Which Weapon Triangle should comeback?

[NinjaMonkey]

The pre-Fates Weapon Triangle.

[vanguard333]

Either something new, or something pre-Fates.

Personally, I want the (sword>axe>lance>sword) + bow weapon triangle, and, (light>dark>anima>light) for the magic triangle.

For anima, I don't care if it stays one thing or gets split again into (wind>fire>thunder>wind). Anima being one thing would allow for more variety in the different spells, while anima being split into wind, fire and thunder would allow each type of magic to have an advantage against a specific unit type, like in Radiant Dawn. 

One thing I do hope to see though, is for every weapon type and every magic type in the game to be used to the full extent. Radiant Dawn, in my opinion, is the game that did this best (apart from playable dark magic users only being available from playthrough 2 onwards), but even then, it could have been even better. No weapon type or magic type should have <4 weapons/tomes, and should have at least one class that is capable of using it before promotion. If there are manaketes and other shapeshifters, then same thing. No more just having stone and stone+.

[Shadow Mir]

On 1/4/2018 at 1:30 PM, Dracologist said:

First off, I have to admit I skipped Fates, so I'm a little biased.

I'm too used to axe-sword-lance at this point and really don't want to deal with a different triangle. It might be cool to have daggers act like swords in the triangle as a bit of a throwback to the days when thieves wielded swords, though.

It could be fun to have a separate triangle for ranged weapons if they had enough different weapons. For example, bow-knife-shuriken could be interesting.

As for magic, I'd like to see a hybrid triangle with the light-dark-anima triangle, but inside anima we still have the wind-fire-thunder triangle as well.

Radiant Dawn did have both magic triangles... and dropped the ball even harder than the other entries that did have one magic triangle as a result (It ain't enough that we still have the typical issue where mages tend to have high enough resistance that attacking them with your own mages tends to not amount to much unless you really overpower the enemy statistically, at which point the magic triangle is irrelevant, but you literally have next to no dark magic users??? That's a design flaw, no ifs, ands or buts about it).

5 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

Either something new, or something pre-Fates.

Personally, I want the (sword>axe>lance>sword) + bow weapon triangle, and, (light>dark>anima>light) for the magic triangle.

For anima, I don't care if it stays one thing or gets split again into (wind>fire>thunder>wind). Anima being one thing would allow for more variety in the different spells, while anima being split into wind, fire and thunder would allow each type of magic to have an advantage against a specific unit type, like in Radiant Dawn. 

One thing I do hope to see though, is for every weapon type and every magic type in the game to be used to the full extent. Radiant Dawn, in my opinion, is the game that did this best (apart from playable dark magic users only being available from playthrough 2 onwards), but even then, it could have been even better. No weapon type or magic type should have <4 weapons/tomes, and should have at least one class that is capable of using it before promotion. If there are manaketes and other shapeshifters, then same thing. No more just having stone and stone+.

See above. Also, I don't see what you hope to accomplish by having separate magic ranks for fire, thunder, and wind, because it's a huge step in the wrong direction (the rank clutter in the Tellius games was a mistake)... also, the only anima type that could actually use its advantage for anything in RD was Thunder (Fire being effective against beasts is literally only relevant for all of one chapter in RD [4-5], and wind's advantage over flyers isn't much better off).

Edited January 6, 2018 by Levant Mir Celestia

[Azz]

Either Heroes or something new.

I like Heroes WT a lot. All they would need to do is tone it down a bit (i.e. not have a 20% bonus/penalty to your atk stat but rather a +/- to accuracy and damage like in other FEs).

However, I don't see them adding Heroes triangle to a main series FE anytime soon so something new is what I would hope for instead. As for what that would be I dunno. As long as it was not a previous one (Unless it is the Swords>Lances>Axes>Swords with Tomes and Bows separate (And Daggers too if they keep them)(a.k.a Shadow Dragon)).

The magic triangle would only ever work when also applied to the physical triangle since all mages have res (More often then not) so even being at a disadvantage never did much (Unless they made mages more diverse). If there is to be a magic triangle I think a Wind>Fire>Thunder>Wind triangle would work best with Light and Dark being outside the triangle. The main triangle would be bog standard while Light and Dark would be more diverse (Like inflicting status ailments etc.) to give reason for them being excused from the triangle.

[vanguard333]

19 hours ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

See above. Also, I don't see what you hope to accomplish by having separate magic ranks for fire, thunder, and wind, because it's a huge step in the wrong direction (the rank clutter in the Tellius games was a mistake)... also, the only anima type that could actually use its advantage for anything in RD was Thunder (Fire being effective against beasts is literally only relevant for all of one chapter in RD [4-5], and wind's advantage over flyers isn't much better off).

It wasn't about what I see in splitting anima into fire, thunder and wind. I was just listing potential pros and cons. Also, that number-of-opponents-weak-to-said-magic problem was RD-specific. It could be completely different in the next game. For example, in Awakening, cavalry counted as beast units, so if fire had the same effect, it would have been anti-cavalry. Not saying that's a good idea; I'm just pointing out the possibilities.

I don't "hope to accomplish" anything; I explicitly said I do not care if they go with anima being one thing, or if it gets split into 3 again. And, since posting that, I have realized that, if they really wanted to still have certain spells having an advantage over certain units, they can still do that and keep anima one thing. 

[Shadow Mir]

7 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

It wasn't about what I see in splitting anima into fire, thunder and wind. I was just listing potential pros and cons. Also, that number-of-opponents-weak-to-said-magic problem was RD-specific. It could be completely different in the next game. For example, in Awakening, cavalry counted as beast units, so if fire had the same effect, it would have been anti-cavalry. Not saying that's a good idea; I'm just pointing out the possibilities.

I don't "hope to accomplish" anything; I explicitly said I do not care if they go with anima being one thing, or if it gets split into 3 again. And, since posting that, I have realized that, if they really wanted to still have certain spells having an advantage over certain units, they can still do that and keep anima one thing. 

Bold: I would disagree and consider this wishful thinking - Path of Radiance wasn't much better about it. Aside from two chapters that exclusively had laguz as enemies and the second to last chapter, laguz enemies were still relatively rare. It didn't help that effective damage was only 2x, so wind's anti-flying attribute wasn't much help.

The rest: Either way, the only one I'd expect to see is wind being strong against fliers.

Edited January 7, 2018 by Levant Mir Celestia

[vanguard333]

3 hours ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Bold: I would disagree and consider this wishful thinking - Path of Radiance wasn't much better about it. Aside from two chapters that exclusively had laguz as enemies and the second to last chapter, laguz enemies were still relatively rare. It didn't help that effective damage was only 2x, so wind's anti-flying attribute wasn't much help.

The rest: Either way, the only one I'd expect to see is wind being strong against fliers.

In the part you considered as, "wishful thinking", I was merely pointing out that the problem you mentioned was unique to a particular game, and saying it could theoretically be completely different in the next FE game, if the next game even decides to split anima, which I previously explicitly said I wouldn't care if they did or didn't. How is that wishful thinking? 

Also, I would argue that, while not perfect, Path of Radiance was much better about how useful the anti-unit effects of magic were than Radiant Dawn was.

I agree that Laguz enemies were certainly less common, but the only one I would truly classify as rare would be the dragon laguz, with the whole of them being Ena, two in the chapter before last, and more in the final chapter. But, while rare, they are much harder to kill than most other enemy units (aside from Ena), which makes that effect of thunder magic... arguably useful, albeit situational. Beast Laguz appeared as feral ones in the chapter with the slavers, then again in the desert chapter, and then appeared periodically as feral ones. They were recurring enough that, in my opinion, fire magic was useful.

Brid Laguz were the most common. There were four chapters with the raven laguz, two chapters that you mentioned that exclusively had laguz as enemies, and I think a couple more times as feral ones, but I am not certain. Even then, they aren't the only flying enemy units. There were also Pegasus Knights and Wyvern Riders; the latter of which having notably high defence and low resistance, making wind better than bows for confronting them. 

[Shadow Mir]

53 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

In the part you considered as, "wishful thinking", I was merely pointing out that the problem you mentioned was unique to a particular game, and saying it could theoretically be completely different in the next FE game, if the next game even decides to split anima, which I previously explicitly said I wouldn't care if they did or didn't. How is that wishful thinking? 

Also, I would argue that, while not perfect, Path of Radiance was much better about how useful the anti-unit effects of magic were than Radiant Dawn was.

I agree that Laguz enemies were certainly less common, but the only one I would truly classify as rare would be the dragon laguz, with the whole of them being Ena, two in the chapter before last, and more in the final chapter. But, while rare, they are much harder to kill than most other enemy units (aside from Ena), which makes that effect of thunder magic... arguably useful, albeit situational. Beast Laguz appeared as feral ones in the chapter with the slavers, then again in the desert chapter, and then appeared periodically as feral ones. They were recurring enough that, in my opinion, fire magic was useful.

Brid Laguz were the most common. There were four chapters with the raven laguz, two chapters that you mentioned that exclusively had laguz as enemies, and I think a couple more times as feral ones, but I am not certain. Even then, they aren't the only flying enemy units. There were also Pegasus Knights and Wyvern Riders; the latter of which having notably high defence and low resistance, making wind better than bows for confronting them. 

Because you aren't helping your case with a "what if".

How so? Because between the low Mt of tomes in general and the x2 modifier, I'm not convinced.

I didn't mention dragons because they were rare, though otherwise, fair enough on them. Beast laguz, on the other hand, showed up more, but outside of chapter 15, they were not that common either.

You literally see only two pegasus knights in the entire game. And Wyvern Riders take magic in general poorly, not just wind magic, so that's saying very little. And the effective bonus wind had over bird laguz meant bupkis because of the aforementioned x2 modifier meaning that wind magic wasn't even that good at countering fliers.

[X-Naut]

I don't think universally effective magic is a good idea, and not just because a game underutilized it. An already 1-2 range weapon type does not need that kind of power.

Aside from that I don't think a magic triangle is pointless, but it would require each type of magic to play differently. I've thought of leaving fire as is, making thunder overall better than fire but 2-range only, and wind granting an avoid bonus against ranged attackers instead of flier effectiveness.

Another crazy idea I recently thought about is how to handle light and dark magic. Instead of the usual anima/dark/light interactions...

• Dark is neutral to anima and beats anything not using magic, but it loses to light.
• Light magic beats all magic types (dark and anima) but is weak against anything not using magic.

These interactions attempt to play into dark magic users being better suited to facing physical opponents while light magic users are better suited to fighting mages. Both now have a concrete advantage over their intended targets instead of bishops being awful against mages. And yes, anything not using magic includes unarmed targets.

[Shadow Mir]

On January 8, 2018 at 10:35 AM, X-Naut said:

I don't think universally effective magic is a good idea, and not just because a game underutilized it. An already 1-2 range weapon type does not need that kind of power.

Aside from that I don't think a magic triangle is pointless, but it would require each type of magic to play differently. I've thought of leaving fire as is, making thunder overall better than fire but 2-range only, and wind granting an avoid bonus against ranged attackers instead of flier effectiveness.

Another crazy idea I recently thought about is how to handle light and dark magic. Instead of the usual anima/dark/light interactions...

• Dark is neutral to anima and beats anything not using magic, but it loses to light.
• Light magic beats all magic types (dark and anima) but is weak against anything not using magic.

These interactions attempt to play into dark magic users being better suited to facing physical opponents while light magic users are better suited to fighting mages. Both now have a concrete advantage over their intended targets instead of bishops being awful against mages. And yes, anything not using magic includes unarmed targets.

Way to dick over light magic there... I mean, seriously??? It ain't like light magic is known for having high might...

[vanguard333]

On ‎2018‎-‎01‎-‎07 at 10:49 PM, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Because you aren't helping your case with a "what if".

What case? Seriously; what do you think I have trying to say? I'm genuinely asking. I have high-functioning autism.

 

21 hours ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Way to dick over light magic there... I mean, seriously??? It ain't like light magic is known for having high might...

Why are you just bashing on other people's ideas? Seriously; could you please be more positive? If you think these ideas are bad, then just say so. Maybe even suggest ways in which it could be improved?

[Shadow Mir]

4 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

What case? Seriously; what do you think I have trying to say? I'm genuinely asking. I have high-functioning autism.

 

Why are you just bashing on other people's ideas? Seriously; could you please be more positive? If you think these ideas are bad, then just say so. Maybe even suggest ways in which it could be improved?

I'm basically saying your argument is weak; you said that the problem I pointed out was only in one particular game, which I called bullshit on due to Path of Radiance not being much better about it (because the 2x modifier and low tome mights meant that the bonus damage was largely negligible; what does it say when wind magic is only marginally better at talking out fliers, which it's hitting a weakness on, than thunder magic???). You also said that things could be different in the next game; bringing up hypotheticals doesn't do anything to shore up your case, if you ask me. Anyway, I also agree with what X-Naut said; giving a 1-2 weapon that kind of power would not exactly be a good idea.

Oh, so I should be more supportive, is that it?  How about.... No???