|
I wonder if the official ages references to when the characters join you or when the prologue starts. It doesn't matter that much though, at least not in this generation, since the very youngest characters join too early for it to make a significant difference. Anyway, I love how Sigurd is all "I didn't intend to conquer Augustria, it just happened".
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 01:08 |
|
|
Fionordequester posted:Actually, I think about 4 years passes between the start of the game and the end. I would know because, um...well...that whole thing about who I'd pair Sylvia and Dew with Anyway, the LP is working out just fine to me. Typically, the level of explanation is right, very little time is spent explaining things I already know and I haven't encountered a "what did you just do right now?" situation yet.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 09:38
|
|
.
|
I've played most Final Fantasy games and Dragon Quest games up to and including the Playstation 2 era. In general, I've played a lot of RPGs up until then. Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest series seems like good bets for JRPG players.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
I don't know if it says more about the game or the fans that people are still making translations, but it is impressive either way. In terms of story, this game has definitely aged the best, it actually seems more modern than the later Fire Emblems.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
rannum posted:It'd be cool if they tried a game in this style again. The giant maps and how it gives story, the actual "armies", the emphasis on talking for cool bonuses...it's all pretty neat and it would be cool to see another go at it that's more balanced
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
About Manfloy's involvement, I would say that it works to the story's advantage if he's not involved all the time. Back in Verdane, he pulled the strings really heavy, going so far to outright off the king when he stopped to obediently dance. In Augustry, he did pull some strings, but it looked more like he added fuel to the fire rather than controlling the events. Now in Silesia, it seems he may not be involved at all. This strikes me like a good balance. The heavier Manfloy can pull the strings, the more powerful he and his sect appears to be. On the other hand, if every chapter had been like Verdane where the Lopto sect practically controlled the events, we would not have much of a living and breathing world. Everything would just be the heroes vs the main villains and the rest are just puppets. To make the world feel alive, it's important that things happen without the main villains being too directly involved.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2016 07:39
|
|
|
Sylvia is probably what I'd call semi-accidental. I don't think that all of what you wrote in your analysis of her is intended, hence accidental. I say semi-accidental though because I nevertheless don't believe it's a coincidence she fits so well with the image of an attention starved teenage girl who desperately plays out her sexuality in a bid of validation. Anyway, I gotta question the intelligence of the enemies. Sigurd has already conquered Verdane and Augustri and they nevertheless intend to fight him.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
Well executed plan! Destroy the queen's armies, capture the queen, capture her strongholds and be surprised as Sigurd moves in and destroys the rebellion.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2016 09:51
|
|
|
Ephraim225 posted:I know this is basically the name of the game in every Fire Emblem, but Sigurd and co. really do seem to pose a much more massive threat than they realistically would. Look at the massive amount of enemies you have to fight! And canonically you win every time! I mean I get that the Holy Weapons are crazy good, but at this point there's only two of them in Sigurd's party.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
About the explanation to Sigurd's success in battle, it is true that having a high variety of soldiers and commanders with different experiences. That way it's very likely that regardless of what the enemies are doing, there's someone who has seen that tactic before and can tell Sigurd various things like the strengths and weaknesses of said tactic. There are however disadvantages as well. One disadvantage is the difficult of organizing your army. You will have an easier time organizing five units of spearmen, three units of cavalry and two units or archers than the same number of unique units. You could say that Sigurd's army gradually got more types of units and had a lot of time to adapt though. There is however another problem in that while you can exploit almost every weakness, your ability to do so will often be limited. If the enemies have a weakness that makes horse archers effective against them and only 5% of your army consists of horse archers, then 5% of your army is all who can take advantage of that weakness. Some tactic are also more or less disabled with an army like Sigurd's. If Sigurd gets into a situation where he'd want to form a spear-wall, tough luck unless all he needs is a really short spear-wall. The enemies tend to not only be overspecialized, but unreasonable so. The counters are also really hard in this game. There are medieval weapons that are more effective against horses than other in real life, but no "horse killers". Soldiers are by this game not allowed to do anything else than poking at their enemies with their weapons. The vyvern riders could have surrounded Ardan and then have whoever is behind him simple ram him with his Vyvern. Or try to grapple him or do just about anything else than uselessly having their weapons bounce off against his armor. The game engine doesn't allow it though thus making a particular counter unreasonable hard. There are other such examples where the game exaggerates an advantage or flat out creates one of thin air. This is in addition to overpowered units like Sigurd himself who can solo most of the game. That said, the Vedanians would lose even harder in real life than in this game. Their units consists mainly of axemen with no armor and no shields, which is overspecialization in this game, but in real life it would be an army that is weak against every enemy (including spearmen) and strong against none. I think that ultimately Sigurd would have to be a great leader who not only can organize his army well, but also deal with conflict within his own army well, an excellent tactician who never gets outmaneuvered by his enemy in terms of combat (though he gets outmaneuvered in terms of politics all the time) and charismatic enough to keep recruiting a higher number of soldiers than what he looses. I guess that's more or less what happens in this game.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2016 15:33
|
|
|
Makes sense, strategy and tactics can be handed over to someone else, leadership and charisma not so much. You'd still want the leader to have a fairly good tactical sense in case the original plan doesn't go as planned (happens very often) and you need to improvise without having the time to discuss with your tactician, but we have reduced the need of Sigurd's tactical prowess from excellent to capable.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
Onmi posted: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.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
Genaro posted:I would say it depends on how strictly the units follow the script, and how complex said scripts are. Having very specific and rigid rules could be a recipe for exploitation (example: saying knights don't attack priests/clerics, because they're religious or something. Now you could have a player forming a priest wall and attacking the knights from behind it) unless there's a condition upon which the rule could be broken, or unless the game is designed to allow for such exploits (such as pairing the knights with ranged units who would shred your wall, giving knights some way to push through, or giving the knights ranged weapons themselves).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2017 12:06
|
|
|
That explains the deal with J&J. I didn't know what the game was trying to do with them, so for me the whole "recruit one, but only one" deal was just pointless and I didn't understand why it was even included.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
Why did Anna suggest they abandon the castle and find cover in a church? A lot of churches were indeed fortified, but not as heavily as a castle. Or is the idea just to hide there rather than fighting? Regardless, if help is on the way, a castle would be where you'd want to be to hold out until the help arrives. Heck, this is one of the things castles are specifically designed for. On the other hand, the talk about "breaking their line of defense" makes it look like Leaf defended his castle by parking his men outside of it and fighting it out there instead of fighting behind the walls. I know that in terms of gameplay, only one person can defend a castle, but does that hold true even for the story?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2017 10:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 01:08 |
|
|
Junpei posted:I always just figured they were off-screen.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2017 11:21
|
|