement, the fact that Fiona has mount is one of the reasons she's considered a bad unit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interconnecteddream Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 Hoooo, boy. I don't know if all of these qualify as unpopular, but I guess I'll share anyway: I like Kozaki's designs a lot and I don't mind if he comes back for future titles. I could do without the battle panties and boob windows, though. I like the marriage system and hope it continues, but maybe with more limited options based on avatar personalities. I don't find Tharja attractive at all, but Rhajat's in-game sprites look cute to me for some reason. The only thing I like about Sumia is her design. I really want to like Severa, but her tsun side is making it really difficult for me... I don't see a problem with casual/phoenix mode. If it can help newer players ease into the franchise, then I don't mind it at all. Owain is one of my favorite characters, but I think he got majorly sidelined in Fates. Hinoka is the only royal sibling I'm not very fond of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrewHak Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 The removing of the weapon triangle in Radiant Dawn's hard mode was really an ingenious way to increase the difficulty of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saisymbolic Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 (edited) While having a mount already helps a unit become better, due to better movement, the fact that Fiona has mount is one of the reasons she's considered a bad unit. Even if she didn't have a mount, she would still be doodoo butter. I remember dedicating hours to training this girl up and her STR and SKL would not budge. At all. She couldn't even do chip damage. Pissed me off. Benched her ssa real quick. Edited August 27, 2016 by SaiSymbolic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNLEASH IT Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 While having a mount already helps a unit become better, due to better movement, the fact that Fiona has mount is one of the reasons she's considered a bad unit. Well RD, along with Thracia 776 are the only two games in the series where they tried to nerf mounted units. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zigludo Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 I agree, unless it's FE4, whose map size gives mounted units a huge advantage over foot units, even if those foot units would be objectively better in other games.Unless you're one of the starting knights, that is. I'd take Ayra over Alec and Noish any day. I'm not sure if they've ever even survived one of my playthroughs... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troykv Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 (edited) How about Fiona? Did anyone use her? FE10 Part 1 has a lot of anti-cavalier maps. Also, her overall stats are bad.. and she isn't exactly in Level 1. Edited August 27, 2016 by Troykv Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Water Mage Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 (edited) Even if she didn't have a mount, she would still be doodoo butter.I know.What meant was, Fiona is already a bad unit and in her case the mount didn't make her better. It made her even worse! FE10 Part 1 has a lot of anti-cavalier maps. The DB maps in part 3 and part 4 as whole are anti-cavalier as well. Edited August 27, 2016 by Water Mage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saisymbolic Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 I know. What meant was, Fiona is already a bad unit and in her case the mount didn't make her better. It made her even worse! Oh, my bad. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rezzy Posted August 28, 2016 Author Share Posted August 28, 2016 Unless you're one of the starting knights, that is. I'd take Ayra over Alec and Noish any day. I'm not sure if they've ever even survived one of my playthroughs... I don't think they ever survive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raguna Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 (edited) I don't think they ever survive. FE 4 just kind of hates those three dudes. I think even the mangas that illustrate the BBQ show them dying specifically while everyone else is just turned to stone or revived in some way or have ambiguious ends. They're also the least likely to marry and pass on to get kids. Not to mention, the game has it specially hard out there for Arden in Mount Emblem. Edited August 28, 2016 by Raguna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troykv Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 FE 4 just kind of hates those three dudes. I think even the mangas that illustrate the BBQ show them dying specifically while everyone else is just turned to stone or revived in some way or have ambiguious ends. They're also the least likely to marry and pass on to get kids. Not to mention, the game has it specially hard out there for Arden in Mount Emblem. Joke characters that the developers wanted to make fun because this was the first time we see properly a new Christmas + Douga archetypes (?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secondworld Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 Many people don't like the avatars, but I haven't seen this particular view from anyone else so I guess it fit? Copy/pasted because I'm too lazy to write it out again at the moment: I always thought that the three avatars were inherently flawed, even before taking into account how they were executed. Fire Emblem isn't a Mass Effect or an Elder Scrolls or a Dark Souls. In most other games with a customizable avatar protagonist like those I mentioned, you are in full control of your avatar, right down to the most basic things like walking where you want to. But in Fire Emblem, you, the player, are not the star, you are the director. This simply isn't a game that can use a playable avatar well, it's kind of a contradiction really. Even if the next game has the best possible implementation of this feature, I still won't be able to get the kind of connection to the game they want me to have. ...there is an inherent flaw with the playable avatars no matter how IS writes them or whatever dialogue choices they might add or whatever they do to try to make a connection with the player and the game that makes them see the avatar as them. I'm not actually controlling what my supposed avatar is doing during the fight, I'm telling them where I want them to go and what I want to see happen, not actually doing it. This creates a disconnect that can't be fixed without changing the core mechanics of the game. Again, in Fire Emblem the player is the director telling the actors where they need to be and what part they need to play, not actually performing. Having an in-game avatar for the player to use to directly interact with the world and characters is by no means a bad idea. I just think the way IS implemented them was misguided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jave Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 (edited) Not sure how unpopular this is, but... I've always that in terms of localized dialogue, the Tellius games (specially Radiant Dawn) are the worst in the series. FE7 and FE8 sound like they're done in a more neutral English, while FE11, FE13 and FE14 has the characters talk more loosely, which feels a lot more natural. In FE9 and FE10, it sounds like everyone is trying too hard to sound medieval, and there's a lot of inconsistencies with some characters sounding super serious in one scene and then cracking jokes on the next. I guess the reason why the dialogue in these games bothers me so much is because nobody talks like this in real life. Edited August 28, 2016 by Jave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DanMan Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 Hoooo, boy. I don't know if all of these qualify as unpopular, but I guess I'll share anyway: I like Kozaki's designs a lot and I don't mind if he comes back for future titles. I could do without the battle panties and boob windows, though. I like the marriage system and hope it continues, but maybe with more limited options based on avatar personalities. I don't find Tharja attractive at all, but Rhajat's in-game sprites look cute to me for some reason. The only thing I like about Sumia is her design. I really want to like Severa, but her tsun side is making it really difficult for me... I don't see a problem with casual/phoenix mode. If it can help newer players ease into the franchise, then I don't mind it at all. Owain is one of my favorite characters, but I think he got majorly sidelined in Fates. Hinoka is the only royal sibling I'm not very fond of. Funny, because I'm 90% sure that you mean Kusikahira, who's the art director. Kozaki simply draws the characters into the designs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NekoKnight Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 Many people don't like the avatars, but I haven't seen this particular view from anyone else so I guess it fit? Copy/pasted because I'm too lazy to write it out again at the moment: I don't see why turn-based gameplay is antithetical to personal avatars. For any game, you are "directing" where your character moves/what they do, it's just that some games (action titles) allow more precise control of your actions. Funny, because I'm 90% sure that you mean Kusikahira, who's the art director. Kozaki simply draws the characters into the designs. I could have sworn Kozaki had some influence on class outfits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secondworld Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 (edited) I don't see why turn-based gameplay is antithetical to personal avatars. For any game, you are "directing" where your character moves/what they do, it's just that some games (action titles) allow more precise control of your actions. Well that's sort of what makes the difference. In those other games I mentioned, you have control of something as basic as walking in the direction you're moving the analog stick in. With Fire Emblem you're moving a piece on a board. EDIT: To add to my point, you specifically move every character as piece on the board. There's no more control you have over the avatar than any other character, which hurts the point of having a personal avatar imo. And Fire Emblem isn't antithetical to personal avatars, like I said before I just think IS went about it in a misguided way. Edited August 29, 2016 by DavidSW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.