Durability. Yes or no?

[DisobeyedCargo]

The latest posts of would you trust any other developer with FE have been focusing on weapon durability, so I thought why not have a discussion about it on its own?

I think a more balanced weight system/a more balanced version of what fates did could outright replace durability, and if it was gone, I wouldn't miss it.

Edited May 22, 2018 by DisobeyedCargo

[Rose482]

I know i'm going to be one of the few people who say this, but i like durability for weapons 

[DisobeyedCargo]

1 minute ago, Rose482 said:

I know i'm going to be one of the few people who say this, but i like durability for weapons 

How come?

[Rose482]

Just now, DisobeyedCargo said:

How come?

I guess i just didn't like how Fates handled it, i know the chances are they would handle it better if they did that again in another FE game.....but really i never hated the fact weapons break with time,  it just really gave a element of having to know when to use to each weapon....and if no weapons ever broke, you can just keep spamming the use of one weapon again and again, and i don't think that something i would enjoy XD 

 

 

[DisobeyedCargo]

2 minutes ago, Rose482 said:

I guess i just didn't like how Fates handled it, i know the chances are they would handle it better if they did that again in another FE game.....but really i never hated the fact weapons break with time,  it just really gave a element of having to know when to use to each weapon....and if no weapons ever broke, you can just keep spamming the use of one weapon again and again, and i don't think that something i would enjoy XD 

 

 

Fair enough I suppose 

[badatfireemblem]

I just feel really satisfied using up weapons tbh. The progression through to higher ranking weapons is nice and not having the earlier weapons breaking just seems kind of weird to me.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

I like modern Fire Emblem games' use of down time where you check on units, look at grinding opportunities, and the shops. But in Fates I rarely bought anything, just replacement staves and class changing seals. Why spend money on a weapon that's been balanced to be as good as the generic iron weapons I've got? I think proper balancing of weapons in a durability-less system is absolutely possible. But once you've done that, it really drops the value in earning money.

Durability has been poorly balanced in previous games. Both in terms of game balance (like Othin's 60 use Pugi axe) or logical errors like how steel weapons supposedly break faster than unrefined iron. But just because a system was bad before doesn't mean it can't be made very good in the future. Bring durability back, and put in reasonably expensive weapon repairs for the benefit of those that use cool personal weapons. And don't have characters auto-discard weapons that have been depleted of durability, since I don't want to have to worry about that as enemies swarm me on enemy phase. I also feel like weapons breaking ought to leave that character defenseless for the remainder of enemy phase. Re-equipping a weapon takes time and in-universe I doubt these soldiers have any idea on which swing their shoddy weapon in their hands will give out on them. 

[Armagon]

While Fates' handling of weapons was eh, one of the reasons why SoV is my favorite FE is because i didn't have to deal with weapon durability. The thing with weapon durability is that it can easily lead into hoarding. It doesn't matter in games that let you freely grind because money is easily obtainable but in games that don't, good weapons have low durability and are expensive to replace. And if it's a Prf or S-rank weapon, then most of the time, once it's gone, it's gone. It's why in Binding Blade, i heavily restrict myself from using the Legendary Weapons pre-Ch.23. And in most games, i just stick to using weaker weapons, only bringing out the Silver weapons when i have to. I don't like that.

[DisobeyedCargo]

5 minutes ago, Armagon said:

While Fates' handling of weapons was eh, one of the reasons why SoV is my favorite FE is because i didn't have to deal with weapon durability. The thing with weapon durability is that it can easily lead into hoarding. It doesn't matter in games that let you freely grind because money is easily obtainable but in games that don't, good weapons have low durability and are expensive to replace. And if it's a Prf or S-rank weapon, then most of the time, once it's gone, it's gone. It's why in Binding Blade, i heavily restrict myself from using the Legendary Weapons pre-Ch.23. And in most games, i just stick to using weaker weapons, only bringing out the Silver weapons when i have to. I don't like that.

That's also something that bother someone me. I often hoard all my good weapons untill I don't need them

 

i will concede that this is partly my fault however due to me holding onto everything I find in RPGs and never using it 

[Shrimpica]

8 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

But once you've done that, it really drops the value in earning money.

does it? In CQ, until late midgame, you have to think where to invent the money, because you need Master Seals and weapons are expensive af. Buying 2 eff. weapon for a chapter can easily break your wallet.

[Hawkwing]

I don't mind durability for the iron->Steel->Silver chain, as well as for throwing weapons (although those seriously need more uses) and killer weapons, but I do want to take a page out of Echoes/Gaidens book and give each character a pitifully weak but still present back-up weapon that has no might. That way, no character is outright defenseless if their weapon breaks (one of my biggest fears in every game with durability, even if it rarely comes up due to foresight), and for very powerful characters you can save on uses of other weapons by having them attack with their strength alone.

I don't want durability for personal weapons or legendary ones, though. Due to being a resourceful person by nature, I'll never use these until the final levels of the game, so I miss out on seeing these awesome tools in action. I'm not asking for a repeat of Fates very questionable attempts at debuffing (granted I haven't played the game(s), but I raise an eyebrow and question the thought process behind certain downsides that weapons have, and how they were supposed to be practical), but I would want a similar system in place. it doesn't have to be complex; Just prevent a weapon with high might from being able to crit, or have a weapon that attacks twice lower the users speed, or have a weapon only be usable on the player/enemy phase, or just have it be a weaker counterpart to their sibling with durability. Have it so legendary weapons have their uses, but aren't a "get out of jail free" card.

[Modamy]

It's been a while since I've played Fates, but a problem that I had with their attempt at getting rid of durability were the debuffs or the fact that my units were constanly getting weaker as I tried to up my damage output. A problem I had with Fates in general was with the ridiculous amount of micromanaging going on when it came to weapons, aoe buff skills, and enemy debuffs just resulting in the game over complicating itself. While durability isn't always well balanced I vastly prefer the simple approach of a stronger weapons with fewer uses that I make use of only when I need it as opposed to the nonsensical amount of calculating that I need to do in Fates just to be certain I'm safe for the enemy phase.

I also just feel like if people are hoarding good weapons for later that's on them not the game. I've learned from playing RPGs for years now that when I hoard I'm probably never going to use it because the time when I "need" it porbably won't ever come so why bother keeping a useless item forever when it could just be useful to me now.

[Fabulously Olivier]

Yes, with two caveats:

1) Prf/legendary weapons should have unlimited uses.

2) 1 use should = 1 fight, not one attack. Running out of durability mid-fight is enfuriating and adds tedius micro-management to equipment.

[thecrimsonflash]

I always prefered weapon durability, I acknowledge that it isn't the best balanced of mechanics in some games, but I really think that it adds more to the global strategy of the game as a whole, it makes the player consider several battles ahead, rather than only consider what is happening now, it's also great for making you really need to make very educated purchases rather than just buy the next upgrade you need to take into account of how long the weapon will last you, I also think it goes nicely with permadeath, everything is finite, people and weapons alike. Sure it is nice to not have to think about these things but I really feel like you lose something, SoV much as I love it had an insufferable inventory system to deal with, and fates really made inventory really boring.

[Etrurian emperor]

I'm fairly indifferent on the subject. I was skeptical when they removed weapon durability in Fates but I can't say I ever noticed the change. After Fates when I returned to POR I also didn't really register the change of having weapon durability back. 

[Von Ithipathachai]

I wouldn't mind weapon durability coming back if it also comes with the option to pay to repair weapons.  Otherwise, I'm kind of indifferent.

As long as it doesn't involve Fates's weird and annoying secondary effect system, I honestly don't care what they do.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Von Ithipathachai

[Slumber]

Yes. 

The games without durability, I haven't enjoyed how weapons were handled, especially Fates. 

I do think that there should be way more options when it comes to repairing weapons, however. Weapons with less than 5 uses left probably take up a lot of inventory space for many players. 

Edited May 22, 2018 by Slumber

[Armagon]

31 minutes ago, Modamy said:

I also just feel like if people are hoarding good weapons for later that's on them not the game. I've learned from playing RPGs for years now that when I hoard I'm probably never going to use it because the time when I "need" it porbably won't ever come so why bother keeping a useless item forever when it could just be useful to me now.

There are valid reasons to why people hoard in FE though, mainly being the weapon cost. Good weapons are expensive and they have low uses so the cost isn't worth it sometimes. Comparing it to RPGs is flawed (though i get where you're coming from) because of the structure. When you buy a weapon in an RPG, it's never gonna break and even when they start getting expensive real fast, you can still grind and make money easily. With FE, when you buy a weapon outside of Fates, it's gonna break, some faster than others. 

[Zanarkin]

either keep it but have an option in the base where you can pay to have them repaired [or do something else], or if you want to get rid of them balance weapons in other ways aside from what fates did. There is little reason why a steel sword should automatically reduce my stats. I get that it might be heavy but this is coming from a game series where one of the main characters easily wields a 2 handed sword with just one hand. Echoes did ok without having dumbass side-effects to the weapons. They should follow that approach more. Don't know how i feel about the weapons skills but that is besides the point.

[Modamy]

2 minutes ago, Armagon said:

There are valid reasons to why people hoard in FE though, mainly being the weapon cost. Good weapons are expensive and they have low uses so the cost isn't worth it sometimes. Comparing it to RPGs is flawed (though i get where you're coming from) because of the structure. When you buy a weapon in an RPG, it's never gonna break and even when they start getting expensive real fast, you can still grind and make money easily. With FE, when you buy a weapon outside of Fates, it's gonna break, some faster than others. 

I didn't mean weapons in other RPGs as much as I meant something like elixirs in Final Fantasy that people constantly refuse to use because there are only like 9 in the whole game and then by the time they've beaten all the super bosses they look in their inventories to see they still have all 9 even though they would have been helpful prior to this. I honestly just prefer using weapons when I need them and working things out later if they break because otherwise I'm just carrying around a silver sword for 15 chapters when they become available in the shop or something.

[Armagon]

3 minutes ago, Modamy said:

I didn't mean weapons in other RPGs as much as I meant something like elixirs in Final Fantasy that people constantly refuse to use because there are only like 9 in the whole game and then by the time they've beaten all the super bosses they look in their inventories to see they still have all 9 even though they would have been helpful prior to this. I honestly just prefer using weapons when I need them and working things out later if they break because otherwise I'm just carrying around a silver sword for 15 chapters when they become available in the shop or something.

It's really just a psychological thing going on. Using that Final Fantasy example, if there are only 9 elixirs in the game, it makes sense why people refuse to use them unless it's absolutely necessary. They don't want to use it up at the wrong time.

Similar deal with FE, especially with Prf and S-rank weapons. Those are weapons that you only get once and once it's gone, it's gone. No one wants to be stuck using weak Iron weapons but all the good weapons are either expensive to replace or there's only one in the entire game. So it leads to people using weaker weapons and only bringing out the big guns when they have to.

Really though, now that i take a good look at it, it's more of the cost of the weapon than the durability itself. As i said before, the cost of good weapons isn't worth it when they break so fast.

[bottlegnomes]

25 minutes ago, Slumber said:

I do think that there should be way more options when it comes to repairing weapons, however. Weapons with less than 5 uses left probably take up a lot of inventory space for many players. 

One of the absolute best things SD and NMotE did was letting you merge weapon uses. I'd love to see that become a staple in all games with durability.

For the vote, I guess I'm in the meh camp. If the alternative is Fates system, absolutely keep durability. That system was a mess that I'd like to see never return. On the other hand, Echoes I was perfectly fine with it. Other elements made you have to consider which weapons to use and with upgrading and whatnot, you still had to manage your inventory for a decent chunk of the game to make sure everyone got a weapon they wanted.

That said, I never really mind it when I go back to games that have it, and of all the complaints I've ever heard from people new to FE, I can't say weapon durability has ever been one. If it does come back though, I'm also an advocate of repairing. It doesn't necessarily have to be exactly how FE4 did it, but I'd like something more than just 3 hammerne uses. Also definitely agree with wanting to have broken weapons not get discarded immediately. Like if I accidentally break my brave axe because one too many enemies was in range, I don't want to be FUBAR because I could only repair it down to when it had 1 use left.

@Armagon I definitely get being discerning with weapon uses, but I feel like the hoarding that some people do is more a case of taking that too far than anything. In most cases, even with the legendary weapons, if they break you might have to use a 15 might silver axe instead of the 18 might legendary axe that gave +5 defense. That's kind of sucky to lose out on, but it's not the difference between winning the game and losing the game 99% of the time. It's usually the difference between clearing a chapter in 10 turns instead of 9. Obviously there are some examples like FE6 where there is a significant difference based on weapons breaking, but even then, it's definitely possible to use them and still be fine on the requirements.

[Bhoop]

When it comes to durability, for weapons, Yeah Sure. For magic, pls bring back Gaiden Style. Because it makes sense that your physical/mental strength drains with time as you use magic. I've seen other fantasy stories with magic do it that way (like the Eragon series by Christopher Paolini), and the way it is portrayed, makes sense, because a spellcaster has to find the energy from somewhere to put the energy into the spell, since energy cannot be created or destroyed. 

I mean, in FE7, Nino has no idea how to read, but she still needs the book to cast magic? And then, its just like, lets say I've been using Fire (I mean the SPELLBOOK like from the GBA games) over and over again, eventually getting through, lets say, five fire tomes. I'm pretty sure I would've memorized the words by then....

 

Ok, now to elaborate. If a person reads the same lines over and over again, they would eventually memorize those words, similar to like practicing an oral speech or presentation. Thus they wouldn't need said lines on paper anymore. Now, obviously, if they don't keep practicing the lines, they will eventually forget them. In the place of Fire Emblem, lets use... Lute from Fe8. Who doesn't use Lute on a normal playthrough (probably that one guy who hates mages, but eh). Now, on the assumption that the player WILL use Lute throughout the entire game, Lute comes with a Fire tome, and the player eventually buys more Fire tomes from the chapter 5 shop for Lute. Now, eventually those Fire tomes run out. Lets say...three or four tomes are used up by Lute. Lute should now be able to cast Fire without a tome. However, lets say The player makes her use Thunder tomes instead for the rest of the game. Lute should forget the words for Fire, and will need the tome again once she forgets some of the words. But eventually, she'll memorize Thunder. However, if she constantly switched out between using Fire(from memory) and a Thunder tome, she would not forget the Fire spell.

 

For non-magic stuff, Weapons with durability also make sense to me. And it makes sense to constantly have to buy weapons. But instead of an Armorer, why not a blacksmith with resource gathering (but more balanced)? That way, you could hand over, lets say...five iron ingots/ore + some leather (for the handle and hilt) to make an Iron sword. Obviously, you would need some other type of currency as well to pay the blacksmith to make the weapon, or you could just straight up pay the blacksmith to make a certain weapon. No restrictions. (meaning from the first blacksmith, you could make silver weapons, but they would be expensive). And maybe, from Blacksmith to Blacksmith, prices are different. Like, in a city blacksmith, it takes less money if you hand over the materials than if you were at a village blacksmith. Or something like that. 

Also for Prf weapons, they would need...lets call it special materials to make them, similar to the gossamer hair from SoV, but more attainable, you know?

 

Now if we are talking legendary weapons, they should be unbreakable, because they are legendary after all. Now, obviously there would be some balancing. Personally, I would take gaiden's weight system and use that. Lets use the Gradivus as an example. I would give it about sixish weight, so that each unit who could wield it loses six speed. Something on that scale.  (Now, I am by no means a good balancer, so pls don't rage).

 

Now...the Hammerne, if I were to use my system above, I'd make it so that A: it'd cost a ton of health, like Anew from SoV, and B: I would change its effect so that it either it stops the #of uses from going down for a turn, or, for a turn, the weight of the weapon is reduced to zero. 

 

I think that's all I have off the top of my head. But yeah, that's my point of view on this topic. 

[NinjaMonkey]

I'll take weapons with a limited number of uses over weapons that have no durability issues, but have a bunch of stupid debuffs and effects.

[Modamy]

23 minutes ago, Armagon said:

It's really just a psychological thing going on. Using that Final Fantasy example, if there are only 9 elixirs in the game, it makes sense why people refuse to use them unless it's absolutely necessary. They don't want to use it up at the wrong time.

Similar deal with FE, especially with Prf and S-rank weapons. Those are weapons that you only get once and once it's gone, it's gone. No one wants to be stuck using weak Iron weapons but all the good weapons are either expensive to replace or there's only one in the entire game. So it leads to people using weaker weapons and only bringing out the big guns when they have to.

Really though, now that i take a good look at it, it's more of the cost of the weapon than the durability itself. As i said before, the cost of good weapons isn't worth it when they break so fast.

I totally get that it's psychological, but why hold off on using a weapon that would help you right now for a hypothetical situation where it would be helpful down the road.

The way I tend to look at Prf weapons is that they are meant to give units easy ways to get experience with strong weapons. Ephraim's Reginleif, Micaiah's Thani, Orsin's Pugi, Mareeta's ... um, Mareeta's sword, and of course the Rapier are all weapons given to low level units to get easy kills and obtain experience. Those weapons are made for weaker units to become better so that they won't need them later on why would you hoard them.

I kind of agree with you on the last bit. I think people put too much weight on the value of certain weapons and decide they're too valuable to use, but then what's even the point of having them? This is a strategy game series, it's on the player to adapt and use the resources at their disposal to the greatest affect in order to complete each map.