No More Zeroes for the Future?

[property of nuvelle]

I'm referring to no longer doing "no damage" if opponents Defense is higher than Atk, and now doing just one instead. Should it be kept for future games? I think it'd be best for it to return.

-Grinding lower leveled units could be easier, they can now do at least one damage to finish an enemy.

-It makes sense realistically, a weapon will never not hurt someone, or it will at least wear them down.

-It adds its own sort of planning and strategy so you can no longer just tank forever. Maybe still forever actually.

That's all I can think of. Thoughts?

Edited August 11, 2017 by KongDude

[bethany81707]

Hm... in the end, I'm not sure gameplay will ever beat that satisfying tink.

Maybe armour knights should be able to take 0 damage, but no other unit type. Armours don't really have a 'positive'- their high defence is in numbers that other units, if favoured by the RNG, can match.

[Sentacotus]

It would be funny to see two generals with high defense literally duke it out at -1 hp a turn and see who wins...

[thecrimsonflash]

12 hours ago, KongDude said:

I'm referring to no longer doing "no damage" if opponents Defense is higher than Atk, and now doing just one instead. Should it be kept for future games? I think it'd be best for it to return.

-Grinding lower leveled units could be easier, they can now do at least one damage to finish an enemy.

-It makes sense realistically, a weapon will never not hurt someone, or it will at least wear them down.

-It adds its own sort of planning and strategy so you can no longer just tank forever. Maybe still forever actually.

That's all I can think of. Thoughts?

I'm going to take this point by point

Grinding lower level allies implies that you are able to get them that low without killing them, subdue may be a thing in the future, but that still has a unit going up against an opponent they have no business facing

realistically that implies that the person is wearing no armor or that the enemy is using a hammer or other anti armor weapon, perhaps this only applies to classes like swordmasters, but even then one could say that is the result of a successful parry, back to armors though, very few weapons can actually penetrate plate armor without attacking already hard to hit points on the armor which are exposed but aside from that save for the aforementioned hammers armor is borderline unbeatable, also considering that armors are shown to be blocking with their shields they have no good reason to take damage

considering that in shadows of valentia you also had most units healing constantly tanking was still somewhat feasible, though mages would still decimate most armors so it only made that weakness all the more lethal when you are required to take 1 damage with most likely being doubled and a very low likelihood of avoiding you were almost guaranteed to take two damage per enemy, so assuming that you are hit by a mage and survive that only makes your enemies numbers all the more deadly and your barrons more useless

I am not a fan of minimum damage, personally.

[X-Naut]

11 hours ago, phineas81707 said:

Hm... in the end, I'm not sure gameplay will ever beat that satisfying tink.

Maybe armour knights should be able to take 0 damage, but no other unit type. Armours don't really have a 'positive'- their high defence is in numbers that other units, if favoured by the RNG, can match.

I agree that armored units should be the exception, whether through their own passive damage reduction or simply not rounding up the damage.

I do like the idea of always taking damage from attacks, even if most of the time you should be taking some damage without the mechanic.

[property of nuvelle]

13 hours ago, phineas81707 said:

Hm... in the end, I'm not sure gameplay will ever beat that satisfying tink.

Maybe armour knights should be able to take 0 damage, but no other unit type. Armours don't really have a 'positive'- their high defence is in numbers that other units, if favoured by the RNG, can match.

Yeah that makes sense.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

I like it. Even if you're a god with loads of defense, getting swarmed by a pack of gargoyles is sure to exert your strength to some extent. I think the 1 damage minimum on attacks helped make HP a more relevant stat in this game than other installments. Though not as much as spells and combat arts consuming HP on use, but with these mechanics together, HP became an important stat indeed.

[Randoman]

Count me in on the "Only Armor Knights and their promotions should take 0 damage from physical attacks" bandwagon. I mean, with units like cavaliers and mages, I doubt it'd be impossible for them to be essentially immune to physical attacks in real life, no matter how hard they train (given the fact that horses for cavaliers aren't that heavily covered in armor and the wardrobe of mages not being protective enough against metal weapons). Armor knights, on the other hand, make complete sense due to them being all armored up.