Huh, i don't recall it in Sacred Stones.
Well, it's the dumbest JRPG trope and if i had known, i wouldn't have bought the game at all. Do Birthright and Revelations pull the same thing?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Fire Emblem Fates |OT| Nohr does what Hoshidon't
- Thread starter Shun
- Start date
Huh, i don't recall it in Sacred Stones.
Well, it's the dumbest JRPG trope and if i had known, i wouldn't have bought the game at all. Do Birthright and Revelations pull the same thing?
The Awesomest
Member
FE9 also had the Black Knight chapter.
Birthright does it, but the final boss is the biggest joke imaginable. I beat him in a single turn on Hard.
I'm fine with it in the GBA games, as the second parts you're literally two turns or less from the final boss. (and killing the boss was really easy)
I always surrendered on that. Never bothered to raise Mist and the game throws enemies in there if you keep her around.
Endgame 1
is the dungeon with monsters and possessed Lyon as the boss.
Endgame 2
is the Final Boss battle.
kuroneko0509
Member
ahh yeah tested phoenix mode on ch9 conquest on my jp copy (since my na is at home, cannot test) and yep cannot lose even if pt got wiped within 1 turn >.>
It's kind of weird that the game only allows you to lower the difficulty but not ramp it up. Having played through part of Awakening and up to ch12 on both Birthright and Conquest in classic mode makes me think it'd be nice if I could go from Normal/Classic to Hard/Casual or something, since classic always feels like I'm cheesing stuff by parking my tanks at choke points and abusing the dumb enemy AI that dives into any units they have in range even if they're all alone and will obviously get ambushed by my whole team as soon as they move into range.
Of course competent AI that would play cold war with you would also be a pain, but classic mode doesn't make me feel like I'm doing anything interesting besides waltzing around attack ranges and baiting suicidal attacks from the AI.
I get the challenge that comes from having to position your team just right to maximize your damage and minimize the damage your units take, but it kind of feels same-y after a couple maps. Due to all this, I'd say Conquest has been the better path so far since it keeps throwing gimmicks such as map traversal mechanics or alternate win conditions that prevent the game from being just about kiting suicidal AIs and making them take horrible trades.
Of course competent AI that would play cold war with you would also be a pain, but classic mode doesn't make me feel like I'm doing anything interesting besides waltzing around attack ranges and baiting suicidal attacks from the AI.
I get the challenge that comes from having to position your team just right to maximize your damage and minimize the damage your units take, but it kind of feels same-y after a couple maps. Due to all this, I'd say Conquest has been the better path so far since it keeps throwing gimmicks such as map traversal mechanics or alternate win conditions that prevent the game from being just about kiting suicidal AIs and making them take horrible trades.
Finale Fireworker
Member
I'm trying very hard to simply rush the houses.
I can go slow and manage my units with little to no difficulty, but then another unit beats me to what would be the third house.
If I send my horse mounted units (Elise and Silas) ahead of the group, they simply incur all the wrath of the enemy units and are decimated in a single turn.
I have to find the right combination of movement here. Because I either go too fast and die or go too slow and miss out on the house.
If you can get two units with decent movement in range of the bottom left house while also being in the enemy freeze staff range, she can only target one of them and the other will be free to go to the house. If I remember correctly, the enemy only starts moving to the third house (second one up from the bottom) once you reach that side of the ice lake.
Don't get me wrong. It's tough. I'm totally struggling with this game and I'm essentially a vet.
Adam Prime
hates soccer, is Mexican
Man, what an interesting discussion on Casual vs Classic. Here's another facet of the comparison:
I feel like you are losing content on Classic mode when someone dies. Arguably, one of the best parts of Awakening and Fates are the support conversations.
One reason why I felt compelled to quit Classic on Conquest was because when someone died, I felt like I was losing out on game content, specially those support conversations. If I lost a favorite unit, I would miss out dialog.
I think a lot of us can agree a thing we like about Awakening and Fates is reading those conversations and getting to know those characters better.
I feel like if:
A) There was "another way" to unlock support conversations even if a character died (maybe once you beat the game, everything is unlocked, I dunno) - that would take the sting of death off Classic mode.
B) There was simply a "cool down" period when someone died on battle similar to the recent XCOM games
C) You could no longer use characters who died in story battles, in story battles. They were regulated to only being used in My Castle or Paralogues.
... then I could stomach losing a unit, if I still knew there was another way to get the game content that I would be missing out of they died.
It's weird, I kind of think in a way they "ruined" Classic mode by adding support conversations to the game. It sucks that you lose that game content. I would care a lot less if someone died in battle on classic mode if I knew that I could still get those conversations. Because utlimately, if your best archer dies in Classic mode - you can still recruit another Archer elsewhere in the game through the Einhjar units, My Castle recruitments, or Prison recruitment. The only thing you really miss out on are:
A) specific Lv growths to that unit, and skills
B) Support conversations
TLDR; The threat of missing out on some of the best content in the game, support conversations, is one reason I prefer Casual over Classic mode.
I feel like you are losing content on Classic mode when someone dies. Arguably, one of the best parts of Awakening and Fates are the support conversations.
One reason why I felt compelled to quit Classic on Conquest was because when someone died, I felt like I was losing out on game content, specially those support conversations. If I lost a favorite unit, I would miss out dialog.
I understand all the support conversations are found online on YouTube on GFAQs, but y'all understand my point
I feel like if:
A) There was "another way" to unlock support conversations even if a character died (maybe once you beat the game, everything is unlocked, I dunno) - that would take the sting of death off Classic mode.
B) There was simply a "cool down" period when someone died on battle similar to the recent XCOM games
C) You could no longer use characters who died in story battles, in story battles. They were regulated to only being used in My Castle or Paralogues.
... then I could stomach losing a unit, if I still knew there was another way to get the game content that I would be missing out of they died.
It's weird, I kind of think in a way they "ruined" Classic mode by adding support conversations to the game. It sucks that you lose that game content. I would care a lot less if someone died in battle on classic mode if I knew that I could still get those conversations. Because utlimately, if your best archer dies in Classic mode - you can still recruit another Archer elsewhere in the game through the Einhjar units, My Castle recruitments, or Prison recruitment. The only thing you really miss out on are:
A) specific Lv growths to that unit, and skills
B) Support conversations
TLDR; The threat of missing out on some of the best content in the game, support conversations, is one reason I prefer Casual over Classic mode.
Finale Fireworker
Member
Why aren't you just resetting when a unit dies like everyone else?
A dead unit means you failed the map. You reset and try again.
I think that mostly stems from the obsessive-compulsive habits gaming tends to teach us (ie: "I'm missing out on content"). I like how some people actually create their own narratives where some unit sacrificed themselves to clear a map or leave them dead when they're offed by a series of unfortunate events, but at the same time I feel like the general concept of making Classic mode boil down into little more than kiting AIs over and over is incredibly boring.
I don't know if I'd be willing to restart Conquest to tweak the difficulty to hard/casual, but it certainly feels like classic mode's more of a pain than an actual boon due to how it devolves the premise of the game to min-maxing everything all the time and resetting whenever the RNG gives you a bad outcome or something.
Say, it does feel like losing your tank/mage for a map and having to make do without them for a bit is still enough of a punishment to make things harder on you without devolving into "welp, time to reset", and missing out on experience for them feels like another punishment that's actually relevant (at least in Conquest).
Which is exactly why I definitely feel like trying Casual out, since this game mode almost feels like that one time when I did a Pikmin 2 run where I tried to lose no pikmin at all, which resulted in more frustration than awesome moments for me. Now that I have even less free time to devote to games I definitely don't feel like raging at random crits or enemy ambushes to the point I'll reset the game outright, and it feels like casual would offer me a nice middle ground where losing a unit for a map would still impact things while not forcing me to reset evert single time something bad happens.
Adam Prime
hates soccer, is Mexican
I get that.
I mean, this game kinda reminds me DKC Tropical Freeze Hard Mode. You get no checkpoints and one hit kills. It's not impossible. But you definitely REALLY have to learn the level.
We can debate all day whether that type of game is FUN or not, it's strictly a matter of preference, but that's basically Classic mode on Fire Emblem. Do you think it's fun to play the same level for an hour to really learn and hope you don't get a bad string of RNG? Some people do. I feel that way about DKC:TF, I've played the SAME level for HOURS because I want to master it and beat it on Hard Mode. I understand, some people feel the same way about their Fire Emblem Classic mode.
Which is why it seems to me that Classic mode is better as a "second playthrough" kind of thing, the way Hard mode is regulated in DKC:TF.
I mean, the insistence on classic is what's driving me far beyond the point of fun with this stupid endgame, and i doubt i'll have a sense of satisfaction when i'm done with it, so casual has its advantages, you just have to remember that the game is balanced with an eye for forcing resets from people playing classic.
If the game were rebalanced to be like FFTactics, where death in battle is only a big deal for that battle, then things would look different, enemy tactics and such. Right now they focus on kills because they know most players (yo) will ragequit as soon as we lose anyone.
If the game were rebalanced to be like FFTactics, where death in battle is only a big deal for that battle, then things would look different, enemy tactics and such. Right now they focus on kills because they know most players (yo) will ragequit as soon as we lose anyone.
pokemonsquared
Banned
It's not like anyone is forcing you to play casual if you don't want to or that map design was changed to incorporate it.
Jesus christ I never get why people get their jimmies rustled over this kind of stuff. It's their game, let them play how they want. Not like casual players cant soft reset anyways if they lose a unit.
Jesus christ I never get why people get their jimmies rustled over this kind of stuff. It's their game, let them play how they want. Not like casual players cant soft reset anyways if they lose a unit.
Adam Prime
hates soccer, is Mexican
You CAN switch to Casual mode in the middle of your playthrough on Classic. I did after about 10 missions on Hard/Classic/Conquest. I've enjoyed Casual more.
I think the BEST way to go about this game is: Classic mode and don't reset when someone dies. The game always gives you enough opportunities to have enough units and keep going. However, you are just going to miss out on those support conversations. Which is the reason why I went Casual mode. I think I am going to play Conquest again on Classic, that way I won't care if I miss out on anyone's support log since I'll already have a file on Casual with everyone.
Oh nice! I never bothered to read the difficulty screen (due to the kanji) and thought the change would only work for Lunatic->Hard->Normal rather than the Classic->Casual thing. I'm thinking about splitting my save and giving casual a try for a bit, but is there a way to bump the enemy difficulty up to Hard walfway through or will I have to stick to Normal for that save?
Adam Prime
hates soccer, is Mexican
lol I don't think anyone's jimmies are rustled. I think it's an interesting conversation comparing and contrasting the two modes. I think it's genius they incorporated the two modes in this game to give it more flexibility to all personalities of gamers.
Again: Conquest Classic Mode is the "DKC:Tropical Freeze Hard Mode" of Strategy JRPGs.
I think that's kind of neat, Nintendo makes an option to play a game like that - a mode where you TRULY have to master your way through.
Adam Prime
hates soccer, is Mexican
I did the exact thing. I split a save after Ch.10 and tried the next few maps on Classic and Casual Hard. I landed on Casual as the way I wanted to spend my time for the rest of the game.
You can't go back up in difficulty, only down. But you can split your save three times, and make one Normal.
So basically, make three files: XX = your current chapter
Ch.XX Hard - Classic
Ch. XX Hard - Casual
Ch. XX Normal - Classic
Obviously start Hard Classic as your first save, then change the settings and create a new save after it.
and try each for a few chapters and see what you like. That's what I did.
Yeah, I agree. The thing I like the most about Conquest is that it uses stage gimmicks to make levels into more than just cheesing the AI all the time, so even in Classic it isn't like I'm doing the exact same things over and over like in Birthright.
One thing I was thinking about is how PvP battles would actually work out, since losing units is a serious setback compared to stuff such as Advance Wars, and thus it looks like both teams would enter a cold war-like state where they'd keep their formations packed just outside of enemy range, with neither of them going in unless the other one screws up and gives them an opening to go for a favorable trade. The lack of alternate victory conditions unlike in AW also feels like it'd contribute to a whole lot of nothing happening, and the importance of movement range to properly go in for a kill or escape from being chased would probably place lots of emphasis in high mobility units over stronger but less mobile ones.
Adam Prime
hates soccer, is Mexican
LOL that's hilarious, I have yet to try PvP but you sound exactly right. What incentive is there to initiate combat? Since in single player the CPU is always the aggressor, and is always weaker, but has more units, you plan your strategy around that. What if the CPU had the equal amount of units as you did, but were as strong as yours? I wouldn't rush into battle until I knew I would get equal trades and tactical position on the battlefield.
Like chess.
Your units don't die permanently when you play online.
Playing online is awful, though. If there's an argument to be had over Fire Emblem not being designed around permanent death, there's an entirely new one over 'Fire Emblem was literally never designed to be played where the enemy side is remotely intelligent'.
The big difference here is that unlike in chess you aren't required to forcibly advance your units towards your opponent's, so you can both keep passing back and forth until the end of days.
I'm fairly positive in that FE would need something akin to AW's buildings and HQs to work on a PvP mode, not as in that exact same thing but rather some area of the map that encourages players to fight over them in some way... but then again you'd be running the risk of your scout unit getting rushed by the whole enemy team and losing it for good, or sending your scout but surrounding it with tanks to protect it from ranged attacks while it captures, at the risk of possibly losing some of your tank units...
All this theorycrafting is really interesting for me, since it definitely points out how wildly different FE and AW would be even given somewhat similar circumstances.
Edit:
I never implied there was permadeath in PvP battles, but that FE's limited unit system doesn't really work on a PvP environment since neither side would be willing to lose any units due to how scarce and important each of them are. Ganging up on an unit and killing it means your opponent's counterattack will be even weaker, and that starts a positive reinforcement loop where your numbers advantage will allow you to gang up on and take out more and more units while your opponent is eventually reduced to a helpless party that couldn't ever hope to beat yours due to raw numbers and stats.
You'd need to rebalance unit dynamics Fire Emblem significantly for it to ever 'work' in a real PvP environment. Most of the systems in the game are held together by an understood player phase/enemy phase dynamic and letting the two sides being empowered to affect the state of the map in the same exact way just breaks it over its' knee. I think the best you could do is force a battle over a mutual objective under duress to engender aggressive action, significantly weaken overall power levels of units, give you more access to 'fodder' like generic soldiers and turn your named units into something more like generals with some sort of incentive toward taking them out.
And probably remove pair-up altogether.
And probably remove pair-up altogether.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
The secret about RNG in Fire Emblem is that, especially in the 2RN games, it's really not that hard to play around and can largely be solved by using good units. Doing some math and planning for what will happen on enemy phase will mitigate most RNG issues you can have.
Same turn reinforcements and specific chapters/moments aside, resetting almost always happens because I made a mistake.
Same turn reinforcements and specific chapters/moments aside, resetting almost always happens because I made a mistake.
In fairness some of the time it can just be raw bullshit. Missing an above 95% hit stings and you're not always in a position to plan for the chance it goes wrong and still do most of the stuff you wanted to accomplish in a turn.
Casual mode is fine if you enjoy that kind of experience more than what Classic offers. Like others have said though, FE's mechanics, map design and AI feels more balanced towards Classic. I don't think anyone is saying you can just cheese/bruteforce through most maps on Casual without ever thinking about it, just that it offers you a lot more easy solutions to problems you'd otherwise have to find more optimal strategies to work around and take chances.
There were a lot of situations on Conquest from chapters 19 to 26 where, had I been given the leeway of losing a unit, it'd make things far easier for me since there's a lot of tricky enemy positioning and really strong flanks on some of those chapters. The Spy Shuriken Ninja Hell from Chapter 25 would've been so much more doable if I could just sacrifice one of my tanks in order to go through the enemy placement, but since I couldn't I had to take advantage of utility staffs, rallies, baits, proper positioning and just play all around more carefully. Even small things would change, like trivializing the boss from chapter 23 since you could just throw all your units at him without having to worry about missing and then Vengeance triggering and killing your unit that was supposed to finish the job. In Classic, you actually have to be aware of the fact that he will activate Vengeance over half the time and plan your attacks accordingly so you can take him out as efficiently as possible. Really, the late portions of any map in general is trivialized if you can just afford to lose units and stationary bosses don't really pose a threat anymore.
You're currently on the "breather phase" of Conquest. 17 is a return to form and then things really ramp up once you get to 19 and onwards.
There were a lot of situations on Conquest from chapters 19 to 26 where, had I been given the leeway of losing a unit, it'd make things far easier for me since there's a lot of tricky enemy positioning and really strong flanks on some of those chapters. The Spy Shuriken Ninja Hell from Chapter 25 would've been so much more doable if I could just sacrifice one of my tanks in order to go through the enemy placement, but since I couldn't I had to take advantage of utility staffs, rallies, baits, proper positioning and just play all around more carefully. Even small things would change, like trivializing the boss from chapter 23 since you could just throw all your units at him without having to worry about missing and then Vengeance triggering and killing your unit that was supposed to finish the job. In Classic, you actually have to be aware of the fact that he will activate Vengeance over half the time and plan your attacks accordingly so you can take him out as efficiently as possible. Really, the late portions of any map in general is trivialized if you can just afford to lose units and stationary bosses don't really pose a threat anymore.
You're currently on the "breather phase" of Conquest. 17 is a return to form and then things really ramp up once you get to 19 and onwards.
pokemonsquared
Banned
Yeah I cleared revelation on classic, then turned it down to casual for battle saves.
And less headaches from random crits when grinding in the museum melee maps. Nothing like getting a brave or a rare mycastle reward, then someone dies and you end up having to reset.
Battle saves do fix the major grief of the game, but break it in the other direction if you don't feel like going on the honor system.
Maybe the way Shadow Dragon did it, where there was a spot like a dragon vein mid-map where you could save mid-battle, once, and have it stick (so not as a battle-save).
Maybe the way Shadow Dragon did it, where there was a spot like a dragon vein mid-map where you could save mid-battle, once, and have it stick (so not as a battle-save).
The only time I have personally not minded permadeath in a game (ie not resetting when somebody dies) was Knights in the Nightmare. In that game units joined every chapter and they were all disposable assets anyway. You had to sacrifice characters to level up other characters. So all your units are essentially dying all the time anyway. Plus you always got more so you never ran out.
Fire Emblem is just awkward in this regard. So many important story units that you don't wanna die but too many units to actively use them all.
Fire Emblem is just awkward in this regard. So many important story units that you don't wanna die but too many units to actively use them all.
OniBarubary
Banned
I beat the game but I started over again just so I could marry Peri oh my god what is wrong with me what is this life
I played Birthright Hard/Classic, Conquest Normal/Classic, and now Revelation Hard/Casual. I want to play through the third path and see the end, but I can't be assed into replaying some of the too-long maps in Revelation. I can handle a long, engaging battle, but a lot of those early ones were just so tedious that I didn't want to risk screwing one up (and I haven't).
ShadowSoldier89
Member
Classic just needs the one time save point on a map that Shadow Dragon had
its a great middle ground between punishing with a full restart and never have to fear anything
its a great middle ground between punishing with a full restart and never have to fear anything
After finishing Conquest on Hard Classic (and currently a ways into Birthright on Hard Casual just to feel the difference), I think I'd say that permadeath is actually far less of an issue now than it has ever been.
It's all thanks to the prison. As long as you make an effort to capture enemy units in useful classes whenever possible, you're provided with a huge supply of expendable units. First of all, that allows for Casual-esque suicide strats with minimal penalty; but on top of that, because Conquest Hard enemies aren't the absolute jokes most enemy units are in FE, you can actually make decent use of them in combat.
In my file, the bards sing songs of Takanori, the brave Hoshidan archer who joined the cause of justice and held the front line against the demon Takumi in chapter 10. His expert aim with a ballista and noble self-sacrifice on the final turn will not soon be forgotten.
It's all thanks to the prison. As long as you make an effort to capture enemy units in useful classes whenever possible, you're provided with a huge supply of expendable units. First of all, that allows for Casual-esque suicide strats with minimal penalty; but on top of that, because Conquest Hard enemies aren't the absolute jokes most enemy units are in FE, you can actually make decent use of them in combat.
In my file, the bards sing songs of Takanori, the brave Hoshidan archer who joined the cause of justice and held the front line against the demon Takumi in chapter 10. His expert aim with a ballista and noble self-sacrifice on the final turn will not soon be forgotten.
True. I still restart after someone dies in casual, but the save points make it easier to jump right back in.
I might give Classic a try on my Nohr playthrough however.
Adam Prime
hates soccer, is Mexican
Oh my gosh, yes. A checkpoint mid-battle would be amazing for Classic mode.
Current systems are perfectly fine for Classic. You get a bookmark for when you have to put a map down midstream, but everything else should stay as is. Any sort of checkpoint or battle save is too open for abuse. If people want that, Casual is there for you. Only thing I'd change is no more bullshit back to back no save chapters. I'm OK with back to back chapters were you can't resupply, but let me save and warn me that I can't resupply so I can't create an unusable save if for some reason I'm unprepared. Either that or completely reset the chapter if someone backs out in that case.
pokemonsquared
Banned
Seeing that the opponent is going to land that 2% crit and kill your best unit who otherwise would easily defeat them and reloading a battle save and doing something else is more or less just an extension of those who reloaded and tried a map again after being ganked by suprise reinforcements in classic with those in mind anyways.
Finale Fireworker
Member
Open poll: who are the most effective units in Conquest?
Child units or otherwise.
This is my first FE with limited experience and in really concerned about wasting XP on subpar units. My gut says not to waste resources on Arthur beyond possibly his offspring, but I've been wrong before.
Child units or otherwise.
This is my first FE with limited experience and in really concerned about wasting XP on subpar units. My gut says not to waste resources on Arthur beyond possibly his offspring, but I've been wrong before.
- Camilla
- Xander
- Elise
- Leo (is OK, I guess)
- Effie
- Niles
- Selena
- Keaton
- Jakob/Felicia
- Kaze
- Silas (fiiiine, he's good)
- Peri (she's better)
- Ophelia (the only pure mage that's good)
- Velouria
- Nina
- dunno about the other kids because I'm saving them for Revelation
Arguably I would slot in Beruka, because she turns into a very reliable physical tank with an underrepresented weapon and above average mobility. Just watch for bows.
Finale Fireworker
Member
I had really excellent luck with Sophie (Silas's daughter) in Birthright - access to lots of great skills - so I was always planning on using her.
Certainly anything Silas can do Sophie can do better?
This is a pretty good guide on all the Conquest Units.
In general you can't go wrong with all the Royals, Effie, Niles, Keaton, Felicia and Shura.
If you play on normal, it's irrelevant really.
But a general tier list of effectiveness fpr forst gen would be something like:
S: A decent Corrin, Aqua, Xander,Camilla
A: The first Servant you get (Felicia or Jacob), Elise, Niles, Leon
B: Silas, Effie, Keaton, Gunter, 2nd Servant you get, Beruka, Harold/Arthur
C:The rest
Either their stats are hard to mess or just have good utility. Odin has the highest total growths, but are distributed weirdly and he is not a good fit for dark mage
From the kids, the best are definitely Velouria and Percy. Ophelia is probably the best spellcaster you can get. But getting most of the kids is recommended for the XP if nothing else