Jump to content

Should "Triangle" Weapon Types Be the Same Weight?


Should Weapon Types Be the Same Weight?  

16 members have voted

  1. 1. Should they?

    • Yes
      2
    • No
      14


Recommended Posts

I'm doing some stat rebalancing for my Fire Emblem project and this question popped into my head.

Basically, Swords, Lances, and Axes are already distinguished from one another decently by their Might and Hit.  Can't we just make things simpler and keep them the same weight as well?

Edited by Von Ithipathachai
Phrased the question more clearly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, here is the thing; I don't think so.

Now I may be looking at this in a different manner entirely. Despite what they are stat wise, you have to consider something else. Their rank, and thus, the material they are made out of,

Lance are slender, with a pointed tip, thus they might be lighter. Axes have a big blade and small handle, the material needed for that may be heavier. Sword can be balance, but can give and take depending on the sword.

Over all, at the very least, you should categorize the weapons by type, and then basically do a Heroes stat way. Where Axes will have more Weight, Lance being the lightest, and sword being a nice in between. 

I had originally thought of this from a material standpoint rather then gameplay, so feel free to ignore my vote and answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to consider that weapon weight is a distinguishing factor too.

Consider a cavalier who doubles with a sword but not a lance. Now you have a much more interesting player decision than "which one hits harder?"

Edited by YouSquiddinMe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, YouSquiddinMe said:

Consider a cavalier who doubles with a sword but not a lance. Now you have a much more interesting player decision than "which one hits harder?"

Would you believe me if I told you this has never crossed my mind once?

I think I may be playing a little too much Heroes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eclipse said:

Yep.  Unless you want to throw realism out the window (not that FE was realistic to begin with, but still).

Uh, IRL, even most lightweight utility axes are about twice as heavy as a sword. A fire axe, which is supposed to be used quickly and easily in emergencies, is 6-7lbs.

Battle-ready swords usually don't go over 3lbs. A broadsword, which is a heavier, more versatile sword, is about 3lbs. Heavy, 2 handed swords like claymores are about 6lbs, which is still on the lighter side as far as axes go.

Lances/spears have the most varied weight, with javelins being incredibly lightweight by design, while something like a pike can be upwards of 10lbs. So averaging them out towards the middle works fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Slumber said:

Uh, IRL, even most lightweight utility axes are about twice as heavy as a sword. A fire axe, which is supposed to be used quickly and easily in emergencies, is 6-7lbs.

Battle-ready swords usually don't go over 3lbs. A broadsword, which is a heavier, more versatile sword, is about 3lbs. Heavy, 2 handed swords like claymores are about 6lbs, which is still on the lighter side as far as axes go.

Lances/spears have the most varied weight, with javelins being incredibly lightweight by design, while something like a pike can be upwards of 10lbs. So averaging them out towards the middle works fine.

Honestly?  I've never tried to hack someone to death with an axe, so I'm not sure what kind of axe would be suited for battle.  For swords/lances, it really depends on what it's based on.  Regardless, weapons that are 2-3 times heavier than units is a no-go (per GBA logic).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, eclipse said:

Honestly?  I've never tried to hack someone to death with an axe, so I'm not sure what kind of axe would be suited for battle.  For swords/lances, it really depends on what it's based on.  Regardless, weapons that are 2-3 times heavier than units is a no-go (per GBA logic).

I agree that no unit should use a weapon that's, on paper, nearly twice their size. 

But the only cases I can think of where this was the case was Nino, Florina, and then Guy and Lyn with Blades. Amelia in SS had some con problems, and I think Ross could hold on to some heavy axes with middling con. There are cases in FE6, but weapon balance in that game was just awful across the board and it's almost not even worth going over. 

But on the whole it almost never was a problem. Honestly con has only ever been a problem was with FE4 and the Tellius games with magic. The mages didn't have different enough personal stats to make up for the massive differences in tome stats. 

I've always liked con/weight, as it did a lot to actually making weapons feel different. There could be better balancing, but nixing it all together seems like not the best idea. 

Edited by Slumber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Slumber said:

I agree that no unit should use a weapon that's, on paper, nearly twice their size. 

But the only cases I can think of where this was the case was Nino, Florina, and then Guy and Lyn with Blades. Amelia in SS had some con problems, and I think Ross could hold on to some heavy axes with middling con. There are cases in FE6, but weapon balance in that game was just awful across the board and it's almost not even worth going over. 

But on the whole it almost never was a problem. Honestly con has only ever been a problem was with FE4 and the Tellius games with magic. The mages didn't have different enough personal stats to make up for the massive differences in tome stats. 

Sol Katti.  WHY.  It's double Lyn's weight and then some.

The lightest axe unit in FE7 is Isadora.  The heaviest axe that she can theoretically wield?  Basilikos, which is more than triple her weight.

I'd rather have a static penalty to speed, a la Steel weapons in Fates.  At least it would make more sense than tomes that are heavier than axes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Slumber said:

I agree that no unit should use a weapon that's, on paper, nearly twice their size. 

But the only cases I can think of where this was the case was Nino, Florina, and then Guy and Lyn with Blades. Amelia in SS had some con problems, and I think Ross could hold on to some heavy axes with middling con. There are cases in FE6, but weapon balance in that game was just awful across the board and it's almost not even worth going over. 

But on the whole it almost never was a problem. Honestly con has only ever been a problem was with FE4 and the Tellius games with magic. The mages didn't have different enough personal stats to make up for the massive differences in tome stats. 

I've always liked con/weight, as it did a lot to actually making weapons feel different. There could be better balancing, but nixing it all together seems like not the best idea. 

Only Nino, Florina, Guy and Lyn??? Really??? Try damn near every female unit in GBA. Amelia is one of the few exceptions.

Edited by Levant Mir Celestia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, they should be the same weight because otherwise axes get shit on by being extremely heavy on top of a horrible hit rate for like 1mt extra over lances. And realism is a poor excuse because the Iron variants of weapons are lighter and more durable than the Steel variants of weapons, even though irl Steel is more durable and lighter than Iron. Realism was thrown out the window since the beginning.

I would probably say the same thing about Dark magic but at least it usually has effects like hp recovery (Nosferatu) or ignoring res (Luna) to make up for their shortcomings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NegativeExponents- said:

Yes, they should be the same weight because otherwise axes get shit on by being extremely heavy on top of a horrible hit rate for like 1mt extra over lances. And realism is a poor excuse because the Iron variants of weapons are lighter and more durable than the Steel variants of weapons, even though irl Steel is more durable and lighter than Iron. Realism was thrown out the window since the beginning.

I would probably say the same thing about Dark magic but at least it usually has effects like hp recovery (Nosferatu) or ignoring res (Luna) to make up for their shortcomings.

I did ask this question with Axes in mind.

But I'll admit that YouSquiddinMe brings up a good point about making every Triangle weapon type weigh the same taking away some strategic depth of choosing what weapon you should attack with.

So what I would do is give the weapon types smaller weight differences.  Maybe making Swords heavier or Axes lighter in the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving them different weights is fine, as the weight buffer usually varies between classes to fit the weapon they wield, such as Fighters having more Con than Myrmidons. If you don't want to shaft females or specific classes, then assign a uniform Con stat to every representative of the class and don't under-Con any class type (GBA Pegasus Knights).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Von Ithipathachai said:

I did ask this question with Axes in mind.

But I'll admit that YouSquiddinMe brings up a good point about making every Triangle weapon type weigh the same taking away some strategic depth of choosing what weapon you should attack with.

So what I would do is give the weapon types smaller weight differences.  Maybe making Swords heavier or Axes lighter in the process.

It brings up less than you think. In the GBA Fire Emblem games, female and "use axe" was something you pretty much never did. Axes have such stupid amounts of weight that even when you can use them, you're pretty much only using the lightest of axes. The only reason for a female to use an axe really (in the con ones where strength doesn't equal con) is because she can't use javelins. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Augestein said:

It brings up less than you think. In the GBA Fire Emblem games, female and "use axe" was something you pretty much never did. Axes have such stupid amounts of weight that even when you can use them, you're pretty much only using the lightest of axes. The only reason for a female to use an axe really (in the con ones where strength doesn't equal con) is because she can't use javelins. 

 

Literally the only female in the GBA games who can do this is Echidna, who actually has the same con as one of her male counterparts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Von Ithipathachai said:

I did ask this question with Axes in mind.

But I'll admit that YouSquiddinMe brings up a good point about making every Triangle weapon type weigh the same taking away some strategic depth of choosing what weapon you should attack with.

So what I would do is give the weapon types smaller weight differences.  Maybe making Swords heavier or Axes lighter in the process.

I see your point and I do agree that having them all the same weight would be boring but strategically there’s almost never a reason to use a heavier weapon that could cost you a follow up attack and lower your avoid due to speed loss compared to using a lighter weapon without all the penalties.

But I guess that’s more of an issue with balancing rather than the actual con and weight system. In that case I change my vote. There should be differences, just better implemented than before.

2 hours ago, Slumber said:

Literally the only female in the GBA games who can do this is Echidna, who actually has the same con as one of her male counterparts. 

G̶r̶e̶a̶t̶ ̶K̶n̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ ̶A̶m̶e̶l̶i̶a̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶l̶i̶k̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶s̶a̶y̶ ̶h̶i̶

Edit: Never mind I forgot Great Knights could use lances

Edited by NegativeExponents-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Slumber said:

Literally the only female in the GBA games who can do this is Echidna, who actually has the same con as one of her male counterparts. 

Yep, and that's the issue with the weight system numbers in a nutshell. To be honest, it wouldn't have been so bad if they used some sort of weapon rank and skill requirements to determine if a person was also capable of suing them, or if a character could choose to wield them 2-handed versus one handed for less of a penalty to using the weapon, but in the end of the day, you just end up with a system that often times just punished certain units for existing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Augestein said:

Yep, and that's the issue with the weight system numbers in a nutshell. To be honest, it wouldn't have been so bad if they used some sort of weapon rank and skill requirements to determine if a person was also capable of suing them, or if a character could choose to wield them 2-handed versus one handed for less of a penalty to using the weapon, but in the end of the day, you just end up with a system that often times just punished certain units for existing. 

I'm not seeing the correlation.

From "The only reason for females to use axes is if they can't use javelins" to "Echidna's the only person this applies to, and she's no worse than male counterparts in this regard", I'm not sure how the connection is "These units are punished for existing".

Don't use axes on these characters. It's why con and weapon weight are a thing. Could there be some beefier females more along the lines of Echidna, or a bit more balance to make the penalty less harsh to smaller con units? Sure. But I'm not connecting the dots you're putting down.

I do agree that unit weapon ranks should come into play more. I've argued since I started posting here that weapon proficiency mitigating speed penalties from weapon weight would be a nice way to handle this.

But again, the thing you're saying "punishes units for existing" is the entire reason con and weight exists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Slumber said:

I'm not seeing the correlation.

From "The only reason for females to use axes is if they can't use javelins" to "Echidna's the only person this applies to, and she's no worse than male counterparts in this regard", I'm not sure how the connection is "These units are punished for existing".

Don't use axes on these characters. It's why con and weapon weight are a thing. Could there be some beefier females more along the lines of Echidna, or a bit more balance to make the penalty less harsh to smaller con units? Sure. But I'm not connecting the dots you're putting down.

I do agree that unit weapon ranks should come into play more. I've argued since I started posting here that weapon proficiency mitigating speed penalties from weapon weight would be a nice way to handle this.

But again, the thing you're saying "punishes units for existing" is the entire reason con and weight exists.

"Literally the only female that can use axes is Echidna who has male con." So yeah, it's exactly the problem in a nutshell. Basically the only one that can use it is an exception rather than the norm. 

And that's the issue. There's no strategy or thinking involved when "this person is so bad with this weapon that it'll never be used." It's why dark magic was generally considered trash. Too heavy, too inaccurate, and when it could be good, like Nosferatu, it weighs you down so much that it's generally not worth it. Weight and con is a bad system. Weapon weight in and of itself isn't terrible ie, Gaiden saying a steel lance weighs EVERYONE down the same amount.  Because with con, it becomes a threshold thing. Low con units are stuck using inferior weapons to make up for their lack of con. It lowers their evade, it lowers their attacking potential, and rarely does it pose anything interesting. Fates/Gaiden had the idea of weapon penalties right. Con and weight did not. And heck, Strength = Con is a system that takes a dump on mages overall.

Yeah.

Because it is. Females that aren't mounted units have *zero* bonus for having low con. They can't pick people up. Sure, they can be picked up easier, but that doesn't excuse having -2 or 3+ con. Let's use an example. A GBA Pally versus a GBA hero. Pallies generally have better con than heroes. So naturally, the hero can't ever use a weapon better than the paladin. The hero's boon over a paladin is that it isn't weak to horseslaying weapons. That's hardly good balance. And females versus males are pretty much the same thing. Under no circumstance do you want a female unit in the GBA Fire Emblem under normal circumstances.  Let's use an example: Heath and Florina. Heath has 9 Con. Not great, but not terrible. His aid is... 16. Let's use Florina, her Con is 4. Which is garbage. Her aid? 16. So even in practice, it's not that great. A Florina that uses a Javelin loses 7 AS. A Heath that uses a Javelin loses 2. Even with Florina's level lead, speed growth lead, and base speed lead, a level 16 Florina throws a Javelin with about the same level of competence as a a level 7 Heath. She's slightly faster, but in order to match the strength, she needs to be around 16. That's nuts. Even worse? That's normal mode Heath. Not hard mode where he has 13 strength and 9 speed. This isn't even a "male vs female" discussion, but why Con wasn't that great of a system.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...