111 replies to this topic

[Viole]

I hope sniper class returns it would be weird without it ^^'.

They have to! They're one of the staple classes of the series.

[Zamimari]

I loved the FE10 marksmen 2-3 range and would like it to return. But I think to make archers viable hte hit rate on javalins and hand axes need to get nerfed thus archers, and light magic users too I guess, would be the go to for accurate indirect combat... for early game at least. Also the new dual battle system would have to allow archers to always trigger the additional attack, like a class specific skill or something, then I think they would be more or less balanced even without 2-3 range.

Edited by Zamimari, 24 March 2012 - 12:30 PM.

[L95]

Snipers should get daggers. :p

3 range ftw?

[Narga_Rocks]

I don't think that the Double Bow cut accuracy at 1-range.

Yes. Yes it did. It's not noticeable on anything except Auras and Ashera, though, since he tends to have 100 hit on most stuff even with the -30 penalty for not two range.

[dondon151]

I'm pretty sure it doesn't because the Double Bow's innate range is 1-2. I'm also pretty sure that longbows didn't cut accuracy at 3-range either, since their innate range is 2-3. You just think it did because their innate hit is terrible.

[Othin]

http://serenesforest.../fe10/calc.html

I'm pretty sure Vincent doesn't toss numbers onto that page just from thinking they might be the case.

[VincentASM]

BTW, I should mention I wrote that page before I played the game and I haven't gotten round to checking out the Double Bow yet (that part was added by a contributor).

[Narga_Rocks]

I'm pretty sure it doesn't because the Double Bow's innate range is 1-2. I'm also pretty sure that longbows didn't cut accuracy at 3-range either, since their innate range is 2-3. You just think it did because their innate hit is terrible.

Nope. Longbows suck even worse at three range. You have the game. Do me a favour. Get leo a longbow, stand at two range without supports, then stand at 3. If the hit is the same, fine.


Similarly, if you have a 4-E-5 save, take the double bow at 1 range against an aura. Now do the same thing at 2 range. See the difference.


Anyway, back on topic, you should be able to try to crack heads at 1 range with your bow like staffs in fe10. It should also cost 5 uses (bows aren't meant to be used that way so it's gotta do something bad to the bow) and have lower accuracy and damage (-10 to -20 accuracy and mt = str + 2 to 5 depending on the weapon). Now, this could actually make things worse for archers, considering it's a waste of uses and will probably do low damage. At least if they miss they won't burn any uses of the bow.

Edited by Narga_Rocks, 24 March 2012 - 03:32 PM.

[Furetchen]

I'm thinking it'd make things worse.

"OKAY GOT MY FRESH DLC INNES GONNA FUCK SOME SHIT UP WITH MY SILVER Boh fuck he has nothing to switch to on EP"
*four melee attacks later*
"WELL THEN SO MUCH FOR THAT"

Edited by Furetchen, 24 March 2012 - 03:42 PM.

[Narga_Rocks]

I'm thinking it'd make things worse.

"OKAY GOT MY FRESH DLC INNES GONNA FUCK SOME SHIT UP WITH MY SILVER Boh fuck he has nothing to switch to on EP"
*four melee attacks later*
"WELL THEN SO MUCH FOR THAT"

Yep. It'd be hilarious. He'd do like 5 damage to each of them and then it'd break. Awesome. Okay, maybe it should only burn 2 uses instead of 5, but I've always found it silly that an archer would just stand there and do nothing rather than at least try to punch the guy or something.

[arvilino]

Enemy Killer Bow Snipers could would be a huge pain though if your characters defense isn't too high, 1 range Killer Punch.

Edited by arvilino, 24 March 2012 - 04:39 PM.

[Kngt_Of_Titania]

I loved the FE10 marksmen 2-3 range and would like it to return. But I think to make archers viable hte hit rate on javalins and hand axes need to get nerfed thus archers, and light magic users too I guess

I think you'd be better off to go with nerfing MT on javelins and hand axes, not accuracy, as in FE12 (it worked well). If you want to know why, play FE6.

Magic users target RES, while archers target DEF; in addition, magic users tend to have notably worse HP/DEF than archers to limit their 1 range attacking and overall EP potential and, in FE10 and FE12, crappy SPD bases or caps (or both). So I never found they invade in each other's territory too much.

[Anouleth]

Nope. Longbows suck even worse at three range. You have the game. Do me a favour. Get leo a longbow, stand at two range without supports, then stand at 3. If the hit is the same, fine.


Similarly, if you have a 4-E-5 save, take the double bow at 1 range against an aura. Now do the same thing at 2 range. See the difference.


Anyway, back on topic, you should be able to try to crack heads at 1 range with your bow like staffs in fe10. It should also cost 5 uses (bows aren't meant to be used that way so it's gotta do something bad to the bow) and have lower accuracy and damage (-10 to -20 accuracy and mt = str + 2 to 5 depending on the weapon). Now, this could actually make things worse for archers, considering it's a waste of uses and will probably do low damage. At least if they miss they won't burn any uses of the bow.

I think ideas like that are kind of lame. While we're at it, why don't we let sword users counter ranged attacks by throwing their sword with a million hit penalty?

[Kngt_Of_Titania]

I think ideas like that are kind of lame. While we're at it, why don't we let sword users counter ranged attacks by throwing their sword with a million hit penalty?

This idea wouldn't be balanced unless it consumed all remaining uses of the sword. After all, you're throwing away the sword, are you not?

EDIT: But seriously, Narga, from somebody who uses archers a crapload and loves the class -- bad idea, imo.

Edited by Kngt_Of_Titania, 24 March 2012 - 08:41 PM.

[Furetchen]

Yep. It'd be hilarious. He'd do like 5 damage to each of them and then it'd break. Awesome. Okay, maybe it should only burn 2 uses instead of 5, but I've always found it silly that an archer would just stand there and do nothing rather than at least try to punch the guy or something.

Oh, I agree it's a good idea. I just would personally rather an archer try and shiv them or something.

But personally I'm another in favour of good bases + 2-3 range + crit bonus on promotion.

[Onmi]

I think ideas like that are kind of lame. While we're at it, why don't we let sword users counter ranged attacks by throwing their sword with a million hit penalty?

Difference? It's entirely possible if you're a snap shot to get off a close range shot with an arrow. INCREDIBLY difficult but entirely possible. Swords are not made for throwing, unless they are. In fact the best throwing weapon in history are axes, most easily caught as well.

Regardless, One of two things need to happen to keep an archer viable

1. They must be able to attack at range 1
2. They must be so good at killing dudes that the lack of an enemy phase does not hinder them at all.

Either would work, but the way it stands FE gives you an archer and s/he's the worst unit to field, bad bases, bad growths, weak weapon. Bench Fodder. Whether that range 1 is a dedicated knife sub weapon, or crossbows, or an accuracy penalty at range 1, or they can only counter at range 1. Or that they let loose an arrow and the enemy goes 'splat' which is pretty much the case Shinon and Klein make as being good snipers (See that dude? he's no longer on the field.)

Either must happen, because otherwise they will be used until they get to promotion, then get ponies with swords. if you even bother. As it stands, Armor Knights and Archers are the classes that IntSys need a lot of help making better (not so much the latter in FE10, due to all the different bows)

[Kngt_Of_Titania]

1. They must be able to attack at range 1
2. They must be so good at killing dudes that the lack of an enemy phase does not hinder them at all.

Or...

3. Play Lunatic and realize offense on PP is usually 10x better than EP and that attacking a H3 beserker wielding a killer axe with 44 ATK without eating a counter is pretty awesome.

I'd kind of be in favor of archers getting 1 range, but if it happens, I want it to be a short bow option; 2-3 MT, low durability before breaking, and expensive -- like javs and hand axes. It would otherwise a poor option compared to other bows, but useful when archers need EP offense. So unlike the weapon trinity, which specializes in 1 range but can do 2 range, bows specialize in 2 range but can do 1 range.

Edited by Kngt_Of_Titania, 24 March 2012 - 08:46 PM.

[Thor Odinson]

Realise Lunatic is only one mode and not one that caters to all players, at that. Its difficulty level might be bow-friendly due to the importance of offing a guy on PP before he gets you, but most players would be turned off by the difficulty alone. It's fine to have it as a mode, but it'd be better if bows were balanced better for the less difficult modes as well.

Though, I enjoyed Snipers on FE12 H1 as well, often having 3 orso on my team because why the hell not and javs/handaxes suck. 2-3range and +crit is a fairly simple solution that many have already stated which would help their PP power enough. Even if enemies don't have 1-2 range, it would still be useful in providing situations where the archer can chip without getting in the way of another unit in places like hallways and the such.

Edited by Luminescent Blade, 24 March 2012 - 08:54 PM.

[Onmi]

Or...

3. Play Lunatic

So we should base everything upon the mode that IntSys said is meant to be beyond stupidly difficult, and not at all a representation of the games nature? Because that's what you're saying, and it sounds retarded. That would be like me ranking all units in Gihren's Greed off Hell mode instead of Hardest Mode. One is meant to be "Okay we've just outright started fucking with you" and the other is "This is the highest reasonable difficulty before we actually have to go into a mode named 'HELL' mode"

Of course GG is a legitimately balls hard game to begin with, to the point where you are still likely to get your ass handed to you on Normal mode. But regardless my point stands.

Also a single bow with EP potential, but is so weak you wouldn't consider using it (comparatively not what the Hand Axe/Javelin/Wind Sword are) is not a good idea because A. It's a single weapon B. it does nothing to mitigate the problem with the class C.none of the games have actually featured 'The short bow option' that's hacks. D. It still wouldn't address the fact that InySys has no idea how to make a starting archer. Yes I know you fellate Wil like he's the second coming of Jesus Christ, I don't care. He sucks. So does Wolt, and Ronan, and Rolf, and Neimi, and Jamuka, and Gordin, and Leonardo, and the only possible exclusion to this is in Gaiden, which I haven't played.

[Anouleth]

Difference? It's entirely possible if you're a snap shot to get off a close range shot with an arrow. INCREDIBLY difficult but entirely possible.

Is it impossible to throw a sword? Of course not. It's possible; just incredibly difficult.

Swords are not made for throwing, unless they are.

And bows are not made to club people with.

Also; Javelins and Hand Axes magically reappear back in your hand after you throw them. A similar thing would happen with a sword.

And one more thing; even in FE10, bow users still stink. I remember having to basically hide Rolf T in later chapters because he was screwing up my enemy phase and costing turns. I think the best answer is to, like KoT said, make a game where avoiding counter-attacks is actually more relevant, and give archers stronger 3-range options (I don't know about all bows being 2-3 range, but a good set of readily available longbows would be ok).

Edited by Anouleth, 24 March 2012 - 09:40 PM.