Fire Emblem Fates

[Hero-of-Time]

42 minutes ago, Glen-i said:

This is usually because of the permadeath feature. Those late game characters are meant to be a fallback for those who go for an "Iron Man" run. Otherwise, you could find yourself in an unwinnable situation very easily.

Good point. Because I never play with that option enabled I didn't even think of this.

[darksnowman]

On 09/02/2022 at 4:01 PM, Hero-of-Time said:

@darksnowman I'd say both Fates and SoV are definitely worth playing. I really enjoyed my time with both back in 2019 and I'm loving playing this part of the story of Fates.

I get your concern about the game having multiple versions but when I played Birthright I never felt like I was missing out on anything. It lead to a very satsfying conclusion on its own.

Rather than play any Fire Emblem I went back to Mario + Rabbids: Kingdom Battle for a couple of levels.  

2 hours ago, Hero-of-Time said:

2 hours ago, Hero-of-Time said:

During one of the private quarters conversations I invited Camilla up to the room. She came out with this...

Yeah, they knew exactly what they were doing here. To make things even funnier, after she left Corrin was laid back on his bed looking very relaxed.  

Word's getting around that you're a fan of the puff-puff!!

1 hour ago, Hero-of-Time said:

Good point. Because I never play with that option enabled I didn't even think of this.

What even is Fire Emblem without permadeath.   I can't fathom it. 

[Hero-of-Time]

1 minute ago, darksnowman said:

What even is Fire Emblem without permadeath.   I can't fathom it. 

A good game.  

Its a weird one, people who play with permadeath on usually reset the game when a character dies anyway. If that's the case, why bother playing with it enabled in the first place?

[Jonnas]

1 hour ago, Hero-of-Time said:

A good game.  

Its a weird one, people who play with permadeath on usually reset the game when a character dies anyway. If that's the case, why bother playing with it enabled in the first place?

Not necessarily. There are plenty of players who'll carry on despite the deaths. My first ever playthrough of FE7, I moved on without Rath when he died. A friend of mine lost three units. When Fused King played Sacred Stones, he allowed half of his army to die in the last few chapters. My own playthrough of Shadow Dragon NES had like 6-8 casualties.

The main reason someone will want to play with Classic Mode on is because tactical mistakes bring upon heavier consequence, even if we choose to be a perfectionist and restart the chapter. There's a different weight to it.

[Hero-of-Time]

8 minutes ago, Jonnas said:

Not necessarily. There are plenty of players who'll carry on despite the deaths. My first ever playthrough of FE7, I moved on without Rath when he died. A friend of mine lost three units. When Fused King played Sacred Stones, he allowed half of his army to die in the last few chapters. My own playthrough of Shadow Dragon NES had like 6-8 casualties.

The main reason someone will want to play with Classic Mode on is because tactical mistakes bring upon heavier consequence, even if we choose to be a perfectionist and restart the chapter. There's a different weight to it.

Sure, there's a different weight to it but the end result is still the same. For me, if a person is going to play with permadeath on then make it meaningful and leave the unit dead. If not, then you may as well play with the option off. 

[Julius]

8 minutes ago, Jonnas said:

There are plenty of players who'll carry on despite the deaths.

When I played Fire Emblem: Awakening, I was one of those players. I was about 20 minutes into a pretty long battle which I'd already reset a couple of times due to watching characters I liked take the fall, when I lost a character I didn't really care that much about.

Rather than reset again, I let her die.

Permanently.

*villainous laughter*

I mean, it was a bunny girl -- does losing her really count as a loss? 

[Glen-i]

29 minutes ago, Julius said:

Rather than reset again, I let her die.

Permanently.

*villainous laughter*

I mean, it was a bunny girl -- does losing her really count as a loss? 

You missed out on quite possibly the rarest thing in Japanese RPG's.

A bunny dude.

So not too bad, all in all. As long as you kept Henry alive. Henry's the best.

[darksnowman]

4 hours ago, Hero-of-Time said:

A good game.  

Its a weird one, people who play with permadeath on usually reset the game when a character dies anyway. If that's the case, why bother playing with it enabled in the first place?

Hmm, doesn't it affect your approach at all? Like, are you more gung-ho about proceedings if you know they'll be back again for the next mission?

[Hero-of-Time]

1 minute ago, darksnowman said:

Hmm, doesn't it affect your approach at all? Like, are you more gung-ho about proceedings if you know they'll be back again for the next mission?

True. In the older games, when there was no option to turn off permadeath, I suppose I was a little more careful. Now I can just go in swords swinging without a care in the world. It's even better if  the game allows you to grind levels. 

[Jonnas]

3 hours ago, Hero-of-Time said:

Sure, there's a different weight to it but the end result is still the same. For me, if a person is going to play with permadeath on then make it meaningful and leave the unit dead. If not, then you may as well play with the option off. 

Like darksnowman implied, there's a different mentality to it. Resetting the entire chapter is still a big penalty, so it's always a walk on eggshells to have everybody survive. In casual mode, this tension is lost, because every death is a pretend death.

It's the difference between having a checkpoint in the middle of the level and having none at all. It's a lot more nerve-wracking when you think you'll be sent to the beginning, but far more casual if you believe it'll only set you back one screen.

3 hours ago, Julius said:

I mean, it was a bunny girl -- does losing her really count as a loss? 

Fairly reasonable argument! Can't say I like that character, even if I'm fond of her son.

Edited February 13, 2022 by Jonnas

[Julius]

3 hours ago, Glen-i said:

You missed out on quite possibly the rarest thing in Japanese RPG's.

A bunny dude.

Oh come on, everyone knows the reason they're so rare is that female JRPG bunny girls eat the male JRPG bunny dudes after mating 

Final Fantasy XIV bunny dude fans are freaking out right now

3 hours ago, Glen-i said:

As long as you kept Henry alive. Henry's the best.

Aye, Henry lived!

...or did he?...

Yeah, he did

Edited February 13, 2022 by Julius

[Hero-of-Time]

9 minutes ago, Jonnas said:

Like darksnowman implied, there's a different mentality to it. Resetting the entire chapter is still a big penalty, so it's always a walk on eggshells to have everybody survive. In casual mode, this tension is lost, because every death is a pretend death.

It's the difference between having a checkpoint in the middle of the level and having none at all. It's a lot more nerve-wracking when you think you'll be sent to the beginning, but far more casual if you believe it'll only set you back one screen.

Oh, I see the point, I just don't get it.

I wonder how many would play Classic if they changed it to default where once a character dies there are no take backs. No resets or saves. Once the character is dead, that's it. 

Anyway, just had a fantastic battle on a map filled with narrow walkways and wind blowing after every turn. If your character is standing in the wind, he or she will then get blown up or down a few spaces. It made for a very hectic fight, trying to manage my troops whilst also watching where they would land on the next turn. Definitely the hardest fight I've had so far. Xander was the MVP here. He tore through a lot of the enemy and I had Felicia follow him around and heal him. Worked out pretty well.  

I will say that Azura has been pretty useless during this playthrough. I remember her being pretty handy when I played Birthright but here...no so much. She does make good battle fodder though. Enemies always seem to target her.

[Dcubed]

7 hours ago, Hero-of-Time said:

A good game.  

Its a weird one, people who play with permadeath on usually reset the game when a character dies anyway. If that's the case, why bother playing with it enabled in the first place?

No lies detected, I’m definitely one of those guys who reset

If it’s good enough for the guys at Intelligent Systems?

It’s good enough for me!

 

[Sméagol]

Yeah I do it too, replaying a chapter, but I refuse to play on anything other than classic mode.

In Xcom, I also refuse to play on anything but iron man mode, although I'll let soldiers actually die there (unless it's very early game), but soldiers in Xcom are generic and more easily replacable.

In Fire Emblem, I do it for the challenge. Fire Emblem, well turnbased strategy games in general, are puzzle games to me, and if you can just do whatever all challenge is lost. So I like to have all my guys survive not just for story reasons, but also the actual strategy gameplay, I really have to think how I go about a map.

That said, for roleplaying reasons I should probably let a few deaths be permanent some time!

 

[Hero-of-Time]

Just had a great battle on another fantastic map. My team was split into two and I had to make my way around the outside of a fort/castle and try to seize the thing. What made it fun was the Dragon Veins that were littered about the place. Hitting one of them meant a wall lowered for the team on the other side of the map. There was a balance needing to be struck during this battle. I had to juggle the decision of whether or not to take out an enemy or to make the area for the other team more accessible. Very satsfying. Once again, Xander, Camilla and Leo did most of the heavy lifting. Strangely, Azura actually survived the battle!  

I'm looking forward to ending the king's reign. Dude is a full on nut job at this point. The fact that his kids don't end him is baffling. All of them together could easily take him. It would make for a shorter game though.  

I wanna play more but my lunch break is over.  

[Hero-of-Time]

I had a crazy battle on one of the maps last night. It involved making a push to seize the enemy territory. Everything was going fine and I thought I was pretty much guaranteed the win but out of nowhere a stupid amount of reinforcements showed up. They completely decimated my forces and so I had to reload an earlier save. Even though I knew what was ahead, the sheer number of enemies popping up was overwhelming. After I had wiped out the reinforcements, I only had Xander and Niles left at my disposal to take the enemy base. Thankfully the enemy only had a couple of troops remaining and I managed to bring home the win. It was definitely touch and go for a while and had Niles not learned how to use healing staffs, I think the battle would have been lost.

The game is certainly stepping things up in terms of difficulty. I don't recall Birthright being this difficult. The reputation of Conquest being the more difficult game is certainly true. 

As I said it was going to happen, I hooked up Corrin with Felicia. The kid they had has arrived too late into the game to be of any use. It's another character who either stays benched or is used as battle fodder. I'm no better than the king that Corrin calls father!  

[Hero-of-Time]

The final battle awaits! Not sure if I'll play it tonight though. May just leave it until tomorrow.

Last few missions were great.

Spoiler

It felt sooooooo good to finally put Iago and Hans in their place. Both of them have been a thorn in my side throughout the campaign and I was waiting for the chance to get some payback. The actual mission wasn't too difficult. I had the option of going left or right and chose the left path as the enemies on that side seemed a lot easier to deal with, given the units I was using.

When it came to dealing with Hans, I sent Xander at him, got a critical hit and sent him packing with a single strike. That'll teach him!  

As for Iago, once all of the units around him were taken care of he was actually pretty easy. In recent fights, the main boss of the map usually paired up with a armored unit and it took a while to whittle down their health but Iago had no such protection and was defeated without much of a fight.

The battle against the king was a tough one and I had to restart it a few times. The placing of your units at the start is VERY important as a lot of them are in their own. Once I figured out who needed to go where the battle went much smoother.

When I eventually got to the king, I surrounded him with Xander, Corrin, Niles, Leo and Benny, with Felica hanging back to heal. Despite him being able to take a hit, as well as heal himself, he didn't stand a chance with all my units focusing all their attention on him.

The scenes afterwards were very anime. Corrin falling to Takumi's arrow, him meeting his fallen family and the power of friendship bringing him back to the fight. Cliche stuff but great nonetheless.

I'm gonna be gutted when the final mission is over. I've enjoyed this immensely.  

[darksnowman]

On 13/02/2022 at 5:45 PM, Hero-of-Time said:

True. In the older games, when there was no option to turn off permadeath, I suppose I was a little more careful. Now I can just go in swords swinging without a care in the world. It's even better if  the game allows you to grind levels. 

Yeah, I play by checking the oppositions attack range and positioning my troops just outside that, let them come closer on the next turn, then engage with them on my terms on the next. Always figured that would be the pattern of play for everyone.   

On 13/02/2022 at 6:43 PM, Hero-of-Time said:

I wonder how many would play Classic if they changed it to default where once a character dies there are no take backs. No resets or saves. Once the character is dead, that's it. 

Playing start to finish with no saves would be mental. But if they could pull off what you're getting at, pretty much everyone would game over due to running out of troops at some point. No matter how careful you are, you can always whiff an attack or be taken out by a crit. Maybe it could be an unlockable difficulty for maniacs like @Jonnas if it isn't a self-imposed thing people in the FE circles do already!  

The option to go back a turn or however it works in Valentia seems like a decent compromise as it saves people who want to keep their characters alive from having to repeat full maps.

On 13/02/2022 at 11:04 PM, Sméagol said:

Fire Emblem, well turnbased strategy games in general, are puzzle games to me, and if you can just do whatever all challenge is lost. So I like to have all my guys survive not just for story reasons, but also the actual strategy gameplay, I really have to think how I go about a map.

Would've said trial and error but puzzley makes it sound much more intellectual. 

[Hero-of-Time]

My adventure is over.

Spoiler

The final battle caused a few issues. I saved my game near the end of the battle where I was in an unwinnable situation. This meant I had to revert back to an earlier save and the only one I had was at the start of the previous mission. Thankfully, because I had played it before, I managed get through it stupidly quick and was back on the final mission in no time. The mission itself was a toughie. There were enemies constantly spawning throughout the whole battle. I tried numerous times to play it slow and just take them out as they arrived but I always kept getting overwhelmed. I eventually thought "sod it" and just started the battle again and steamed my way through the map until I reached the objective. I lost loads of units on the way and even the end was touch and go for a second, with the final attack being my last but ultimately bringing me the victory.

Absolutely loved playing through this. It definitely offered more of a challenge compared to Birthright but I actually liked the story better in this version. There was definitely an uneasy feeling when the characters were making choices that cost lives but was for the greater good. *insert Hot Fuzz gif here* Some of my best units in the game were Niles, Odin and Leo. No surprise that these were ranged units which is what I usually gravitate towards. This goes back to when I played my first FE game and Soren was the MVP. What a guy. 

That's another RPG done for the year. I'll bump this thread again in two years time when I play the final version of the game.  

 

 

[Jonnas]

11 hours ago, darksnowman said:

Playing start to finish with no saves would be mental. But if they could pull off what you're getting at, pretty much everyone would game over due to running out of troops at some point. No matter how careful you are, you can always whiff an attack or be taken out by a crit. Maybe it could be an unlockable difficulty for maniacs like @Jonnas if it isn't a self-imposed thing people in the FE circles do already!  

The option to go back a turn or however it works in Valentia seems like a decent compromise as it saves people who want to keep their characters alive from having to repeat full maps.

What I bolded is known as a "Hard Ironman" (if your lord dies or you otherwise lose the mission's objective, the playthrough is done), and I wouldn't want to force that playstyle on others, either. Choice is good.

(A "Soft Ironman" is when you allow yourself to restart under certain conditions, like losing the Lord. But other units who die must stay dead, or otherwise it's no Ironman)

Some FE games are better for Ironman runs than others. The NES Shadow Dragon is excellent for such runs (I even did a blind soft Ironman run last year, which I chronicled. I only lost 5-and-a-half units) because they keep giving you new units to use in case of emergency. Binding Blade is in a very similar boat, as long as you realize that the True Ending is easy to miss under such a playthrough. By comparison, Three Houses is terrible for them, because you get a small cast at the start, and barely any newcomers (none whatsoever in the lategame). Blazing Blade is in a weird spot where it's fine for a Soft Ironman, but brutal for a Hard Ironman. The list of particularities goes on.

Shadow Dragon DS is likely the best, because that game actually gives you dummy generic units to use if your army gets too small.

On a sidenote, I strongly dislike the Mila's Turnwheel/Time's Pulse. The whole point of making tactical decisions is that there's no takebacks to your risks, but that mechanic washes it all away (for example, you can check if a risky 60% Accuracy attack will pay off or not, which makes it... not a risk). If it's going to stay, it should be limited to one use per map.

[Dcubed]

12 hours ago, Jonnas said:

On a sidenote, I strongly dislike the Mila's Turnwheel/Time's Pulse. The whole point of making tactical decisions is that there's no takebacks to your risks, but that mechanic washes it all away (for example, you can check if a risky 60% Accuracy attack will pay off or not, which makes it... not a risk). If it's going to stay, it should be limited to one use per map.

I think that Radiant Dawn's mid-map single use permanant saves were a better solution personally.  Granted, they were absolutely necessary in RD because of the sheer length of its maps, but I reckon that giving the player a limited use save in general is a better alternative than letting them just freely wind back the clock.

Edited February 17, 2022 by Dcubed