The Class You Hate the Most

[Armagon]

2 hours ago, Metal Flash said:

I complety forgot Great Knights were in Sacred Stones. But yeah, they suck there.

I dunno, Great Knights were pretty great (heh) in Sacred Stones imo. Like, a lot of people talk about "oh, this class is weak to this weapon, and thus, this class isn't that good" but really, when has that actually mattered? If you were to ask me "which chapters in Sacred Stones have enemies that carry the Zanbato", i honestly wouldn't be able to tell you, because that's how rare they are.

Same deal with Great Knights in Awakening too. While they are inferior than their Sacred Stones counterparts, they do get Luna at lv.5, which is an amazing Skill.

[Ether]

Great Knight's problem is that if you're a cavalier, you should promote to Paladin instead, and if you're a knight, you're a bench warmer. The class itself isn't inherently bad, it's just the inferior promotion for the only class that gets it that's worth using most of the time. If you're like, Effie and actually see use despite being an armour, then Great Knight is a perfectly good promotion option. And in awakening and fates, reclassing to Great Knight can have merit for either skill learning or for growth rates... a unit like Hana as an example, doesn't mind marrying into the class to bypass the T1 stage and getting some bulk in her.

[Shadow Mir]

51 minutes ago, Armagon said:

I dunno, Great Knights were pretty great (heh) in Sacred Stones imo. Like, a lot of people talk about "oh, this class is weak to this weapon, and thus, this class isn't that good" but really, when has that actually mattered? If you were to ask me "which chapters in Sacred Stones have enemies that carry the Zanbato", i honestly wouldn't be able to tell you, because that's how rare they are.

Same deal with Great Knights in Awakening too. While they are inferior than their Sacred Stones counterparts, they do get Luna at lv.5, which is an amazing Skill.

The problem with Great Knight in Sacred Stones is that it's just inferior to Paladin (in the case of Cavaliers) - losing one point of move is pretty bad, and frankly, the purpose of being a mounted unit is defeated because they have only average mobility, which does nothing but make me wonder what was the point of being mounted in the first place.

[Armagon]

29 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

The problem with Great Knight in Sacred Stones is that it's just inferior to Paladin (in the case of Cavaliers) - losing one point of move is pretty bad, and frankly, the purpose of being a mounted unit is defeated because they have only average mobility, which does nothing but make me wonder what was the point of being mounted in the first place.

Yeah, Paladins have always been objectively better, but Great Knights at least get full Weapon Triangle usage and, in Awakening, Great Knights get Luna, so i actually prefer Awakening Great Knights over Awakening Paladins.

[Emperor Hardin]

1 hour ago, Ether said:

Armour Knights, easily. Overkill defenses in exchange for piss poor offense is already a losing combination, and it doesn't even matter because after a few turns, your knight is a whole turn of movement behind your infantry, let alone cavalry or flying units. Easily the worst class for most of the series.

Wrt Great Knights, at least they aren't generals. They can keep up, and double weakness doesn't mean much when effective weapons are scarce as is, and won't kill you because you're in a defensive class with WTA to curb their effects. Great Knight is no paladin, but if you're an armour that can turn into a GK, better that than general pretty much every time.

Great Knights only having more weapons then General in the 3DS games, which was a stupid idea anyhow as General needs all the advantages it can get.

Besides Great Knights are supposed to specialize in Axes anyhow, giving them swords defeats the purpose of them.

1 hour ago, Armagon said:

Like, a lot of people talk about "oh, this class is weak to this weapon, and thus, this class isn't that good" but really, when has that actually mattered? 

Only in Thracia 776 and the DS remakes later chapters have effective weaponry really been used effectively by the enemy.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Emperor Hardin

[Ether]

1 minute ago, Emperor Hardin said:

Great Knights only having more weapons then General in the 3DS games, which was a stupid idea anyhow as General needs all the advantages it can get.

Besides Great Knights are supposed to specialize in Axes anyhow.

Great Knights having WTA wasn't meant as an advantage over General, it was meant as they can use WTA to weaken slayer weapons to make the double weakness matter even less than it already does in practice.

[Emperor Hardin]

Just now, Ether said:

Great Knights having WTA wasn't meant as an advantage over General, it was meant as they can use WTA to weaken slayer weapons to make the double weakness matter even less than it already does in practice.

In the GBA games, Generals wield Swords, Axes, and Lances too.

In the 3DS games, Generals are Lance and Axe only, so Black Knight's helmet less and blue armored Einerjar uses Lances while he trips over his own feet.

Stupid idea as Great Knights are supposed to be Axe specializing Cavalry.

[Ether]

Just now, Emperor Hardin said:

In the GBA games, Generals wield Swords, Axes, and Lances too.

In the 3DS games, Generals are Lance and Axe only, so Black Knight's helmet less and blue armored Einerjar uses Lances while he trips over his own feet.

Stupid idea as Great Knights are supposed to be Axe specializing Cavalry.

Yes, I know that GBA generals use all three. That's not what I was talking about. What I was saying was that, because Great Knights have WTA, and can use that to weaken effective weapons(since the weapon mt itself is what is multiplied, and WTA effects the weapon Mt), that WTA, combined with the Great Knight having good def as well as the scarcity of effective weapons to begin with, that Great Knights having dual weaknesses doesn't really matter much in practice. That point had nothing to do with general at all.

Although Great Knights being axe specialists seems like a misnomer, the only FE continuity where this is true is Jugdral, in 8/13/14, Great Knight always have access to WTA, and while Duessel is shown to be an axe main, Frederick and Gunter are not.

[Shadow Mir]

8 minutes ago, Emperor Hardin said:

In the GBA games, Generals wield Swords, Axes, and Lances too.

Wasn't that only in Sacred Stones? The other GBA games only had them use Lances and Axes.

2 hours ago, Ether said:

Armour Knights, easily. Overkill defenses in exchange for piss poor offense is already a losing combination, and it doesn't even matter because after a few turns, your knight is a whole turn of movement behind your infantry, let alone cavalry or flying units. Easily the worst class for most of the series.

Seeing comments like this makes me wonder, am I the only one who sees Fighters (and other infantry axe users) in a worse position class wise than Knights (and Archers, since they're the other class that lots of people complain about)?

Edited September 18, 2017 by Levant Mir Celestia

[Emperor Hardin]

7 minutes ago, Ether said:

Yes, I know that GBA generals use all three. That's not what I was talking about. What I was saying was that, because Great Knights have WTA, and can use that to weaken effective weapons(since the weapon mt itself is what is multiplied, and WTA effects the weapon Mt), that WTA, combined with the Great Knight having good def as well as the scarcity of effective weapons to begin with, that Great Knights having dual weaknesses doesn't really matter much in practice. That point had nothing to do with general at all.

Although Great Knights being axe specialists seems like a misnomer, the only FE continuity where this is true is Jugdral, in 8/13/14, Great Knight always have access to WTA, and while Duessel is shown to be an axe main, Frederick and Gunter are not.

Few enemies use effective weaponry anyhow.

Nope, it is also true in Tellus, though the localizers misnamed it Axe Paladin. Great in Japan's Fire Emblem game means specializes in Axes. Hence Hector is the only Great Lord and Axe General is Great General in Japan.

Its also clear that Sacred Stones only gave them swords because they promoted from the GBA Cavalier which had swords.

5 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Wasn't that only in Sacred Stones? The other GBA games only had them use Lances and Axes.

Yes, though that was the only GBA game with Great Knights so they carefully balanced them out.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Emperor Hardin

[Ether]

1 minute ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Wasn't that only in Sacred Stones? The other GBA games only had them use Lances and Axes.

Seeing comments like this makes me wonder, am I the only one who sees Fighters (and other infantry axe users) in a worse position class wise than Knights?

I think that fighter characters tend to be poor, but fighter as a class isn't as bad as knight as a class, so I prefer fighters to knights. We have a decent few examples of good, or at least plenty usable fighters, like FE9 Boyd, Nolan, Geitz(starts as a warrior, but all fighters become warriors in 7, so there's no real reason to make a distinction) and Barst. Even if a lot of them are bad, that doesn't make the class itself inherently bad, which I feel is the case with Knights. Admittedly, I also like fighters in Fates because small crit rates aren't as much of a be all end all for me as they are for you, but that's just a difference in playstyle. 

Just now, Emperor Hardin said:

Few enemies use effective weaponry anyhow.

Nope, it is also true in Tellus, though the localizers misnamed it Axe Paladin. Great in Japan's Fire Emblem game means specializes in Axes. Hence Hector is the only Great Lord and Axe General is Great General in Japan.

I was going with the translated names as I know them, if they intended Gold Knight to be Great Knight, that still only evens out the representation though, since 8/13/14 still say otherwise. Also, Ephraim and Eirika both promote to Great Lord. Whether they're intended to main axes or not doesn't particularly matter though, since I was talking about the incarnation of the class that has had full Weapon triangle access. Differences in names from localization doesn't really seem relevant.

[Emperor Hardin]

3 minutes ago, Ether said:

I was going with the translated names as I know them, if they intended Gold Knight to be Great Knight, that still only evens out the representation though, since 8/13/14 still say otherwise. Also, Ephraim and Eirika both promote to Great Lord. Whether they're intended to main axes or not doesn't particularly matter though, since I was talking about the incarnation of the class that has had full Weapon triangle access. Differences in names from localization doesn't really seem relevant.

Gold Knight was only Gold Knight everywhere, never Great Knight.

By the point Awakening came out, it was only FE8 that did that and FE8 took pains to ensure Generals would not be overshadowed, something FE13 threw away along with plot.

Ephraim and Erika promote to Master Lord in Japan.

Point being Great Knights having full weapon triangle when Generals do not is clearly a stupid idea Awakening shouldn't have done.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Emperor Hardin

[Ether]

Just now, Emperor Hardin said:

Gold Knight was only Gold Knight everywhere, never Great Knight.

By the point Awakening came out, it was only FE8 that did that and FE8 took pains to ensure Generals would not be overshadowed, something FE13 threw away along with plot.

Ephraim and Erika promote to Master Lord in Japan.

Point being Great Knights having full weapon triangle is clearly bullcrap.

I'm not particularly concerned with what the class is called in Japan to be honest, and I assume from the first point you meant that Axe Paladin was originally Great Paladin... which is fine, but again, isn't particularly relevant, really. Whether Great Knights should or shouldn't have WTA, or whether armoured horse units with WTA should be called something other than Great Knight isn't really as important as the fact that, atleast in the localized games, every instance of Great Knight does have this trait. It might be imbalanced, but FE has never been balanced, and even with full WTC, Great Knights aren't particularly overpowered. Making GKs worse wouldn't make General a better class, it would only hurt Knights by removing their better promotion option... and Knights don't need any more disadvantages. 

[Emperor Hardin]

Just now, Ether said:

I'm not particularly concerned with what the class is called in Japan to be honest, and I assume from the first point you meant that Axe Paladin was originally Great Paladin... which is fine, but again, isn't particularly relevant, really. Whether Great Knights should or shouldn't have WTA, or whether armoured horse units with WTA should be called something other than Great Knight isn't really as important as the fact that, atleast in the localized games, every instance of Great Knight does have this trait. It might be imbalanced, but FE has never been balanced, and even with full WTC, Great Knights aren't particularly overpowered. Making GKs worse wouldn't make General a better class, it would only hurt Knights by removing their better promotion option... and Knights don't need any more disadvantages. 

Why should Generals not have swords and Awakening favored the skills of Cavalier meaning Knights are still going to stink if they promoted to Great Knight.

[Ether]

Just now, Emperor Hardin said:

Why should Generals not have swords and Awakening favored the skills of Cavalier meaning Knights are still going to stink if they promoted to Great Knight.

I never said Generals shouldn't have swords? I said that removing weapons from Great Knight wouldn't make General a better class. As for the second point, a Cavalier is likely going to go Paladin than Great Knight anyway, but the point was that making Great Knight weaker doesn't help Knights because it makes the better of their promotion options worse than it is already. How good Cavaliers are or aren't as a Great Knight compared to Knights doesn't matter here.

[Emperor Hardin]

2 minutes ago, Ether said:

I never said Generals shouldn't have swords? I said that removing weapons from Great Knight wouldn't make General a better class. As for the second point, a Cavalier is likely going to go Paladin than Great Knight anyway, but the point was that making Great Knight weaker doesn't help Knights because it makes the better of their promotion options worse than it is already. How good Cavaliers are or aren't as a Great Knight compared to Knights doesn't matter here.

Cavaliers shouldn't have two weapons to begin with. Tellius had the right idea.

Cavaliers should be Lance only, then promote to the Lance/Sword Paladin or the Lance/Axe Great Knight.

The point being Generals had no advantages and further crippling the class for the sake of Great Knights was dumb.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Emperor Hardin

[Ether]

Just now, Emperor Hardin said:

Cavaliers shouldn't have two weapons to begin with. Tellius had the right idea.

Cavaliers should be Lance only, then promote to the Lance/Sword Paladin or the Lance/Axe Great Knight.

The point being Generals had no advantages and further crippling the class for the sake of Great Knights was dumb.

That's fine, Cavaliers would still be better than Knights, but I suppose it would help in some regard. The only way to make Knights better than they are is to either remove their movement penalty compared to infantry, make their overkill defenses actually matter, give them better offensive presence, or all of the above. Even if you did all of that, they would still be worse than Cavaliers, movement flexibility is just too important in Fire Emblem to ever make them truly on par.

Which is fine, FE is a single player game, and as long as the characters are usable, which they usually are, balance doesn't really matter. If Wendy and Sophia can clear the game, it doesn't matter if they're the worst units, you can use them if you want to put in the effort.

[Emperor Hardin]

Just now, Ether said:

That's fine, Cavaliers would still be better than Knights, but I suppose it would help in some regard. The only way to make Knights better than they are is to either remove their movement penalty compared to infantry, make their overkill defenses actually matter, give them better offensive presence, or all of the above. Even if you did all of that, they would still be worse than Cavaliers, movement flexibility is just too important in Fire Emblem to ever make them truly on par.

Which is fine, FE is a single player game, and as long as the characters are usable, which they usually are, balance doesn't really matter. If Wendy and Sophia can clear the game, it doesn't matter if they're the worst units, you can use them if you want to put in the effort.

I have a list of ideas to help the class, but right now one I'll mention is similar to RD. Just as how Radiant Dawn Generals are one of the few tier 2 classes to get 2 weapons, give Knights Lances+Axes, then learning Swords after promotion to General.

Though Awakening had mutliplayer elements, thus leading to everyone having the same spot pass team.

[Ether]

Just now, Emperor Hardin said:

I have a list of ideas to help the class, but right now one I'll mention is similar to RD. Just as how Radiant Dawn Generals are one of the few tier 2 classes to get 2 weapons, give Knights Lances+Axes, then learning Swords after promotion to General.

Though Awakening had mutliplayer elements, thus leading to everyone having the same spot pass team.

Weapon triangle control makes Knights better at tanking, but they don't really need to be better at tanking. The class suffers because in general, Fire Emblem doesn't require tanks on the level of a Knight, and it would be bad if it did, because that stifles the ability to players to opt not to use a Knight. It would improve their offense a bit which helps, but the movement penalty is the most important factor. As long as that is around, Knights will never be a premier class.

As for spotpass teams, it's a small extra bit on top of the meat of the game. It exists, but I wouldn't put much stock in it, especially since AI can usually be exploited. I don't think that FE is a series that would benefit from multiplayer anyway, but that's another can of worms.

[Emperor Hardin]

2 minutes ago, Ether said:

Weapon triangle control makes Knights better at tanking, but they don't really need to be better at tanking. The class suffers because in general, Fire Emblem doesn't require tanks on the level of a Knight, and it would be bad if it did, because that stifles the ability to players to opt not to use a Knight. It would improve their offense a bit which helps, but the movement penalty is the most important factor. As long as that is around, Knights will never be a premier class.

As for spotpass teams, it's a small extra bit on top of the meat of the game. It exists, but I wouldn't put much stock in it, especially since AI can usually be exploited. I don't think that FE is a series that would benefit from multiplayer anyway, but that's another can of worms.

Believe me thats not the sole idea I have, there's a big list of things.

Vestaria Saga actually did an interesting idea by having a Knight who improved the defense and resistance of adjacent units.

They need to bring back Advance Wars then.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Emperor Hardin

[Ether]

Just now, Emperor Hardin said:

Believe me thats not the sole idea I have, there's a big list of things.

Vestaria Saga actually did an interesting idea by having a Knight who improved the defense and resistance of adjacent units.

Really the biggest thing to make Knights better is to be a person who enjoys Knights. If you prefer to play slow and turtle, Knights are great for you. They don't need to be good for anyone else, really. I've not much exposure to Vestaria, was planning to look at it when/if that planned localization comes through, though that's a neat concept. It still suffers from the problem that Knights still(presumably) fall behind the rest of your army, and thus past the initial stages of a map, are unlikely to be adjacent to your other units unless you play more slowly to accommodate them. Still, it's something extra, it certainly doesn't hurt them to have that.

[Emperor Hardin]

Just now, Ether said:

Really the biggest thing to make Knights better is to be a person who enjoys Knights. If you prefer to play slow and turtle, Knights are great for you. They don't need to be good for anyone else, really. I've not much exposure to Vestaria, was planning to look at it when/if that planned localization comes through, though that's a neat concept. It still suffers from the problem that Knights still(presumably) fall behind the rest of your army, and thus past the initial stages of a map, are unlikely to be adjacent to your other units unless you play more slowly to accommodate them. Still, it's something extra, it certainly doesn't hurt them to have that.

Even people who enjoy Knights tend to be annoyed by their constant nerfs.

The problem is whenever the class gets a buff like movement growth, dual weapons, great resistance, or Wary fighter, it gets taken away the next game.

[Ether]

1 minute ago, Emperor Hardin said:

Even people who enjoy Knights tend to be annoyed by their constant nerfs.

The problem is whenever the class gets a buff like movement growth, dual weapons, great resistance, or Wary fighter, it gets taken away the next game.

That's fair enough. Though please, no more Wary Fighter. That skill is super annoying on enemy Generals while making your own Knights... marginally better at best.

[Emperor Hardin]

4 minutes ago, Ether said:

That's fair enough. Though please, no more Wary Fighter. That skill is super annoying on enemy Generals while making your own Knights... marginally better at best.

Problem is the player's main knight is Effie, whose speed is absurdly good. Benoit gets helped by the skill, but he's much less viable on revelations.

As an Armor fan, its annoying that SoV made Barons/Generals even worse then in the original, giving them no advantages, while taking away the few they had.

Oh and terrain restrictions need to die permanently.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Emperor Hardin

[Interdimensional Observer]

6 minutes ago, Emperor Hardin said:

They need to bring back Advance Wars then.

Agreed. And unlike FE, there is hardly any RNG involved in AW unless you're talking Flak/Jugger/Nell, which makes it fairer to both players.

Though I'm interested- how did TearRing Saga handle multiplayer?

 

I'll buy into giving Generals full WTC control and taking it from Great Knights.

1 minute ago, Ether said:

Though please, no more Wary Fighter. That skill is super annoying on enemy Generals while making your own Knights... marginally better at best.

Shouldn't enemy generals be a tough nut to crack? And if you're playing Conquest on Hard or Lunatic, the game should be hard. 

And its more than marginally better- it keeps them from being nearly ORKOed by magic, and helps them survive even the strongest of physical enemies. If Generals had Wary Fighter in SD, maybe they'd actually be useful on Merciless outside of Wolf and Sedgar.