Dismount

[Jedi]

As some of you know, FE3 and FE5 had a mechanic called "dismount" where your mounted units couldn't go inside structures with their mounts but could fight off horseback (with swords only even if they didn't use swords on a mount). They also had minor stat losses while off their horse.

How would you feel about the mechanic returning in a future game or a possible remake but revamped? I'd like just a general discussion.

I for one loved the mechanic and found its only flaw to be the "Only Swords (or bows if you were a horse archer) dismounted" deal

Edited November 20, 2014 by Jedi

[General Horace]

It also bugged me that dudes like Fin and Brighton's class names were "Lance Knight" and "Axe Knight" and couldn't use the respective weapons unmounted.

That being said I wasn't a huge fan of the feature in the first place, I suppose it did make unmounted units a bit better than their counterparts indoors, so it has its merits there I guess. It also mass assimilated units into a bunch of 5-7 move foot units that all did pretty much the same thing though, which I found really lame.

[Jedi]

It also bugged me that dudes like Fin and Brighton's class names were "Lance Knight" and "Axe Knight" and couldn't use the respective weapons unmounted.

That being said I wasn't a huge fan of the feature in the first place, I suppose it did make unmounted units a bit better than their counterparts indoors, so it has its merits there I guess. It also mass assimilated units into a bunch of 5-7 move foot units that all did pretty much the same thing though, which I found really lame.

I see what you mean, I do quite think though with some refinement it'd be really awesome

[Caster]

No,

I really hate this mechanic.

It just seems rather pointless to me.

All it does is mostly nerf your characters and make them use weapons they are worse with, and having you stock up on more swords and stuff for people who don't need them.

I'd rather keep my horsies and flying ponies thanks.

[Jedi]

No,

I really hate this mechanic.

It just seems rather pointless to me.

All it does is mostly nerf your characters and make them use weapons they are worse with, and having you stock up on more swords and stuff for people who don't need them.

I'd rather keep my horsies and flying ponies thanks.

I personally see it as a "You can't rely on just your mounts to do everything, use other people" as quite a few people play FE in that way.

Edited November 20, 2014 by Jedi

[Baldrick]

It makes a nice combo with Canto, it makes units more balanced without nerfing that mechanic.

As it is, if dismounted knights can use their preferred weapon, I don't think it's enough of a disadvantage to offset having Canto in outdoor maps. Perhaps instead, dismounted knights had 2 move?

[Jedi]

It makes a nice combo with Canto, it makes units more balanced without nerfing that mechanic.

As it is, if dismounted knights can use their preferred weapon, I don't think it's enough of a disadvantage to offset having Canto in outdoor maps. Perhaps instead, dismounted knights had 2 move?

That would be a bit ridiculous. Radiant Dawn did have a good balance between no dismount/dismount, Mounts just had less move in buildings.

But reducing people to two move? That's just like saying "Don't use me, I'm slower then a general"

[Axie]

I would not be opposed to dismount coming back because it was a unique and possibly fun mechanic... as long as the dismounted units got to use their primary weapon instead of everyone using swords. That was probably annoying enough in FE3 where the Wlv stat exists and you can equip good swords, in FE5 with weapon ranks (that were hard to raise) it was just shitty. Not to mention everyone using swords is boring and bad for the weapon triangle.

EDIT: I don't even think allowing primary weapons to be used would ruin dismounting as a balancing mechanic? Less movement alone balances it out already, and dismounting also decreases your other stats a bit, and being stuck with (probably) E Swords indoors is unbalanced in the opposite direction.

Edited November 20, 2014 by Axie

[Baldrick]

In RD, mounts inside buildings had the more move than mages/generals, the same move as other infantry, and still had Canto. It wasn't really a good balance at all.

Is it ridiculous though? Mounted units have 2 move and canto in outdoor maps, and if they keep their weapon they have virtually no disadvantage compared to infantry in indoor maps. Even if they had 3 less movement in indoor maps, the balance is tipped towards mounted units because of Canto.

To clarify, if Canto doesn't return I don't see any point in Dismounting returning, especially if they keep their weapon.

[X-Naut]

I have no problem with dismounting as a way to prevent mounts from completely outclassing footies, but I would definitely prefer to have them keep their weapons. Perhaps they could take a weapon rank penalty instead, where their ranks are treated as one below their actual value? As far as movement I'd say either have -1 Move vs foot units or equal unpromoted but no gain promoted. Another thought is to bring back class skills (besides Canto) and have assign some to only the mounted version of the class.

[Axie]

Canto would NOT redeem Knights and Generals and would also not redeem mounted units with such crippled move... which is irrelevant because this thread discusses dismounting and they would not have Canto indoors. They'd be the same as foot units but with decreased stats. Adding a crappy forced secondary weapon is too much in my opinion; they don't need to be TERRIBLE indoors to justify the use of foot units.

EDIT: I love the idea of reducing their weapon rank. It decreases their performance, but doesn't force you to buy a bunch of extra swords and you keep variety within your army.

Edited November 20, 2014 by Axie

[NinjaMonkey]

I personally see it as a "You can't rely on just your mounts to do everything, use other people" as quite a few people play FE in that way.

Just because a few people play it that way doesn't mean that everyone should be forced to do it their way.

[Dragoncat]

Well I really shouldn't be posting in here, all I know of this is what I've read, haven't played anything that it was in. BUT.

The not being able to use certain weapons is lame and unrealistic. "Durr hurr I'm not going to use this axe without my pony, I'm gonna only use swords until I get back on just for shits and giggles." Makes NO sense.

It's a neat mechanic, if it comes back with some tweaking I wouldn't mind.

[dondon151]

That would be a bit ridiculous. Radiant Dawn did have a good balance between no dismount/dismount, Mounts just had less move in buildings.

for clarity's sake, FE10 mounted units had the same movement as same-tier unmounted units when indoors, but they still retained canto. so i wouldn't call it a "good balance."

i'm not too sure why so many people are perturbed by the sword lock upon dismount; it ranges from huge nerf to inconsequential annoyance, and that's the whole point of the mechanic. that would be like saying that dismounting is bad because of movement penalties. a mounted unit who had a higher dismounted sword rank than mounted non-sword rank would even stand to benefit from dismounting. that said, i'm a fan of the weapon rank penalty idea, and an alternative is to have separate mounted/dismounted weapon ranks in the same weapon class.

so i'm not actually sure that dismounting should inflict stat penalties aside from movement. i think that a more exotic mix is desirable, e.g. -2 str, -2 skl, but +2 spd upon dismounting, or something.

As it is, if dismounted knights can use their preferred weapon, I don't think it's enough of a disadvantage to offset having Canto in outdoor maps. Perhaps instead, dismounted knights had 2 move?

the number one reason why knights are bad is because they have -1 mov compared to other infantry. when you have less mov to begin with, even a 1 mov penalty is significant.

Just because a few people play it that way doesn't mean that everyone should be forced to do it their way.

this is an incomprehensible objection. you don't think that everyone should be forced to play in a way where they can't solely rely on mounts just because a small set of FE players rely solely on mounts. but if few FE players rely solely on mounts to begin with, then why would the other players care about having their mounts nerfed?

Edited November 20, 2014 by dondon151

[Jedi]

My bad there dondon. Its been far too long since I've played RD I was kinda speaking out of my ass.

I think though that Fe10 had an interesting idea even if it wasn't really balanced in the end.

[Robert Stewart]

I like dismounting. The main thing I don't like about it is units being forced to use swords when dismounting. I'd rather have them keep the same weapons they have when mounted, but have separate weapon ranks for the two 'modes.'

[dondon151]

FE10 never explains why the movement penalty exists. it's even more confusing because laguz don't get movement penalties indoors, so hawks and wolves are running around unimpeded whereas wyverns and horses are inexplicably hampered.

[Jedi]

FE10 never explains why the movement penalty exists. it's even more confusing because laguz don't get movement penalties indoors, so hawks and wolves are running around unimpeded whereas wyverns and horses are inexplicably hampered.

This is quite true.

Do you think Jill or someone mentioning something in P1 about this would make it more justified? Or just baffling still, out of curiosity

Edit: Sorry Slart its hard to quote multiple people when I'm on a phone.

Edited November 20, 2014 by Jedi

[Baldrick]

In RD, mounts inside buildings had the more move than mages/generals, the same move as other infantry, and still had Canto. It wasn't really a good balance at all.

Jedi, what am I, chopped liver? >_<

the number one reason why knights are bad is because they have -1 mov compared to other infantry. when you have less mov to begin with, even a 1 mov penalty is significant.

Well, that's the point. If mounted units have inherent benefits outside, infantry should have inherent benefits while on foot.

[Robert Stewart]

Speaking of dismounting, I know that TRS has dismounting more or less like in FE3, except that a few classes (mostly Commando Knights) can use lances while dismounted. Does anyone know if Berwick Saga has dismounting? If so, how did it work there?

[dondon151]

Well, that's the point. If mounted units have inherent benefits outside, infantry should have inherent benefits while on foot.

what i meant was, going from 7 to 5 mov is not as bad as going from 5 to 3 mov. that's why penalizing dismounted units with worse-than-armored-movement is a poor idea.

FE5 has certain infantry classes that have 1 more mov compared to standard infantry classes. SMs and sages had more mov than heroes and high priests. that's another distinction that can situationally elevate infantry above cavalry in the presence of the dismounting mechanic.

[Dark Sage]

i'm not too sure why so many people are perturbed by the sword lock upon dismount; it ranges from huge nerf to inconsequential annoyance, and that's the whole point of the mechanic. that would be like saying that dismounting is bad because of movement penalties. a mounted unit who had a higher dismounted sword rank than mounted non-sword rank would even stand to benefit from dismounting. that said, i'm a fan of the weapon rank penalty idea, and an alternative is to have separate mounted/dismounted weapon ranks in the same weapon class.

so i'm not actually sure that dismounting should inflict stat penalties aside from movement. i think that a more exotic mix is desirable, e.g. -2 str, -2 skl, but +2 spd upon dismounting, or something.

The swordlock is probably a big issue for people because its simply not that intuitive. I understand that using an axe on a mount is different than using it on foot but the question that would arise is "why didn't this knight learn how to use an axe on foot as well as on horseback instead of learning how to use an entirely different weapon only on foot?" It's not that big a deal to me personally but I can see how it would be for some people.

I'm gonna have to disagree on mounted units getting a mix of stat penalties and bonuses when dismounting mainly due to personal preference (I prefer only stat penalties). I am in support of separate weapon ranks for mounted status or dismounted status though, it accomplishes something very similar to swordlocking while being more intuitive. Also when it comes to reduced movement, one idea I had is that all dismounted units have a fixed movement range regardless of class tier; a dismounted cavalier and dismounted paladin both have the same movement range as a fighter for example.

[Robert Stewart]

Also when it comes to reduced movement, one idea I had is that all dismounted units have a fixed movement range regardless of class tier; a dismounted cavalier and dismounted paladin both have the same movement range as a fighter for example.

FE3 more or less did this, but that's because all mounted classes dismounted to one of 3 dismounted ones, all of which had 6 move.

[dondon151]

I'm gonna have to disagree on mounted units getting a mix of stat penalties and bonuses when dismounting mainly due to personal preference (I prefer only stat penalties).

my reasoning is as such:

- movement and weapon rank penalties are severe enough, so other stat penalties aren't very necessary.

- i never understood how mounted units could be fast when their agility is compromised by sitting on top of a huge animal.

i think it would make sense for the stat penalties to be more severe than the stat bonuses, but there's not a compelling reason for either choice, i agree.

Edited November 20, 2014 by dondon151

[Roivann]

As for not being able to use certain weapons indoors, lances/spears are, for the most part, pretty damn big. They are designed for poking dudes from far away, not for close-quarters combat. So it sort of makes sense that you couldn't use them in tight indoor spaces. Of course, the ceilings in the battle animations for FE3 and FE5 are rather tall anyways, so... eh. And axes, well, it's not like you need a wide swing or anything to make effective use of an axe, so there's really no reason why most axes couldn't be used indoors. Perhaps slim lances could be used indoors? And halberds could only be used outdoors? Same with Zanbatos? At that point, though, why divide it up by weapon type at all, when you could just have a flag that says whether or not a weapon is usable indoors... I'm kind of rambling, anyways.