You think Pirates should come back?

[Harvey]

I really love pirates in FE. So damn brutal and loot the poor breaking villages and them setting sail over seas...that and that the pirate class itself is something I miss after playing Blazing Blade.

So you think Pirates should come back in the next game? 

 

[Jedi]

Sure, I do kind of miss their Waterwalking skill, it gave them a bit of unique utility for a foot unit.

[Magical Glace]

We don't need three different types of axe-based infantrymen with similar high HP/attack, low skill and defenses statspreads.

Barbarians and fighters are more than enough.

[Shadow Mir]

11 minutes ago, Glaceon Mage said:

We don't need three different types of axe-based infantrymen with similar high HP/attack, low skill and defenses statspreads.

Barbarians and fighters are more than enough.

Ditto. Also, let's be honest - when was walking on water ever actually useful?

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Quote

Ditto. Also, let's be honest - when was walking on water ever actually useful?

Maybe in FE8's chapter Distant Blade to detract the attention from the enemy pirates with Ross to save the village with the rapier because the peggies kinda suck due to their weapon disadvantage.
It's the only situation it comes in mind, if any.

As for the topic I don't really care as long berserker class still exists.

Edit: Why isn't this topic in general FE?

Edited March 22, 2017 by Magillanica Lou Mayvin

[Jedi]

13 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Ditto. Also, let's be honest - when was walking on water ever actually useful?

Tons of maps where Marth has to seize because he has a weaker version of the skill.

It also saves a few turns in an FE8 map last I checked.

Edited March 22, 2017 by Jedi

[Harvey]

sheesh people. I just wanted the return of pirates from FE games with sail boats and whatnot and I get that your opinions are different and all but it just sounds like you're bashing the pirates because of their lack of use in battle......um...why is it that way when they were bad guys to begin with?

 

[Jedi]

I think it'd be cool if they used the boats from FE8 maybe in some way sure.

[Harvey]

9 minutes ago, Magillanica Lou Mayvin said:

Why isn't this topic in general FE?

Because seeing as how pirates weren't shown up recently, I just thought that now might be a good time to come back.

 

[Magical Glace]

7 minutes ago, Harvey said:

sheesh people. I just wanted the return of pirates from FE games with sail boats and whatnot and I get that your opinions are different and all but it just sounds like you're bashing the pirates because of their lack of use in battle......um...why is it that way when they were bad guys to begin with?

I said they were redundant though.  Now, I don't like axe based infantry classes, but that's completely different from what I actually said, which was noting that there are two other axe based infantry classes with a similar statspread already there, and that there doesn't need to be a third.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Quote

I think it'd be cool if they used the boats from FE8 maybe in some way sure.

This gives me idea to bring back the ballistician class from FE11 to let them make use boats in chapters with water.
Why not having an ally who can fire from the sea?
 

Quote

Because seeing as how pirates weren't shown up recently, I just thought that now might be a good time to come back.

Just was a bit confused by seeing this in Switch because it's a topic which could be discussed within a larger target group. More people (like me) tend to check out general FE rather than Switch.

[Shadow Mir]

12 minutes ago, Magillanica Lou Mayvin said:

Maybe in FE8's chapter Distant Blade to detract the attention from the enemy pirates with Ross to save the village with the rapier because the peggies kinda suck due to their weapon disadvantage.
It's the only situation it comes in mind, if any.

As for the topic I don't really care as long berserker class still exists.

Edit: Why isn't this topic in general FE?

 

11 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Tons of maps where Marth has to seize because he has a weaker version of the skill.

It also saves a few turns in an FE8 map last I checked.

I brought it up because I thought that the ability to walk on water is just way too niche, as opposed to legitimately being useful (and I still do).

[SullyMcGully]

In my opinion, the pirate, brigand, and barbarian classes should all be combined into a single class with the ability to travel over mountain and water tiles and destroy villages. Give it a cool name like "Raider" and you're ready to go!

[Nym]

Aye aye Captain

[Zapp Branniglenn]

11 hours ago, Magillanica Lou Mayvin said:

This gives me idea to bring back the ballistician class from FE11 to let them make use boats in chapters with water.
Why not having an ally who can fire from the sea?

FE8's chapter 10(Ephraim) had exactly that. Boat Ballisticians on water. They moved one space at a time but since water surrounded the entire map, they were a real problem since the only units that can get out there are fliers. I think pirates would be ideal for such an obstacle. Assuming they could move more than one space at a time. You might as well have sent fliers anyway that only need to dodge one shot.

As for whether pirates should return, I'd like to see a combination of brigand and pirate if the setting called for it. Them being able to swim makes plenty sense given their lack of armor. But if there's one beach chapter in the game, then it won't really matter when you've got one pirate on the team. The only advantage pirates tend to have is when baiting lance wielding fliers in a position that other enemies will not reach them, allowing you to pull that pressure from your main force before they advance. But fliers could already accomplish this in fewer turns with better movement range. Pirate is probably best left as an enemy only class as they slowly approach a village that you must reach before them.

[Interdimensional Observer]

Water-walk and mountaineering too are pretty useless for the player. The main use they have is for the enemy, where they creep, creep, creep over terrain that the player can't get to (sans fliers, which in almost every game pirates/brigands appear, use WTD lances), eventually reaching either a village to smash, or the player's forces, obviously ready to smash the brigand/pirate.

If they could move faster at sea/on mountains, then things would be better.

[BlueBloodEmblazer]

I guess the more classes the merrier, however I won't be disappointed if they're still not in FE Switch.

[Harvey]

21 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

I said they were redundant though.  Now, I don't like axe based infantry classes, but that's completely different from what I actually said, which was noting that there are two other axe based infantry classes with a similar statspread already there, and that there doesn't need to be a third.

By that logic, you are still saying that there's no need to have that class because there are other axe classes....

Um...you do know that originally pirates can come without axes right? Sure Pirates in games were axe users but we can see a completely set of different pirates...like Brigid?

Also...again, people bashing at pirates for lack of use in battle.....I guess Dart's existence in Blazing Blade was pointless?

 

Edited March 23, 2017 by Harvey

[Magical Glace]

2 hours ago, Harvey said:

By that logic, you are still saying that there's no need to have that class because there are other axe classes....

Um...you do know that originally pirates can come without axes right? Sure Pirates in games were axe users but we can see a completely set of different pirates...like Brigid?

Also...again, people bashing at pirates for lack of use in battle.....I guess Dart's existence in Blazing Blade was pointless?

Briggid was an archer, she was raised by pirates, yes, but her class was not Pirate.

The CLASS is redundant, because the STATSPREAD (key word here, because you apparently missed it the first two times) is way too similar to two other already existent classes, on top of using the same weapon as them.  

That is what I said.

[Harvey]

2 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

Briggid was an archer, she was raised by pirates, yes, but her class was not Pirate.

The CLASS is redundant, because the STATSPREAD (key word here, because you apparently missed it the first two times) is way too similar to two other already existent classes, on top of using the same weapon as them.  

That is what I said.

That still doesn't change the point that you made it sound like they are pointless to use in battles..

Also, if they really are THAT similar, then just replace the pirate for the other class, its that simple. 

 

[Magical Glace]

Just now, Harvey said:

That still doesn't change the point that you made it sound like they are pointless to use in battles..

Also, if they really are THAT similar, then just replace the pirate for the other class, its that simple. 

Usefulness has nothing to do with the fact that they're redundant with fighters/brigands.

Do you even know what redundant means?  

I don't really care which one it is because I never liked any of the three classes anyway, but I feel like putting in Pirate when we have two very similar classes to do basically the exact same thing (high str/HP, low skill/def/res) is incredibly stupid.

[Harvey]

9 minutes ago, Glaceon Mage said:

Usefulness has nothing to do with the fact that they're redundant with fighters/brigands.

Do you even know what redundant means?  

I don't really care which one it is because I never liked any of the three classes anyway, but I feel like putting in Pirate when we have two very similar classes to do basically the exact same thing (high str/HP, low skill/def/res) is incredibly stupid.

I know what redundant is and you're pretty much just saying that having to bring back pirates itself is no longer needed considering you already have two similar classes correct?

 

Edited March 23, 2017 by Harvey

[Magical Glace]

1 minute ago, Harvey said:

I know what redundant is and you're pretty much just saying that having to bring back pirates itself is no longer needed considering you already have two similar classes correct?

Now please explain how that translates into this:

11 minutes ago, Harvey said:

That still doesn't change the point that you made it sound like they are pointless to use in battles..

Because I fail to understand how calling the class redundant gets this conclusion.

3 minutes ago, Harvey said:

I get you hate axe users which is why they ought to come back simply because it'll only be a bit easier to grind some units that need that training.

I don't understand this statement either.  What does the fact I dislike axe users have to do with grinding?  What does including pirates have to do with grinding?  How are the portions of this sentence related at all?

[Harvey]

4 minutes ago, Glaceon Mage said:

Now please explain how that translates into this:

Because I fail to understand how calling the class redundant gets this conclusion.

I don't understand this statement either.  What does the fact I dislike axe users have to do with grinding?  What does including pirates have to do with grinding?  How are the portions of this sentence related at all?

 

According to the dictionary: too much and unnecessary.

Meaning that having pirates is not needed when you have OTHER similar classes correct?

 

[Magical Glace]

Just now, Harvey said:

According to the dictionary: too much and unnecessary.

Meaning that having pirates is not needed when you have OTHER similar classes correct?

You didn't answer any of my questions.

1. How does redundant with other classes = useless in combat?

2. all of this:

6 minutes ago, Glaceon Mage said:

I don't understand this statement either.  What does the fact I dislike axe users have to do with grinding?  What does including pirates have to do with grinding?  How are the portions of this sentence related at all?