Would you like to see movement and Constitution return as growths?

[DisobeyedCargo]

So Thracia 776 had growth rates for both Constitution and Movement (albeit quite low). Would you like to see this return in future FE games? Personally I think I'd be pretty cool to see.

Edited April 15, 2018 by DisobeyedCargo

[Armagon]

Constitution, maybe. And that's a really hard maybe because constitution and the weight system sucks ass. As for movement, no. I think movement should be a static stat that doesn't change without the Boots. That's how it's always been, except for Thracia.

[De Geso]

Separate answers for both would have been good. I'm okay with con growth, as it can help low base con units get a little edge. Plus it makes things more interesting, where a unit that used to be able to be rescued easily now can't, changing some strategies.

Movement is a no, though. It diminishes class individuality and is such a tiny growth rate (any higher than 2 or something and the game would be busted) that it barely matters at all.

Edited April 15, 2018 by YouSquiddinMe

[DisobeyedCargo]

Just now, YouSquiddinMe said:

Separate answers for both would have been good. I'm okay with con growth, as it can help low base con units get a little edge. Plus it makes things more interesting, where a unit that used to be able to be rescued easily now can't, changing some strategies.

Movement is a no, though. It diminishes class individuality.

I'll add separate answers 

[NinjaMonkey]

No and no.

[Shadow Mir]

No to both. Con is a cancer mechanic that adds nothing to the game (not to mention the units that most likely get decent-ish con growths won't even need them).. Movement would likely have a growth rate so low that it might as well not be a thing.

Edited April 15, 2018 by Levant Mir Celestia

[Cysx]

Con only if it plays more of a role than in entries beyond Thracia. It made sense there. I guess I'd rather not have con at all, though.

I like each unit gaining movement/con at different paces, I think it greatly helps with variety. Problem is, the randomness makes the whole concept a bit game breaking, especially for movement; yet if you take it out and make it fixed growths that are unique to every unit, then it becomes overcomplicated instead.

... so no to both, I suppose. I still believe movement as a dynamic stat is potentially a great idea if done right, though.

[Dark Holy Elf]

Con growth, maybe. It's not a stat that has been seen in a while. Con growth is probably preferable to the FE9-11 system of using Str for Con, since while it grows at least it isn't doing double-duty for being a key growth early, but it would still run into the problem those games have where the entire Con mechanic eventually becomes pointless as everyone gets enough Con to not care.

Move growth is a hard no.

[DemolisherBPB]

Gods no on the move, It's so low in Thracia as it is that I dismiss it as It'll so rarely go up that trying to plan around it is pointless, Much like the fact it has a growth rate at all.

Con I'm saying no but it really is a "eh" kinda thing, I'm happy never seeing it again, and if it returns if it's set for each character/class only going up on promote or just at random I don't really care. Though I lean slightly more to been set, Just as I usually think of the GBA games when it comes to Con in general.  

[wheelsonfire]

I wouldn't mind, just see how things would play out and it might lead to some interesting situations (having a foot unit outpace a flyer or a mounted unit, for example, and taking out units they are weak two before the latter gets hit). Con growth would also be a welcome return, as it would make some units more viable.

Edited April 15, 2018 by wheelsonfire

[Chibi]

Movement is a big no imo. The highest movement units are already considered the strongest as is, but enabling minor movement growth would break the game in half, no matter the % growth chance.

Con growth gives a bit more flexible, although the system is a poor one in the first place (Unbalanced weapon weight, discriminating female units). If isn't the worst of FE's balancing attempts, but if it came back it would need to be looked good at regardless. I don't think giving con a growth rate would help, though.

[Shadow Mir]

1 hour ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

Con growth, maybe. It's not a stat that has been seen in a while. Con growth is probably preferable to the FE9-11 system of using Str for Con, since while it grows at least it isn't doing double-duty for being a key growth early, but it would still run into the problem those games have where the entire Con mechanic eventually becomes pointless as everyone gets enough Con to not care.

I disagree - if I may be frank, it would only help male units, who likely wouldn't really need it, whereas females suffer.

1 hour ago, wheelsonfire said:

Con growth would also be a welcome return, as it would make some units more viable.

See above.

[Michelaar]

I don't see Con being neccesary, and mov growths is just a bad mechanic.

[wheelsonfire]

@Levant Mir Celestia

Why would that be the case? I can think of the  female units that would love to have such as Florina, Lyn, Fir, Sophia (I know she has low speed growth, but a con increase might help mitigate that), and Sanaki.

And I can't think of movement growth being bad for anyone...

[Armagon]

14 minutes ago, wheelsonfire said:

And I can't think of movement growth being bad for anyone...

The more movement you have, the better your are. All a movement growth would do is make Mounts even better than they were before.

[Shadow Mir]

16 minutes ago, wheelsonfire said:

@Levant Mir Celestia

Why would that be the case? I can think of the  female units that would love to have such as Florina, Lyn, Fir, Sophia (I know she has low speed growth, but a con increase might help mitigate that), and Sanaki.

And I can't think of movement growth being bad for anyone...

Other than Marty, who was already a heavyset male unit, con growths in Thracia were mostly on the low side, especially for females. Also, I honestly think Sanaki is a bad example.

Movement growths would likely be so low that you couldn't feasibly count on them, so as far as I'm concerned, there's no point. Also, what Armagon said.

Edited April 15, 2018 by Levant Mir Celestia

[SoulWeaver]

25 minutes ago, Armagon said:

The more movement you have, the better your are. All a movement growth would do is make Mounts even better than they were before.

So make it a Class-based thing - your Movement is only even capable of growing if you aren't riding anything except a Ballista, get those guys some Move please. If the game features Awakening ReClassing, then make it so you only have that increased Move while in an Infantry Class, or make it reset if you go to a Mounted Class, which would both keep the Move growth from helping the Mounted Powercreep and also discourage grinding for any Unit that gained Movement through Growth since you want them to keep up but using a Second Seal at all resets their walking capabilities.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

I think if Con made a return, a way to increase such a crucial stat is essential. Growth rates isn't the method I would pick, but they could do worse - like distributing just two body rings across the game.

[SatsumaFSoysoy]

No to both unless we're getting stuff like Capture back, then Con would be cool. Con in GBA games amounts to essentially nothing, since the best units (some of them female) reach such high Speeds that they'll outrun and double most enemies even with the AS penalties anyway.

[redlight]

Con, yes. Though I'd not have the con stat affect attack speed. Only for rescuing allies and capturing enemies

Movement only if it's like 1% max (like how Makalov's 75% speed growth is the max in Radiant Dawn). Not really lottery winning levels of RNG blessed, but you'd feel incredibly lucky for experiencing such luck. Also, a character would only experience it once during their playthrough as the cap of the movement stat would be 1 point higher than what amount of movement you'd achieve by promotion.

[Jave]

No to both.

Con and Weapon Weight are probably never returning anyway.

Mov is something that helps define a class. Outside of fixed gains on promotion, it shouldn't be allowed to change permanently.

[Emperor Hardin]

23 minutes ago, Jave said:

No to both.

Con and Weapon Weight are probably never returning anyway.

Mov is something that helps define a class. Outside of fixed gains on promotion, it shouldn't be allowed to change permanently.

It helps make units in classes with terrible move more usable. Take the Armor Knight in Tearring Saga being one of the only units with movement growth.

I mean look at Echoes: SOV, what is the point of not having movement growth, when you can already have Sages and FalcoKnights with higher defense then Barons anyway.

1 hour ago, Armagon said:

The more movement you have, the better your are. All a movement growth would do is make Mounts even better than they were before.

If kept to non mounted units like Armors, movement growth could actually nerf mounts and buff classes who need it.

Tearring Saga mostly gave good movement growths to bad movement base classes.

Edited April 15, 2018 by Emperor Hardin

[SoulWeaver]

37 minutes ago, Emperor Hardin said:

I mean look at Echoes: SOV, what is the point of not having movement growth, when you can already have Sages and FalcoKnights with higher defense then Barons anyway.

The difficulty with SoV is that this only happens because it held on to Gaiden's All-Stats-cap-at-40-for-EVERYONE thing, meaning that in the end everyone had an equal ceiling and thus once that ceiling was reached stats more or less became meaningless, replaced in importance by Movement(the one stat NOT given the same ceiling for everyone), Weapons Available(seeing as how some of the Weapon Types had cooler/better Weapons out there that could be obtained), and Inherent Class Bonuses(such as Falcoknights gaining the damage buff vs. Terrors or Barons taking half damage from Bows). If Barons had Movement Growths, they could catch up with the others, yes, but on the other hand since stat caps are always the same anyways you can just Pitchfork your two Barons(Red and Green) into Cavaliers and you only lose the Bow-reduction.

[Emperor Hardin]

1 hour ago, SoulWeaver said:

The difficulty with SoV is that this only happens because it held on to Gaiden's All-Stats-cap-at-40-for-EVERYONE thing, meaning that in the end everyone had an equal ceiling and thus once that ceiling was reached stats more or less became meaningless, replaced in importance by Movement(the one stat NOT given the same ceiling for everyone), Weapons Available(seeing as how some of the Weapon Types had cooler/better Weapons out there that could be obtained), and Inherent Class Bonuses(such as Falcoknights gaining the damage buff vs. Terrors or Barons taking half damage from Bows). If Barons had Movement Growths, they could catch up with the others, yes, but on the other hand since stat caps are always the same anyways you can just Pitchfork your two Barons(Red and Green) into Cavaliers and you only lose the Bow-reduction.

Thing is not only  are the new class skills unbalanced, with the Dread Fighters having ludicrously OP skills and Heavy Armor being useless, but the remake got rid of the things that helped low movement units in the original.

Take the speed ring, originally it gave +5 movement making it perfect for your Baron, while your Gold Knight and FalcoKnight get a Lance or shield.

Even before stat caps are reached, units like Gold Knight are going to have the same or higher defense then your Armor units anyhow.

If they'd added movement, at least armor units would have the capability to improve a bit. See Billford of Tearring Saga. 3-4 Movement sucks when infantry units of the same tier have 4-5 movement, but Billford being one of the only characters with a decent movement growth gives him a chance of being good with a lucky level. By contrast, Echoes: SOV barons are bad forever.

Imagine if Valbar had like 10% movement growth in SOV and movement was returned from Thracia 776 instead of  fatigue. Then you'd actually have a reason to use the Soldier line units outside of their first few debut maps.

Edited April 15, 2018 by Emperor Hardin

[SullyMcGully]

I think Con should definitely have growth rates. Movement doesn't need them, but it would be cool if there was like a 1% rate where every now and then you have a character get lucky and gain movement. You could bump the rates up a bit on units like dancers, so that they would gain Mov without promoting.