Just a grumbling female player...

[Ice Dragon]

40 minutes ago, Cute Chao said:

See, I can get over the lack of chest armour for that reason (though a stray arrow could prove deadly, like with Cherche's awful missing back armour,, or a thrust of a lance if she chooses to attack physically and not magically), but the lack of lower armour is what really gets me. She's wearing some kind of thong armour that just looks... uncomfortable. 

You aren't hitting the person sitting on the back of the dragon ever with a melee weapon anywhere other than the legs. There's simply no way to get close enough with a dragon in between you and the rider.

Honestly, I'm surprised dragon knights are armored at all other than as insurance for if you get shot down and need to continue combat on foot.

 

47 minutes ago, Cute Chao said:

I'm sure one of the male armours also mentioned that they were hot. Maybe they should take tips from Effie xD 

But, again... just stop removing armour from the female armour wearing units, and I'll be happy. I can put up with any mage or dancers outfits if they could just do that >.< 

Actually, if you compare Effie with, say, Draug, Effie is actually more covered. She's only vulnerable from the front at the head and less than four inches square at the top of each thigh.

Draug is vulnerable from the front at his head, under his arms, at the sides of his stomach, and almost the entire front of his thighs. Pants aren't particularly great at stopping swords or spears or arrows.

[Dark Holy Elf]

Honestly if they were being remotely realistic, fliers wouldn't wear any armour at all. Not only is it mostly superfluous when you spend most of your time in the sky, but every added bit of weight reduces the mobility of your mount. Of course, by the same token, fliers should be almost entirely small people, which obviously they aren't in FE (Camilla and Vaida might be the biggest women in the series; Michalis, Haar, Glen, and Cormag look like pretty big men). Given this, we really should just critique FE armour for style rather than function. (And I side with those who feel the recent games have come up lacking by that metric.)

7 hours ago, Johann said:

Here's an in-depth 5 piece article on detailing the rise of otaku subculture and how it's played out in mass markets (starts a little slow so if you wanna get to the meat, jump to part 3). The gist of it is that otaku spending habits are consistent, even in times of overall economic decline, making sales of their desired products rather stable. However, due to the designs of these products being catered for a niche group (which the majority has little to no taste for), there isn't much room for growth, if any, including exports into other cultures.

An interesting read; thanks for linking it. For what it's worth, though, I do think Fire Emblem (FEH included) has managed to have a wide enough array of designs to appeal beyond just a niche group.

[Water Mage]

2 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

You aren't hitting the person sitting on the back of the dragon ever with a melee weapon anywhere other than the legs. There's simply no way to get close enough with a dragon in between you and the rider.

Honestly, I'm surprised dragon knights are armored at all other than as insurance for if you get shot down and need to continue combat on foot.

 

Actually, if you compare Effie with, say, Draug, Effie is actually more covered. She's only vulnerable from the front at the head and less than four inches square at the top of each thigh.

Draug is vulnerable from the front at his head, under his arms, at the sides of his stomach, and almost the entire front of his thighs. Pants aren't particularly great at stopping swords or spears or arrows.

Yeah, I never understood why Wyvern Riders are always portrayed heavy armor. Michalis, Cormag and Beruka seem to have the right idea though.

And speaking of Draug, doesn’t his armor seem more like a Cavalier’s armor rather than a Knight’s?

Quote

Honestly if they were being remotely realistic, fliers wouldn't wear any armour at all. Not only is it mostly superfluous when you spend most of your time in the sky, but every added bit of weight reduces the mobility of your mount. Of course, by the same token, fliers should be almost entirely small people, which obviously they aren't in FE (Camilla and Vaida might be the biggest women in the series; Michalis, Haar, Glen, and Cormag look like pretty big men). Given this, we really should just critique FE armour for style rather than function. (And I side with those who feel the recent games have come up lacking by that metric.)

To be fair, Wyverns seem to be strong enough to carry large people without losing much speed, and Cormag and Glen do seem to wear light armor(for Wyvern Rider standards) perhaps to make up for their large size.

Edited February 3, 2018 by Water Mage

[Rezanator]

3 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

You aren't hitting the person sitting on the back of the dragon ever with a melee weapon anywhere other than the legs. There's simply no way to get close enough with a dragon in between you and the rider.

Longer spears?

2 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

Honestly, I'm surprised dragon knights are armored at all other than as insurance for if you get shot down and need to continue combat on foot.

Actually, if you compare Effie with, say, Draug, Effie is actually more covered. She's only vulnerable from the front at the head and less than four inches square at the top of each thigh.

You have to run a cost and benefits of armor on a mount an rider. You can compare dragons to horses; expensive, powerful, mobile. Like horses, dragons are expensive to train (no animal goes willingly into pointy sticks), maintain feed, and to reproduce. If the dragon can support a rider and has strength to spare for some armor and the money is available, then it it makes sense to protect both of them. If your dragon dies, well time to find an expensive replacement. If your rider dies, time to train and arm an expensive replacements. Knights were never cheap.

3 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

Draug is vulnerable from the front at his head, under his arms, at the sides of his stomach, and almost the entire front of his thighs. Pants aren't particularly great at stopping swords or spears or arrows

8 minutes ago, Water Mage said:

And speaking of Draug, doesn’t his armor seem more like a Cavalier’s armor rather than a Knight’s?

The shield helps with that. Pants are great, they protect us from small accidental cuts, bugs bites, and keep us warm.

20 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

Honestly if they were being remotely realistic, fliers wouldn't wear any armour at all. Not only is it mostly superfluous when you spend most of your time in the sky, but every added bit of weight reduces the mobility of your mount. Of course, by the same token, fliers should be almost entirely small people, which obviously they aren't in FE (Camilla and Vaida might be the biggest women in the series; Michalis, Haar, Glen, and Cormag look like pretty big men). Given this, we really should just critique FE armour for style rather than function. (And I side with those who feel the recent games have come up lacking by that metric.)

An interesting read; thanks for linking it. For what it's worth, though, I do think Fire Emblem (FEH included) has managed to have a wide enough array of designs to appeal beyond just a niche group.

On the flying part. We have dragons that can fly over mountains and oceans but not walls and boxes. I don't know how high they fly.   Unless the dracoknight is peppering the enemy with range weapons and has not intention of ever engaging in melee until they are very weak, they are going to have to come down and fight. Having less mobility is not a problem if you have the weapons and armor for prolong melee. 

[Dark Holy Elf]

This is a bit off-topic, but it's one of my pet peeves which I have to set the record straight on:

4 minutes ago, Rezanator said:

On the flying part. We have dragons that can fly over mountains and oceans but not walls and boxes. I don't know how high they fly.   Unless the dracoknight is peppering the enemy with range weapons and has not intention of ever engaging in melee until they are very weak, they are going to have to come down and fight. Having less mobility is not a problem if you have the weapons and armor for prolong melee. 

It doesn't matter how high they fly. As long as they are able to maintain elevation in the air (and they clearly are), they must generate lift. The more they weigh, the more lift they must generate. This simple inescapable fact is why everything that flies tries to be as light as possible, whether we're talking about human-made constructs like aeroplanes (made out of extremely light materials) or natural creatures like birds (who are far lighter than they look, and lighter than mammals or reptiles of comparable size).

Adding an extra 20-40 pounds to your flying weight is a huge extra expenditure of energy just to stay in the air (and a worse one when trying to gain altitude, whatever method is used). This in turn would mean your mount would not be able to gain altitude as quickly, nor fly for as long, and would most likely also have more trouble with general manoeuvering (if you've ever watched a bird carrying prey, you'll know it's much less graceful than one that isn't). This all adds up to a very big deal.

 

(But yes, dracoknights and pegaus knights should 100% be peppering their enemies with ranged weaponry. If flying mounts existed, why would flying soldiers ever use anything else? Let the mount concentrate on flying and not absorbing impacts from its rider striking things with melee weapons, all while abusing your range/height advantage over your foes. As an added bonus, bows are even relatively light weapons! It blows my mind that we had to wait until Fates to finally get a bow flier.)

[Rezanator]

9 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

It doesn't matter how high they fly. As long as they are able to maintain elevation in the air (and they clearly are), they must generate lift. The more they weigh, the more lift they must generate. This simple inescapable fact is why everything that flies tries to be as light as possible, whether we're talking about human-made constructs like aeroplanes (made out of extremely light materials) or natural creatures like birds (who are far lighter than they look, and lighter than mammals or reptiles of comparable size).

Adding an extra 20-40 pounds to your flying weight is a huge extra expenditure of energy just to stay in the air (and a worse one when trying to gain altitude, whatever method is used). This in turn would mean your mount would not be able to gain altitude as quickly, nor fly for as long, and would most likely also have more trouble with general manoeuvering (if you've ever watched a bird carrying prey, you'll know it's much less graceful than one that isn't). This all adds up to a very big deal.

 

Can't disagree with physics. If the existing armor is too heavy, then make stronger lighter armor.

On the other hand, in FE you can bring your dragon inside castles and have them fly around at ground level. The whole argument will change if we are using the internal logic of FE or the real world. 

15 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

This is a bit off-topic

At least we are no longer talking about lolicons and the like 

[eclipse]

2 hours ago, Rezanator said:

At least we are no longer talking about lolicons and the like 

This, I can agree with.  Thus, topic stays open, for now.

Man, what were you guys doing while I was gone? ;/

[Ice Dragon]

3 hours ago, Water Mage said:

And speaking of Draug, doesn’t his armor seem more like a Cavalier’s armor rather than a Knight’s?

Mounted knights only ever have hip armor on the sides and never in front. The one in front doesn't work when you're straddling a mount.

 

3 hours ago, Rezanator said:

Longer spears?

Not even Monster Hunter's lances are long enough to target a rider on top of a dragon. And at that point, you'd have significant trouble with point control and leverage. The dragon can just push the tip of the spear a bit and you won't be able to recover from it.

 

3 hours ago, Rezanator said:

On the flying part. We have dragons that can fly over mountains and oceans but not walls and boxes. I don't know how high they fly.   Unless the dracoknight is peppering the enemy with range weapons and has not intention of ever engaging in melee until they are very weak, they are going to have to come down and fight. Having less mobility is not a problem if you have the weapons and armor for prolong melee. 

More reason to armor the dragon and not the human on the dragon.

 

2 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

It doesn't matter how high they fly. As long as they are able to maintain elevation in the air (and they clearly are), they must generate lift. The more they weigh, the more lift they must generate. This simple inescapable fact is why everything that flies tries to be as light as possible, whether we're talking about human-made constructs like aeroplanes (made out of extremely light materials) or natural creatures like birds (who are far lighter than they look, and lighter than mammals or reptiles of comparable size).

Adding an extra 20-40 pounds to your flying weight is a huge extra expenditure of energy just to stay in the air (and a worse one when trying to gain altitude, whatever method is used). This in turn would mean your mount would not be able to gain altitude as quickly, nor fly for as long, and would most likely also have more trouble with general manoeuvering (if you've ever watched a bird carrying prey, you'll know it's much less graceful than one that isn't). This all adds up to a very big deal.

You need to be able to balance flight performance with not dying to sharp things pointed your way.

One would assume based on the fact that dragon knights do wear relatively heavy armor that the dragons are not burdened enough by that weight to noticeably impact their flight performance. On the other hand, the much lighter armor of pegasus knights implies that pegasi have a much lower carrying capacity, which makes sense given their typically smaller size.

 

2 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

(But yes, dracoknights and pegaus knights should 100% be peppering their enemies with ranged weaponry. If flying mounts existed, why would flying soldiers ever use anything else? Let the mount concentrate on flying and not absorbing impacts from its rider striking things with melee weapons, all while abusing your range/height advantage over your foes. As an added bonus, bows are even relatively light weapons! It blows my mind that we had to wait until Fates to finally get a bow flier.)

Trying to hit a target when you are not shooting from a stable position is difficult. Trying to hit a target several hundred feet away like this is even more difficult. There are also beating wings in the way. You also become an easy target for any mage that can see you because there is pretty much zero chance of accidentally hitting your own troops with friendly fire when your target is hovering a few hundred feet over the battlefield.

Also, resupplying your dragon archers with arrows is a shitton harder than resupplying your foot archers.

[Interdimensional Observer]

11 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

or natural creatures like birds (who are far lighter than they look, and lighter than mammals or reptiles of comparable size).

Bird bones are less dense I remember hearing once.

11 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

(But yes, dracoknights and pegaus knights should 100% be peppering their enemies with ranged weaponry. If flying mounts existed, why would flying soldiers ever use anything else? Let the mount concentrate on flying and not absorbing impacts from its rider striking things with melee weapons, all while abusing your range/height advantage over your foes. As an added bonus, bows are even relatively light weapons! It blows my mind that we had to wait until Fates to finally get a bow flier.)

I think there was an FE4 manga or something where the standard technique of Thracian Dracoknights is to rain Javelins on the foes below, which Quan has learned to adapt to (all those horse units are probably an ideal counter- since they can just dash out the way of the falling spears). I'd speculate not having read said source, that once they're out of throwing weapons, the Dracoknights have to divebomb in, exposing themselves to close range counterattacks where Quan scores his kills.

Berwick Saga apparently made it so grounded units' 1 range attacks can't hit fliers unless it's on counterattack against a flier's initiated 1 range attack. Rather realistic, more so than them just dropping down whenever somebody wants to hit them.

The most realistic scenario for me, insofar as flying beasts could be imagined "realistic" would be to pack a few Javelins, a more standard spear for divebombing when you run out, and maybe a small sword or dagger just in case you have to dismount. 

 

8 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

One would assume based on the fact that dragon knights do wear relatively heavy armor that the dragons are not burdened enough by that weight to noticeably impact their flight performance. On the other hand, the much lighter armor of pegasus knights implies that pegasi have a much lower carrying capacity, which makes sense given their typically smaller size.

...Assuming Pegasus don't wear those outfits less for practical and more for stylistic reasons. Although sometimes style just so happens to be a side effect of practicality. Like with professional Beach Volleyball, I heard once that women wear two pieces instead of onesies not because they want to show off their stomachs, but because sand could annoyingly get stuck in one piece much easier. The source was an interview with one of the famed US Olympic players, not that I can find it at the moment.

 

8 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

One would assume based on the fact that dragon knights do wear relatively heavy armor that the dragons are not burdened enough by that weight to noticeably impact their flight performance. On the other hand, the much lighter armor of pegasus knights implies that pegasi have a much lower carrying capacity, which makes sense given their typically smaller size.

RD lists Constitution and Weight for all units. For unmounted units with light armor, like Swordmasters, Con = Wt. For mounted units, Con is comparable to unmounted units- the 12 Con of a Male Dracoknight is only 1 more than a Male Swordmaster's. A Female Halberdier's 7 Con is not the same as their 12 Wt, so the difference between Con and Wt is likely how much more armor they are wearing. And for a mounted unit, it can't be armor that makes for the huge difference between Con and Wt (7 Con for a Pegasus Knight, 23 Wt), so it must be the Wt of the creature they ride. 

With this figured out, the Peg line has a WT of 23-24. The Female Draco line has 36-39, and the Male Draco line 41-44. Deducting 7 Con from the Pegs, 8 from the Fdraco, and 13 from the Mdraco, we get 16-17 Wt for Pegs by themselves, 28-31 for Fdraco, and also 28-31 for Mdraco (indicating the difference in the sexes is just the size of the riders). So at most a Wyvern weights nearly double a Pegasus. This would mean that the beasts must be much much stronger to compensate for themselves. That they would be able to lift a few extra pounds of human baggage seems feasible.

This isn't perfect though, since the Horse class shown in 3-3 has 20 Wt, while a Sword Knight has 10 Con and 34 Wt, a similar disparity is found for all other horse classes. The 4 Wt extra I'd guess would logically be in armor here, since the 3-3 Horses aren't wearing any. Therefore, we should deduct a comparable number from the Wt of Pegs and Wyverns to get their real naked Wt.

No surprise, real Dragons in Tellius weigh much more than Wyverns. Shifted Dheginsea and Red Dragons have 79 Wt, Whites 76. Ashera's Auras have 80 Wt even though they're invisible. The Goddess herself is the heaviest thing in Tellius, at 87. The Spirits she uses as weak minions weigh the least in Tellius, 0 Wt- they truly are immaterial. A Tiger is comparable to Draco (well heavier when you consider no armor), and Lions weigh more as well, even Kurthnaga and Ena do.

Edited February 3, 2018 by Interdimensional Observer

[XRay]

14 hours ago, Rezanator said:

At least we are no longer talking about lolicons and the like 

But that is the most interesting subject.

18 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

Pants aren't particularly great at stopping swords or spears or arrows.

Cloth armor is fine. A gambeson coat/skirt is sufficient for swords, spears, and arrows. Metal armor is totally not required.

13 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

bows are even relatively light weapons

10 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

Trying to hit a target when you are not shooting from a stable position is difficult. Trying to hit a target several hundred feet away like this is even more difficult. There are also beating wings in the way. You also become an easy target for any mage that can see you because there is pretty much zero chance of accidentally hitting your own troops with friendly fire when your target is hovering a few hundred feet over the battlefield.

Maybe if the mount is really big. You also probably do not even need the arrows or arrow heads. Iron or lead marbles, or even pebbles, in a bucket would be much more economical.

If you need to fight other fliers, in my opinion, magic is generally better than physical projectile weapons since magical projectiles are bigger and I assume a tome weighs less than a quiver of arrows, so aiming should be easier and the mount less tired.

If the fliers from Fire Emblem actually fly several hundred feet into the air and not hover above the ground two dozen feet away from archers and mages, fliers would not have problems with them. Massed siege tomes may be a problem, but the only time I recall anyone using massed siege tome this way was during Chapter 21 in Awakening. I think massed Berserk staff would be a problem too, but I do not recall anyone trying that before.

[Dark Holy Elf]

3 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Bird bones are less dense I remember hearing once.

They are indeed. Of course, the key here is that the very reason birds have lighter bones is because they fly. There's obviously a disadvantage to growing lighter bones (they break more easily) so the only reason bird bones are so light is the evolutionary advantage for a flier to have as little weight as possible.

 

12 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

Trying to hit a target when you are not shooting from a stable position is difficult. Trying to hit a target several hundred feet away like this is even more difficult. There are also beating wings in the way. You also become an easy target for any mage that can see you because there is pretty much zero chance of accidentally hitting your own troops with friendly fire when your target is hovering a few hundred feet over the battlefield.

Also, resupplying your dragon archers with arrows is a shitton harder than resupplying your foot archers.

A typical arrow weighs something like 10 to 50 grams. Metal armour weighs around 10 to 30 kilograms. An archer could carry more arrows than he or she could possibly use in a battle without adding as much weight as a single suit of personal armour, never mind what armour on the mount would add.

While shooting a bow from a flying mount does indeed sound difficult, it doesn't sound significantly more difficult than shooting from the back of a moving horse, and the advantages to doing so are tremendous. Meanwhile, I think you're grossly underrating the difficulty of trying to strike someone with a melee weapon from a mount. If it's not very clean, the impact of hitting something with a lance or axe as you fly by them risks an impulse to you and your mount which would take you crashing out of the air. A flying soldier would logically want to avoid any and all possible impacts with ground targets - such a fall to the ground, even from minimal elevation, risks serious injury to both soldier and mount. There's a reason we don't attach battering rams to the bottoms of our fighter planes.

[Ice Dragon]

4 hours ago, XRay said:

Cloth armor is fine. A gambeson coat/skirt is sufficient for swords, spears, and arrows. Metal armor is totally not required.

Draug is not wearing a gambeson under that armor. He's wearing a shirt and pants. The bagginess where it tucks into the boots and the dense creasing at the elbows indicate that they are not padded.

 

4 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

A typical arrow weighs something like 10 to 50 grams. Metal armour weighs around 10 to 30 kilograms. An archer could carry more arrows than he or she could possibly use in a battle without adding as much weight as a single suit of personal armour, never mind what armour on the mount would add.

The problem is not the weight. It's the physical space that the arrows occupy. Fletching prevents arrows from packing tightly.

Arrows are also typically held in quivers only by gravity. Tipping a quiver over results in the arrows falling out.

 

4 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

While shooting a bow from a flying mount does indeed sound difficult, it doesn't sound significantly more difficult than shooting from the back of a moving horse, and the advantages to doing so are tremendous. Meanwhile, I think you're grossly underrating the difficulty of trying to strike someone with a melee weapon from a mount. If it's not very clean, the impact of hitting something with a lance or axe as you fly by them risks an impulse to you and your mount which would take you crashing out of the air. A flying soldier would logically want to avoid any and all possible impacts with ground targets - such a fall to the ground, even from minimal elevation, risks serious injury to both soldier and mount. There's a reason we don't attach battering rams to the bottoms of our fighter planes.

Ranged attacks are best used either when they are capable of hitting a designated target accurately, when they are capable of doing enough damage to a wide area to not care about aiming, or when they can fire enough projectiles to ensure that enough of them hit the target.

A flying archer cannot do any of these three. Accuracy is compromised by distance and being on a moving mount, one that is going to be less steady than a horse. Furthermore, the angles you can fire from are restricted by the existence of beating wings to either side of the mount, unlike when firing from horseback where the only thing high enough to even remotely get in the way is the horse's head. Arrows are usually not designed to deal damage to a wide area, and so they fail to satisfy the second criterion. Finally, unlike foot archers, who can operate while standing nearly elbow to elbow in a tight formation to produce a dense rain of arrows upon the opposing forces, flying archers cannot get close to each other without risking collision with adjacent units, resulting in a much less dense rain.

As for attacking with melee weapons, it can be assumed that the recoil of hitting a target is no worse than when doing so from on horseback. One would assume that flying soldiers would be trained to not run into enemies at speeds high enough to injure themselves.

Your fighter plane analogy doesn't work terribly well because the reason is not the same. Fighter planes have far less maneuverability than one would assume of pegasi and dragons and typically operate at much higher speeds where collision with anything is ill advised.

[Rezanator]

19 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

Not even Monster Hunter's lances are long enough to target a rider on top of a dragon. And at that point, you'd have significant trouble with point control and leverage. The dragon can just push the tip of the spear a bit and you won't be able to recover from it.

 

I think we are mixing up our dragons. I'll leave the monster hunters to take care of the huge dragons. Wyverns look to be about the same size as pegasuses, maybe a far more heavier. If the rider wants to hit the enemy they have to be able to reach them. Otherwise might as well let the wyvern do the fighting and just have a mahout.

 

7 hours ago, XRay said:

But that is the most interesting subject.

Some people revealed to much information about themselves.

[Ice Dragon]

On 2/3/2018 at 9:42 PM, Rezanator said:

I think we are mixing up our dragons. I'll leave the monster hunters to take care of the huge dragons. Wyverns look to be about the same size as pegasuses, maybe a far more heavier. If the rider wants to hit the enemy they have to be able to reach them. Otherwise might as well let the wyvern do the fighting and just have a mahout.

Camilla's dragon in Warriors is noticeably larger than any of the pegasi, and that's not even including the tail, which is a fully functional weapon in its own right.

You completely missed the point with the comparison to lances in Monster Hunter. The point is not what they are used for, but a simple comparison of size. Despite the massive length of Monster Hunter's lances, they still aren't long enough to hit Camilla on top of her dragon when you are standing out of reach of her dragon's teeth. And even if you're out of reach of its teeth, you're still in reach of its tail.

It's a poor decision to target the rider with a melee weapon. It's also a poor decision to target the dragon with a melee weapon, but you have to make do with what you have, and that's the less poor choice.

A dragon knight can pretty much have their arms and legs armored and be wearing nothing else and be sufficiently safe from melee attacks if that's the only concern.

 

The rider is there to hit enemies by flying past them, preferably by dragging the weapon below and to the side of the mount. For gameplay purposes, obviously, they can't force dragon knights to only be able to equip pole arms, but one could assume that realistically, they'd be armed with weapons long enough to actually hit things while mounted.

Note how they finally decided it was a dumb idea to give dragon knights swords in the Tellius games because swords not named Gurgurant are far too short to be effective while mounted on a dragon, and they finally had to make battle animations that were at least realistic enough to be believable due to having 3D graphics with undeformed human proportions.

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

Funny enough the original intent for Dracoknights was more or less to become an assassin

 

Yup for all the shit people say about Beruka making no sense shes the one that is closest to the original design intent of the class

[Ice Dragon]

2 hours ago, JSND Alter Dragon Boner said:

Funny enough the original intent for Dracoknights was more or less to become an assassin

Source? It's kind of hard to sneak a dragon into someone's bedchambers, and shooting from on top of a dragon (1) requires that the dragon not be flying and fucking up your aim and (2) requires a ranged weapon of which most swords and lances are not.

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

1 hour ago, Ice Dragon said:

Source? It's kind of hard to sneak a dragon into someone's bedchambers, and shooting from on top of a dragon (1) requires that the dragon not be flying and fucking up your aim and (2) requires a ranged weapon of which most swords and lances are not.

Dean Eda on Thracia 13 although it was closer to ambush and a nod to canto than assasination. The mentioned fighting style was also basically what Travant did in gen 1

[Charmeleonbrah]

On ‎2‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 7:30 PM, Sunwoo said:

But for some reason (that I'm pretty sure we all know, even if some of us won't admit it), the men are fully and properly armored while the women seem to lack pants. That's not a coincidence.

Do yoga pants count as pants?  If so, I think I've found your solution.

[Tsak]

Yeah heck, a lot of males have been tossed to the wayside in lieu of waifu emblem.
It's kind of sad, but they're just sniping their target audience. Legendary Ike was a pleasant surprise, but yeah silly ass bridal cordelia/brave lyn etc are still gonna be some of the best character for a long time. Hopefully Rath can come out using a Reinfleche or however you say that junk. And maybe Knoll can wield Glephnir too, I doubt it though lol.

EDIT: what the actual crap did i read a few pages back? Maybe i'll just stick to other sections of the forums... my goodness

Edited February 6, 2018 by Tsak

[Florete]

To speak on the topic subject, the problem I have isn't the amount of female characters added and their power. That part I actually like. The problem is...the nature of it all. The brides, the Camillas. The fact that most GHB and TT rewards - units you can't spend money on - are male. The fact that despite the main story party having been majority female since the beginning, and is now 3-1 for women, Alfonse always gets the most story attention, to the point there are parts where other characters talk exclusively to him, ignoring Sharena (and no one ever speaks to poor Anna). It's pretty common in paralogues, too; if there are male and female characters with speaking roles, it's usually the men doing most of it.

It's very clear that male players are considered the primary audience.

 

On 1/28/2018 at 12:56 PM, bbqbert said:

Furthermore, female characters are generally given unique classes and roles that male characters do not get--mounted archer, flying singer, dragon, flying dragon, flying mage, etc.. MANY of these roles canonically are male roles--Shigure would be the ideal flying singer, Reyson a flying singer, Nils or any FE9/10 dragons, Rath the mounted archer, among many others.

Saying these roles are canonically male isn't quite right, though:

• The singers/dancers of the series have mostly been female, and we've had both a male and female canonical flying singer, Reyson and Leanne. Shigure would be an ideal flying singer, but you can't call this a "canonically male" role.
• Dragons are usually female.
• Dragon/wyvern riders have more commonly been female.
• Flying mages in the series have been rare, and the only canonical one is Aversa, a woman. And in that game, Awakening, a flying mage could only be female.

Mounted archer is the only arguable one here, but we only have one of those in the game, and it was a special case at that.

On 1/28/2018 at 12:56 PM, bbqbert said:

Said male-weighted banners were often followed by a new female unit that appeared in a random banner on her own (Rhajat, Ayra, etc.).

Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but the Genealogy banner wasn't even male-weighted. It was Sigurd, Deirdre, and Tailtiu.

[Ice Dragon]

6 minutes ago, Florete said:

Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but the Genealogy banner wasn't even male-weighted. It was Sigurd, Deirdre, and Tailtiu.

@bbqbert Also not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but twice is not "often" and "etc." is not correct to use after an exhaustive list.

Also, we've only had a total of three male-weighted new-character banners (Celica's Army, Children of Fate, and World of Dawn) and only one of them was followed by a new character on a separate banner.

[Water Mage]

55 minutes ago, Florete said:

To speak on the topic subject, the problem I have isn't the amount of female characters added and their power. That part I actually like. The problem is...the nature of it all. The brides, the Camillas. The fact that most GHB and TT rewards - units you can't spend money on - are male. The fact that despite the main story party having been majority female since the beginning, and is now 3-1 for women, Alfonse always gets the most story attention, to the point there are parts where other characters talk exclusively to him, ignoring Sharena (and no one ever speaks to poor Anna). It's pretty common in paralogues, too; if there are male and female characters with speaking roles, it's usually the men doing most of it.

It's very clear that male players are considered the primary audience.

 

Saying these roles are canonically male isn't quite right, though:

• The singers/dancers of the series have mostly been female, and we've had both a male and female canonical flying singer, Reyson and Leanne. Shigure would be an ideal flying singer, but you can't call this a "canonically male" role.
• Dragons are usually female.
• Dragon/wyvern riders have more commonly been female.
• Flying mages in the series have been rare, and the only canonical one is Aversa, a woman. And in that game, Awakening, a flying mage could only be female.

Mounted archer is the only arguable one here, but we only have one of those in the game, and it was a special case at that.

Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but the Genealogy banner wasn't even male-weighted. It was Sigurd, Deirdre, and Tailtiu.

To be fair about most GHB being male, most notable antagonists are male, though I can imagine Ishtar, Selena, Petrine, Brunya. Ena might be a GHB due to being a villain of sorts in PoR, and I get the feeling that Nyna and Guinivere might be GHB as well, since they are sort of special units.

[Florete]

7 minutes ago, Water Mage said:

To be fair about most GHB being male, most notable antagonists are male, though I can imagine Ishtar, Selena, Petrine, Brunya. Ena might be a GHB due to being a villain of sorts in PoR, and I get the feeling that Nyna and Guinivere might be GHB as well, since they are sort of special units.

There's truth to this, but there's no excuse for TT reward units. Hell, of the four Lucinas we have, the one that's a TT reward is the "male" version.

[Ice Dragon]

45 minutes ago, Florete said:

There's truth to this, but there's no excuse for TT reward units. Hell, of the four Lucinas we have, the one that's a TT reward is the "male" version.

On the other hand, of the four Lucinas we have, only two of them are canon, and between the two, there's no good reason to make the standard playable Lucina be a free reward and the NPC Lucina the one in the summoning pool.

Also, there's plenty of excuse for Tempest Trials rewards to be predominantly male. Something has to be predominantly male if we're ever going to get remotely near the entire cast of characters, and where better to put less popular playable characters (who tend to be male) and NPCs (who tend to be male) (besides the 3-star pool)?

Edited February 7, 2018 by Ice Dragon

[Vince777]

1 hour ago, Ice Dragon said:

 

Also, there's plenty of excuse for Tempest Trials rewards to be predominantly male. Something has to be predominantly male if we're ever going to get remotely near the entire cast of characters, and where better to put less popular playable characters (who tend to be male) and NPCs (who tend to be male) (besides the 3-star pool)?

I would agree entirely with this if they weren't actually using popular male characters such as the Black Knight and Joshua, who are banner worthy, as tempest rewards.

Seems like occasions wasted to introduce units that are less known/popular instead. They had the right idea with Tobin, Clive & Arden.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Vince777