|
Seems like a deec covering of the mechanics and other interesting notes in FE4. Can't wait to see how this goes
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:02 |
|
|
Something this game is not very clear on, but these chapters take place over a series of years, so despite the fact that Dew starts... Actually we don't have Dew's age. These are the known ages, but lets take Fin for example. Fin's 15 when we first meet him, by the time we get to Chapter 5 he's more like 20. And in Thracia 776 (which takes place a year after the beginning of the Second Generation) Fin is 34. Lets use Leaf as out base, since he was a baby at the end of Gen 5 (which means Altenna was like a 4 year old, which makes something in Chapter 5 seem very stupid.) So if the end of Gen 1 is 15 years, then Gen1 itself takes 4 years. And I think that's still a bit wrong. But the ages between games REALLY don't match up. So take the official ages with a pinch of salt.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
D3m3 posted:Thracia 776 takes place a year before the start of the second generation, though, doesn't it? Mostly, since the two eventually catch up and overlap a little. It's how we end up with Leaf promoting to his starting class. To horrible effect. wait yes... that was my mistake I read it as "One year after"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
Fionordequester posted:One of these days guys...I'll make another update one of these days Don't worry about it.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2016 16:48
|
|
...
|
I think... although this might have been from a hack I was playing, I haven't touched FE4 in forever so I apologize if this is incorrect garbage. That there is a miniscule chance that you can get down to save Cuan and Ethlin. I know I've seen them survive, because they go to the next plot-relevant castle to take to take it over. And if they do that you can't complete the chapter. EDIT: Wasn't forgetting it's just an exploit quote:1. Have Byron KILLED by enemy before talking to Sigurd. So that Cuan's knights will be officially under the command of Byron not Sigurd (bug?) and they will be actively attacking Travant dragoons. (instead of passively going north) Here is the research notes http://www.fireemblem.net/fe/fe4/fe4--research/fe4-alvin-killdking.htm It's of course, pointless, once you seize the next castle, they disappear. Onmi fucked around with this message at 13:37 on Dec 23, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 13:33
|
|
|
vilkacis posted:
Well their AI is aimed towards taking it. So if they survive and you don't take it, then they will. And you can't take a castle from allies. So you just can't hit the next story trigger.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
Fionordequester posted:Just the fact that saving them is possible only via a GLITCH; one that involves skipping the Tyrfing... And the designers didn't even give them stats THAT high! Trabant has perfectly reasonable endgame stats! And Magorn fits well as a Chapter 5 boss! It really does seem like the designers play tested this part over and over, till they were SURE they got it right. Most impressive. Well yeah, speaking from my own experiences in design, you always want it to occur in the games own engine. I mean look at the previous chapter with the Pegasus Knights you could do nothing about. They had to wall you off because they recognised that if they allowed the player to have free reign, they could win with no difficulty. It's the same thing with Eltshan's Knights on Chapter 1. FE4 likes to do its cut-scene battles in engine. But also doesn't want you to mess with them. So they're either set up so you can't, or statted and balanced in a way that it wont matter. You can, regardless of the Tyrfing bug, get Fury down there with the Wing Clipper. It just wont matter because they're tear through the Knights and kill Ethlin .
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2016 06:28
|
|
|
rannum posted:wait are there seriously no gen 2 units with axes Understand that, for the first 4... really 6 games, IntSys considered Axe's to be the enemies weapon. Fighters didn't promote in 1. They were hardly there in 2 (If not at all I don't remember. Game was very non-standard). In 3 Gen-2 you get no axe users period and they give you a Silver Axe and say "Sell this for money" And in 4, no CHILD unit is a primary axe unit. Which means none of them can inherit it. Those weapons are distributed to enemies in the game so they can drop them for your next gen.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
I will say, as loving metal as that scene is... very few people actually DIE at Valhalla actually, including Sigurd. Sigurd is captured and then given a public execution. Quite a few of the squad survive, and die later on in frankly ways that make you kind of wish they had just died here. Poor Titlyu is basically tortured by her siblings until she's a shell of herself and just dies. Azel is locked away by Alvis who couldn't quite bring himself to kill his brother, but eventually the Lopt sect gets to him. Lachesis does make it to Finn, but eventually disappears in the desert, turned to stone. The only people who absolutely die in this battle are Levin, Briggid and Claude. And the former two are possessed by their respective dragons so they can continue living, with Claude hanging around as a Force Ghost. This was all meant to be setup for an intended third generation, but ultimately the game concluded on Gen 2. Which I feel is to its strengths. Gen 1 is the perfect "Before the game setup" prequel that many games leave to the opening text crawl. It shows how one man attempting to do nothing more than save his friends and survive loses everything to the forces of darkness at work. In another game, Sigurd is the ancient hero who couldn't stem the tide of darkness. In this game he's our protagonist, and we get to witness the how and why he couldn't.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
Fionordequester posted:Huh...I knew SOME of that thanks to Serenes Forest...but there were also other tidbits in there that I didn't know. Where did you get all your info? I only checked the "Designer Notes", "Shouzo Kaga's Comments", and "FE Treasury". I didn't see anything in them about Sigurd not actually dying at Valhalla and Claude living on as a Force Ghost It turns out Sigurd's fate came from my gross misunderstanding of when they say "He was executed" as for Claude it comes from Thracia 776 and one of the characters having mentioned communicating with Claude's spirit. It's not quite Force Spirit so much as him now having taken Blaggi Tower's position as communicating with the priests. Also found a funny as hell comment while looking to confirm the info quote:I don’t think that players choosing a gender, name, etc. for the main character will happen in future games, because I think the hero is not the same as the player.” I mostly got it from a bunch of sources like Serenes and the wiki. The Wiki was where I confirmed characters fates basically.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2016 08:48
|
|
|
Fionordequester posted:Lol. Man, how the times have changed I think Kaga probably really liked old tales like the Ring saga, and essentially wanted to make Video Game That with warts and all.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2016 09:25
|
|
.
|
Junpei posted:Onwards, to the second generation and growth rates that look like they came out of Awakening! For truth, justice and incest! None, but they did plan to have the Substitutes show up as characters. And at another point Arthur.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
chiasaur11 posted:Yup. Robin wasn't that much better. The main benefit they had was being "Intelligent" so the player doesn't feel like they've self inserted on a maroon. I hate the Avatars though. I find them an awful design choice for exactly why Kaga said they would be, even though I don't agree with 99% of his design decisions (If you need to see why, He's recently released SRPG game is a major example of how he's very old school as a developer in the worst ways.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2016 12:17
|
|
|
Junpei posted:Ah, I see. Thank you. Although for me, at least, I always go Levin x Fury, partially because Thracia 776 makes it canon and partially because it's really sweet. But I understand you wanting Fee to be basically a flying Ethlyn with combat viability and Ced to threaten capping a few stats rather than guaranteeing maxing one. Granted I always go Levin/Fury to. But it's easy to understand the Titlyu appeal.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2016 03:34
|
|
|
Twilkitri posted:That was before Awakening came out and changed a bunch of names, so not all of the changes are helpful. I also hadn't played Radiant Dawn yet at that point and didn't realise that they'd confusingly gone back on the Wyvern class name choices. The annoying thing is, it's trying to apply terminology across games, which is good, but also bad because in the case of FE4/5 those mounts ARE dragons. They don't have manaketes to compare to. They're Wyverns in Awakening onwards because they're actually wyverns. I get so annoyed with this change, because there are cases like FE8, which it's clear the creatures the regular flying knights of Grado are supposed to be riding are 'dragons' and then there's the class changed Wyvern Knight which is riding a different creature entirely. I realize it's extremely weird to get hung up on when "FalcoKnights' aren't riding about on giant Falcons but... I dunno. It ticks me off with the fan communities more.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
Junpei posted:Now I'm no expert on romanizarion, but I've had this gut feeling that Azel was supposed to be Axel. Maybe it's just me, however. No it was absolutely meant to be Azel
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
I'm unaware of why Kaga might have left IntSys. He clearly wasn't done with the FE franchise since he seemed to believe he owned it when he started working on Tear Ring (it was meant to be set in Akaneia, and basically be a Fire Emblem game) I've heard rumors it was because of FE64's hosed up development, but that's hearsay at best. As you can say these days with Vestaria Saga, he still maintains many of his old design philosophy with SRPG development, and not all of them good. As for the Finn/Lachesis/Beowulf thing... I actually do ascribe to the idea that, even though she never cheated on Beo, she did love Finn to a degree. Of course, Finn disappears at the start of Chapter 4, while Beowulf is around all this time. And to me, it makes sense for a mercenary like Beowulf who's likely had many relationships that never lasted, to simply see HIMSELF as the second pick, rather than the one Lachesis actually loved (which doesn't imply to me that Lachesis didn't love him first and foremost. But more in Beowulf's eyes, his self confidence being a complete shitter, comparing the dirty mercenary to the noble knight, of COURSE he comes up second banana) I do also think that Nanna is Finn's daughter and only the half-sibling of Delmund but... She's also 15. And Delmund is 17. Meaning Delmund was born in the same year as Celice in 759. Nanna isn't born until 761, or the same year as the Battle of Bahara. It's not a stretch at all to think that Lachesis got pregnant with Nanna after the battle, OR before it, depending entirely on when it happened. Obviously, her age and birth year and implication from the beginning that Finn could have been the father imply rather easily that Bahara takes place early on in 761 and Nanna was born late into the year. Does this make Lachesis a cheat? Uh... No? Her husband was dead and specifically asked her to go to Finn, both because the Knight could protect her, and again, from my own perspective, a lack of worth that he perceived from himself. And she chose Beowulf, she didn't choose Finn. From his perspective it's "Obvious" that Finn left, so she 'settled' but from her own perspective, she chose Beowulf because she loved him. Did she decide to get with Finn after Beowulf's death? That's actually not debatable, with Nanna referring to Finn as her father in FE5 (Even adopted) and the description of them living together being like a family unit, to a degree (whether platonic, as a nuclear family unit, or as actual lovers) Lachesis and Finn acted as a Husband and Wife. Why can't Lachesis be a woman who had two loves? I think it's kinda real and I don't see how it implies she cheated on Beowulf (That's be loving impossible given Nanna isn't born till after Finn had already left the army) beyond people trying to meme it up. This seems like the kind of boggling nerd logic that decries someone as "No longer pure" because they got in a relationship. No matter what, Delmund is most assuredly meant to be Beowulf's son. Much like Sety is absolutely meant to be Levin's son and no one elses. And regardless of who provided the seed for Nanna, Beowulf is dead by the time she's born. Again, you're Beowulf, mercenary extraordinaire, Swordmaster, You've been all over Jugdral, a woman in every city like they say, never had a relationship that probably lasted longer than you shipping out to the next battlefield, you've probably sired a hundred bastards you'll never meet if you don't die on the battlefield. And the this princess comes along and sticks with you for years? Actually likes you, hell, actually LOVES you? No way, what's the catch? You're not lovable, you're a hired killer. If Finn had stuck around, there's no way she'd ever have chosen you right? Well this battle looks like it's not going to be one we all survive. It's been fun, and it hurts, but you know that you're likely meeting your end here, now, man up, tell her to go to Finn, he'll look after her, he's a good man and she'll probably be happier than with you anyway. That seems perfectly in line with his characterization to me (The little we have of it.) and I'm more upset that typically if a Manga wants to do the Finn/Lachesis thing they just don't write Beowulf into the story. Seems pretty ridiculous. I have no issue with the people who think Beowulf is both kids parents, absolutely no problem. Junpei posted:Agreed. FE5 in general was kind of bullshit. It's not that what they were doing was bad, it's just the sequels ironed out a lot of the problems with it, and made us take them for granted. Barharra is one of those things that says "This should obviously be Valhalla." but in this case, I believe the name is actually a corruption of "Valhalla" rather than a mistranslation. This does not adjust for all the people later who mistook Julius and Julia as "Yurius and Yuria" Because those people are dumb Onmi fucked around with this message at 06:00 on Jan 1, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 05:57
|
|
|
Fionordequester posted:Oh yeah...there was that whole thing about Nanna being 2 years younger than Delmud, huh? Hmm...to be perfectly honest, I've never played FE5; I researched it in every way I knew how, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were other things I missed. Thanks for pointing that out; I'll add that into the relevant post. Well I think "The Truth" was from his perspective, that he was the second choice. I know it's weird to think about the 'badass mercenary' with the self-confidence issue. This is usually a character trait associated with female characters in harem situations "Oh I'm just the option because he couldn't have who he REALLY loved." Also for the Blaggi Sword, just to confirm, can actually be used by ANYONE with Holy Blood Though for some reason cannot be used by Mareeta and Galvus who both have Holy Blood. It also can't be used by Evayne despite her being Briggid. And a swordmaster. Honestly the question it raises is who the gently caress is Fergus's mother! Since Beowulf didn't have any holy heritage. Although he is hinted at being the son of a Conote princess. So she likely had Minor Noba blood she passed down to her Son.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 06:16
|
|
|
Fionordequester posted:...Yeah. That kind of arbitrary nonsense is the reason why I don't put much weigh on the whole "Beo Sword" argument. I kind of like this stuff being vague because it does sort of evoke that idea of mythology and mystique. There isn't an answer that's set in stone, it fits with the idea of these legendary figures, and maybe it was like this, or like that, and there are different interpretations.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 06:32
|
|
...
|
I think we can safely say that not even IntSys really knows and/or cares that hard about it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 13:51
|
|
|
Rigged Death Trap posted:I think youll find they still care very much about incestuous and creepy relationships Well I mean duh that's just reasonable.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
vilkacis posted:^Um excuse me they are simply very close companions, there is nothing illegal going on here. I just would have called it Valhalla because "gently caress it"
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Junpei posted:If it's supposed to be a corruption, I'd go with Valharra. Like this ヴァルハラ I thinks is "Valhalla" While This バーハラ Is what the location is called
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
I have to disagree with your discussion on how to improve the fire emblem AI as someone who dev's Fire Emblem Romhacks. While a degree of Randomness is nice, it also violates rule 1 when it comes to game design. "Every game is someones first game." I'll use an example. Even though I'm hacking an already existing FE game, I still edited Chapter 1 in such a way that a new player would pick up the basics of how the combat worked and everything they needed to know in the first few turns. Wendy, a Lance/Sword unit is one of the only ones in range of a Mercenary who can do no damage to her, but will double her. Moving and attacking with the lance teaches Lances>Swords and Armors are Slow and Tanky. However on the next turn, a mage will move just into range of Wendy's movement, so when a new player moves Wendy to go attack said mage, they'll see they're taking damage now. "Armors are slow and tanky, but not against magic users." My own solution to difficulty is to provide the player with interesting scenario's to overcome, and multiple ways to go about it. I think it was Kaga himself who once said that when he was designing Fire Emblem, he was trying to make a game in which the player could take the war in their own way. They could slowly advance an invincible phalanx or try to blitz it. They could let units die as if they were disposable or try to protect all of them. In a way, I do craft a 'logic puzzle' for the player to solve, but I've always felt of it as a puzzle in the positive sense. "How can I achieve everything on offer here?" In the early chapters, you set it up in such a way the answer is obvious, and of course, another great thing about Fire Emblem is that the game is NEVER unbeatable. Dondon's 0% growth playthroughs are enough of an example to me that, even if your units never grow, it's not impossible to win. IntSys designed its games very well. So one always have to remember that all those late-game promoted units you receive that most new players pass over as "Useless" exist to fill in slots and make it so the player can always win. However, here are the rules I've found to make sure your maps difficulty is good and not bullshit 1. The map does not require that you have a specific unit that could very well be dead at this point. If the map hinges on the Mage you got 4 maps ago who might be dead or not raised, then your map design has failed. 2. No rear end in a top hat reinforcements, and no reinforcements without indication of where they will be and a warning of them coming. It's not difficult when you get spawned camp, it's not difficult when an unmarked unit dies and spawns an army. If said unit identifies himself as a coward with the power of an army (Lets call him Spandam... for reasons) and thus defeating him makes him freak out and call upon the forces of his army. That's one thing. That's a very clear indicator of what's going to happen, that gives the player a case of understanding what is at stake, and to balance a risk vs reward scenario. Indicate a 'home base' for Spandam, lets say he's trying to get there, but at the same time, he's carrying a Brave Weapon, or a Master Seal, or a White Gem, or whatever, a reward that, for the players point in the game, is worth to achieve. It's not a 'Puzzle" in killing Spandam will gain you the item and then trigger the reinforcements, it's strategy for the player to devise how can they get the kill and the item, while either avoiding the army or fighting back. 3. Every map should be beatable even if your units have been awfully developed, this is usually helped by deploying a crutch on this chapter as a new recruit. This is the reason recruits are paced they way they are in FE games. Growths up front, spread across chapters, crutches in the back, helping you get through the end-game. 4. Conversely, do not burden the player with circumstances they can't control. Sophia and Cecillia in FE6 are a good example of this, one is a horse-mounted unit on a map where Horses have limited movement. In the fog, with Dragons flying about. And the other is a level 1 unit with no stats on a mid-game chapter you have a time limit on. That's not to say "Don't give the player something to defend against." Defensive scenario's are fine. But nothing is more infuriating (And not really difficult) than a useless character who's a burden rather than a help. And this is an important rule. 5. Understand that no individual unit is a challenge to a player. "Boss Fights" in strategy games like Fire Emblem are a foolish attempt, you're either making a damage sponge or a gimmick. Neither of those things are challenging the player on anything else they learned across the game. I realize the idea of an entire army bounding together to down some giant foe is actually a really cool image to imagine, but in practice it doesn't work, this isn't an MMO raid, this is a strategy game. Focus on making the chapters themselves the difficult part, it's a collection of enemy forces, terrain, allied resources, curve balls. Don't be afraid to juke the player by having enemies spawn behind them or off to the side, so long as you obey Rule 2. Don't be afraid to have the boss, (And this is a case where Randomness can work) fake out the player and actually pretend to hide among the enemy. Develop your players skills, train them, and challenge them. Provide them with the resources to experiment and mix-match. There are more things to keep in mind, but I don't have my notes with me. So I can hardly go through it all.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 09:33
|
|
|
Fionordequester posted:So you're afraid that by making the A.I. more random, the A.I. wouldn't act in a way that allowed the player to learn the game as they went along? Therefore you'd want the A.I. to be more predictable for at least the first few chapters? EDIT: Addition, to clarify, their randomness should still follow a pattern I feel. I personally prefer to 'characterize' the enemy generics. "These guys are cowards, so they'll pick on weaker guys and attack in groups. These dudes are really noble so they'll always go after your strongest guys. These guys are bandits, so they'll try to soften the player up with ranged attacks and split them up by going after villages. Maybe add in some spawns in these forts here, to represent sneak attacks." That also gives the player a sense that they're fight an actual force, and not just enemy's in a video game. Fionordequester posted:One thing I would like to note; nobody has ever done 0% growths for Lunatic!FE12 and FE13. Someone once did one for H2!FE12, but never any higher than that. Would you say those difficulties in FE suffer because of that? Fionordequester posted:So would you say we're in agreement in regards to my frustrations about FE12!Chapter 19? Oh yeah that was loving dumb. Fionordequester posted:Hmm...what about Grima from Chapter 25? I instantly fell in love with that one when I played it on Lunatic; his whole deal was that he was this uber powerful unit that you HAD to put down by like Turn 2; or else the infinite reinforcements would overwhelm you. Was that a fight that you would call gimmicky? I consider that gimmicky yes. The best final maps in the series from the games I played are 4's, 5's, 9's and Fates Conquest/Birthright (Though the latter there falls weak) While the bosses themselves have a varying degree of gimmick (From 4's... we'll get to that, 5's being piss pathetic, 9's being immune to anyone but Ike and a buddy and Conquests... actually not being a gimmick at all besides having good skills) The maps themselves are often designed in a way that actually challenges the way you've played the game across the game. It's not that you can't tackle those chapters in unique ways. Hell I devised how to handle Conquest Lunatic in 1 turn for when I just don't feel like playing it (Especially since you have to do it back to back with an already difficult map with no saves unless you play on Casual, which I do because I'm a filthy casual.) But they challenge you the same way the other maps in the series did. My biggest failing grade for FE6's final two maps was that it basically threw out everything that made Fire Emblem Fire Emblem. There was no weapon triangle or varied unit types, there were no careful strategic objectives, there was nothing beyond "Do you have the over powered weapons? If yes, press here to nuke your way through the map." 7's Boss rush was interesting, but I never felt myself engulfed in its design. In both those games cases, the game stopped being the loving GAME. Fionordequester posted:That reminds me of FE13, actually. There would be tough reinforcements, but I can't remember a single time where the game didn't give you at least a brief warning that said reinforcements were coming. Of course, Lunatic+ was nonsense in it's own way, but they at least did well on that front. I don't even, necessarily, rule out the occasional rear end in a top hat reinforcement (Defining this as Spawn-moving reinforcements) so long as they don't have absurd move and spawn far enough away. It's a pacing tool, to get them closer to the right without making the player get shanked by them. Fionordequester posted:Oh, don't worry; if you do find them, you can post them whenever you wish I will, I've had a lot of years to think about FE and Map design, and I wont even claim to be a master of it. I'm still working through stuff. Making one of these games is not easy, and you'll really come to appreciate IntSys's mind for map design on many of them, where frankly, any attempt to change it is just you trying to be different. Onmi fucked around with this message at 10:49 on Jan 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 10:46
|
|
|
Fionordequester posted:Hmm...out of curiosity, how easy is it to get into making RomHacks without much programming knowledge? As things stand now, I can barely even use AviSynth correctly; so that's always been the most intimidating thing for me. Otherwise, I'd love to do simple stuff like noodle around with the growth rates of FE7 characters a bit, and small stuff like that; nothing super ambitious or anything. Romhacking very much follows the state of the programmer.  Everything is impossible until you know how to do it then it's brain dead simple. Messing with growth rates is super simple, there are modules for that. Making maps? Hasn't been easier than it is right now, Eventing? Much more complex, mostly in learning the syntax and doing grunt work. Fire Emblem Universe has a discord chat where a lot of hackers are. So if you ever wanted to do something and needed help, you could ask there. But don't be afraid to start simple and just mess around with things. Onmi fucked around with this message at 12:20 on Jan 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
Junpei posted:There are some things that I would like a future FE's AI to do. See some of those sounds good in theory, but if the AI is only in range of you with attacks below 50, then what happens, does the AI sit there dumbly not knowing what to do? Does it walk away? What about Myrmidons, which are almost purely valued for their evasion and counter-kill status? Do we now redefine the role of that unit? How slow are we making the game here. As well, does that mean that now every enemy army has to deploy the same types of units to be able to match the players ever-evolving arsenal, that leads to the enemy ceasing to feel like a unique entity and basically just becoming clones of each other. One of the things I hated the most about the Black Fang was despite being 'assassins' they somehow had an entire church on one map (a castle producing nothing but monks) Nothing felt unique about them, they felt incredibly boring. One of the things FE6 actually does really well is that It's not like every enemy force has Pegasus Knights, that's Ilia's thing. Ilia's armies make sense for the region of Ilia. Lycian armies make sense for the region of Lycia and etc. etc. It's not homogenized. Where as the enemy having perfect knowledge of what to do either changes how enemies have to be developed (All enemies must have a high hit weapon, a piecing weapon/high mt weapon) By the way, we had a game where the enemy ignored units who they couldn't hit. It was called SRWJ, and it just made the units that couldn't be hit useless, because at most they could kill 1 enemy a turn. Also god, don't attack a unit that can counter kill? Well now this games slowing down to a horrendous grind of moving to attack the enemy. You're also penalizing the player for having strong units. Say you have an armorslayer, vs an entire horse of Armorknights, you're the only unit on the map, they will be ORKO'd attacking you, are they now supposed to sit there fiddling with their spears while you meticulously cut them down one by one? With the exception of the last, all of your suggestions, while in theory making the enemy smarter, actually just makes them slower to kill, makes the player use less fast units like the Myrmidon and rely more on bulky units who aren't evasive but will take minuscule damage, while being encouraged to use weaker weapons just so the enemy will attack them en masse.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
Fionordequester posted:No that's ok; I don't think you actually offended or upset Onmi or anything. He didn't, right Onmi? Absolutely not upset, it's always interesting to discuss the actual effects of changes to AI routines on combat and what they mean. FoolyCharged posted:The only real mistake you made was in thinking the ai is playing by the same rules as the player. The player has to win every battle, the ai only needs to win 1. Fooly has it correct. The player being unable to choose to not-attack on the enemy phase is something pretty key to enemy tactics (and advanced player tactics) the enemy AI doesn't need to reset if it loses one unit, it just has to pound one of yours into the dirt knowing it has infinite resources and you do not. Fire Emblem is less straight up war, and more Asymmetrical Warfare. In fact, I would say that is the main reason, in-story that sigurd's group did as well as it did, rather than its diversity. It's because both sides, in and out of the game, are fighting battles differently. Junpei posted:Okay, newer, better ideas that don't bog down the pacing. More weaponry is decently smart, but it is something to be careful about. For example with the killing edge, there's a reason the players lord starts with high luck and has a good luck growth, it's because Critical Hits to a loadbearing unit kind of suck for the player. There should always be careful consideration, splicing killer-weapons and slayers through the enemy force is good for tension, but be careful not to overload it. As for the skills, that's really hard. I mean, ignore how I think Astra is fundamentally an awful skill (I think the sheer idea of basically having to pray for a skill to activate is completely at odds with the ideas of a tactical or strategic game) And well... it's kind of hard to plan around stuff like Rallies and Astra. How do you plan around a 12.5% chance the enemy suddenly gets 5 attacks? How do you plan around the idea that an enemy may suddenly have boosted-stat. I think, for that to work, we have to scrap the ideas of Rally's and %triggering skills, and instead focus on buffing aura's and always active skills. (Which is something I did for Maiden of Darkness anyway, the only % activated skill is Cath's ability to turn her kills into Red-Gems, mainly because that would be very powerful in a limited funds game if it was always on.) And then, we provide enemy skills that give them their own bonuses when say... working together or in close proximity or under certain commanders (This is also something I've done.) That way it challenges the player not just in positioning and enemy danger, but in army composition, while still giving them a lot of resources to plan their own way past the enemy.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2017 08:31
|
|
|
Junpei posted:So an idea for a "Leadership" skill given to commanders that affect anyone in their army on the map: Can of Worms has a similar skill like that for his bosses in FEIV, that is "While Boss has full HP, all units regain 2 HP" and there are 3 units on the map that have this skill (This is the Shagall chapter) so it actually creates an issue where Shagall will regen the army, will be regened by his throne, will be regened by two other regenners who also regen each other. It takes a LOT to take the skill offline. and definitly makes the battle harder. You ALSO have this skill, Lachesis has it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
BenRGamer posted:Honestly, I disagree, at least for a sizable fraction of the FE Fanbase. That's a... what he meant. The battle they have to win is the one where they kill your unit. Junpei posted:How about skills that give passive benefits (buffs to Hit, Evade, Crit. Evade, Crit, etc.) when at full HP? What if the enemy had versions of Fates's personal skills, like Chivalry, Pragmatic or Rose's Thorns? When I get home I'll show some of the Boss skills that I'm using because I typically include that stuff. Or bonuses to that leaders specific unit type (Pegasus gain increased Damage for example, for an Ilian commander) EDIT: Here's an example of my boss skills  Their skills come their personalities and thus provide bonuses to their troops, while having a bonus of their own. Onmi fucked around with this message at 12:59 on Jan 8, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2017 10:46
|
|
|
Fionordequester posted:By the way, Onmi; you mentioned that no one boss unit is ever going to be a hard fight without being overly gimmicky and stuff, right? So out of curiosity, what did you do for Idoun? Do you believe it would be possible to make an "army vs. boss" fight by turning it into this kind of fight here? I mean yeah it can work like that, but even that for Fire Emblem is strange, since it removes the Weapon Triangle and other mechanics for monster stuff. As for what I did?  I took inspiration from Advance Wars
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:02 |
|
|
Ephraim225 posted:I will support this only if Idoun is given the ability to fire a giant meteor every ten turns or so that damages everything it hits. AoE isn't a known quantity, but I can certainly give her a bombardment ability, I could give her the old Eclipse "Reduce enemy HP to 1" but then I'd make it so she went last in the turn order. So there's no "Oh you got reduced to 1 HP from full. Eat poo poo." reset moments.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 04:04
|
|