What should IS learn from Heroes to make armor units good in mainline games?

[Alastor15243]

Well, Heroes finally did the impossible and made armor units good. Perhaps a bit too good, but that's another discussion altogether. The point is, the vastly different gameplay of heroes, combined with their different approach to balance and their ridiculously wider variety of skills, have resulted in a meta where armor units are no longer the utterly useless, non-doubling dead weight they were in mainline games of old. So...

...What can IS learn from this?

Which of the numerous things IS did to make armor units better in Heroes could be applied to mainline games to make them, if not as good as in Heroes, at least relevant in the meta?

Edited March 31, 2019 by Alastor15243

[Laura]

meg is a good unit

[Rezzy]

Just giving them a Quick Riposte or Special Activation Deactivator skill at baseline would give them the intended effect.

Though arguably Wary Fighter in Fates already made armors operate as intended.

[Jingle Jangle]

• Higher overall base stats/ growth rates.
• Game design that isn't focused on getting from point A to B
• Better team synergy with other classes/ armor units
• Having skills that allows to control follow ups.

[DancingDanny]

Some way to increase movement range temporarily that's a little bit easier? I see a lot of people complain about their movement range as well...

[Hanes]

They could make the maps smaller, which is why armor knights are good in FEH in the first place, the maps are very small and while it is still crippling to have 1 mov FEH is just a very different game, the fact that there is no rng and only a rout objective makes it better for knights since with the exclusion of RNG the game acts more as a puzzle one rather than a strategical one where you adapt to it and raise units by luck so having robust units and in general just tanking is a better tactic in FEH which is what Knights are great at.

That's another thing, raising armor knights; because of their 4 mov and shit fighting and usually no way to just easily grind the hell out of them, it makes it harder to raise them to a usable point and it also means any EXP you gave to them didn't go to another unit who could have used it meanwhile in Heroes you can get everyone to level 40 if you so desire and grinding to 40 is pretty easy and then there's merging and whatnot to just make them even more ridiculous, and there's also a lot of skills that buff them tremendously or that you can pass from others that are also ridiculous.

This is different from mainstream FE which focuses on a whole different style of gameplay that Armor Knights just aren't suited for; Rout maps usually require you to move to fight enemies and everyone basically fights before them, Seize objectives require you to do the same as routing which is moving but the way to end the chapter just changes, kill boss again is just a rout but better and defend is the only objective they are useful for since in those moving a lot isn't really necessary but even then there usually still is an incentive to not tank them like treasure or just the fact that if you don't do anything you will be overwhelmed.

In general (No I didn't say that to be funny) the way IS designs both the maps and gameplay of mainline FEs as well as resource management just differs from FEH entirely which make Knights bad in FE and good in FEH.

Edited March 31, 2019 by This boi uses Nino

[Ertrick36]

12 minutes ago, Jingle Jangle said:

• Game design that isn't focused on getting from point A to B

Literally this.

So many FE games make even rout missions into "get from here to here" missions.  And that naturally puts armors at a disadvantage.

Some may contain missions where the objective is to hold fast against swarms of enemies (I believe the game that did this the most was Blazing Sword, which I'd considered the most balanced GBA FE - also incidentally one of the only FE games where an armor knight is actually considered good), but the norm usually is either to seize or to get to some other point.  Mission variety in general is fairly lacking, and armor knights often find themselves falling behind because of this.

Alternatively, don't make maps that impede their progress.  Specifically referring to the slew of maps in Valentia on Celica's side; a big reason Valbar is considered subpar is because he's constantly faced with desert and swamp maps that have him moving at a slug's pace.  Meanwhile, the whitewings are considered among the absolute best in that route, even so much that goddamn Est can hold her own, and I have no doubt in my mind that it's at least partially because of her insane mobility compared to most everyone else.

 

I don't really think any of this can be gleamed from FEH though.  FEH is just of a different nature entirely than standard FE.  The lack of RNG in combat means defense is so much more important than usual.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

I think it's kind of dumb in-context to have slow armor knights doubling opponents for arbitrary reasons like having a Quick Riposte or Bold Fighter skill. Heroes isn't trying to be realistic with its combat, but mainline games try to be. I do think those skills have their place in a fire emblem game, just not to a degree like in Heroes where your speed stat ceases to matter unless the opponent can somehow cancel your ability. They should only exist on units that already have incredible speed to begin with, allowing them to wield heavier weapons, or rescue allies, or do other actions that cut into their speed stat.

Map design is key to making armor knights good. Fire Emblem maps are too often wide open spaces where you move your entire army like a pack. You'd have to dig into your turn count just to keep armor knights in front and that can be detrimental if there's a thief to kill or a village about to be burnt. Having indoor maps can condense the map design and allow for choke points, but those are also the typical maps where you're hurrying to the end for side objectives like thieves.

One Heroes idea I think is perfect for armor knights though? Obstruct. That should be an innate skill. It can allow our armor knights to function as literal walls and create chokepoints even out of wide open spaces. And let them keep the heat off of squishier units.

Edited March 31, 2019 by Glennstavos

[Othin]

Give them higher stats and/or more/better skills than non-armored units.

I don't see it as particularly complicated. The details of how exactly to implement and balance that are more complicated, but the core of it is a pretty simple idea the rest of the FE games have just not bothered with. Having reduced Move and a weakness to armor-slaying weapons are downsides, so you have to make up for them with some sort of upsides, whatever they are. Main series FE games give them stats and skills that aren't enough of an improvement over what non-armored units get, just different. Sometimes they get more weapon types, but usually not even that, and honestly that's not as significant because weapon type access has diminishing returns.

[Florete]

The only thing to take away from Heroes for armors in the main series is to give armor actual advantages - but not the ones Heroes gives. Armor (as a unit type) in the main series is completely worthless, it has no practical benefits, only downsides. It's supposed to mean the unit has more defense, but in practice that's not always the case. How many units in RD have better defense than Meg?

[bethany81707]

18 minutes ago, Florete said:

How many units in RD have better defense than Meg?

Meg has 10 base defence at level 3, which is less than Aran (11/7), Sothe (14/21), Jill (13/14), Tormod (12/25) and untransformed Muarim (15/19), among others. She has a growth of 35%, matched by Edward, Leonardo, Nolan, Jill, Tormod and Muarim. Fun fact: among the Dawn Brigade, it is surpassed only by Aran (70%), Fiona (55%) and Tauroneo (45%), which probably says more about everyone else.

As a numerical support for the argument.

Edited March 31, 2019 by bethany81707

[Icelerate]

They should make armours not wear armour to make them more attractive looking. 

Increase their growth rates in comparison to balance them. 

[Hanes]

10 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

Increase their growth rates in comparison to balance them. 

Oh but their shitty bases stay the same? ok...

Edited March 31, 2019 by This boi uses Nino

[bethany81707]

So, now that I have a spreadsheet and could sort the growth rates by Defence, the following is a list of characters who tie with/surpass Meg in Defence growths for Radiant Dawn.

Spoiler

35: Edward, Leonardo, Nolan, Meg, Jill, Tormod, Muarim, Marcia, Nephenee, Lethe, Rolf, Janaff

40: Nealuchi, Ike, Mia, Kyza, Tanith, Tibarn, Stefan

45: Tauroneo, Mordecai, Danved, Shinon, Volke

50: Makalov, Boyd, Skrimir

55: Fiona

60: Brom, Kieran, Gatrie

65: Haar

70: Aran, Renning

Of the four armours in RD, Tauroneo has the lowest Growth total, at 330 (tied with Titania, Lyre, Geoffrey). Following is Gatrie (345, Zihark, Marcia, Makalov), Brom (350, Sothe, Mist, Heather, Astrid, Tormod, Nephenee, Rolf, Stefan) and Meg (375, Aran). The highest growth total is 400, a tie between Vika, Micaiah and Sanaki. Laura, Elincia, Edward, Leonardo and Nolan have higher growth totals than Meg and lower than Micaiah.

The lowest growth totals (not counting BK and Lehran, who have flat 0s) is 240, a tie between Reyson, Caineghis and Giffca. The lowest growth rate total for a beorc unit is 300, tied between Bastian and Renning (and Ena).

[Humanoid]

Remove all time limits, whether hard or soft.

The low-turn-count culture of FE is something I've never personally understood, but if people want to play that way, all power to them. However, it doesn't need to be additionally incentivised by map design, let it be a purely self-imposed goal. If I'm happy taking 30 turns to do a map it takes someone else 10, both approaches should be just as valid as each other.

 

Unrelated to FEH, but I'd also pump their defense up, waaaaay up, such that armour is almost, if not completely impervious to physical damage. The only worthwhile counter to it then would be magic, or flanking (which would impart massive bonuses against armour). An armour in a 1 vs 1 situation vs any physical damage unit should be a guaranteed win.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

Don't inflate the stats of armor knights if there's reclassing. Because then everybody will just be an armor knight for the sake of having uber stats for fighting. And when everybody has low movement, nobody has low movement. 

Unless your game has no reclassing, in which case it doesn't matter how unbalanced classes are and you can focus on balancing individual characters around them. I miss those days of fire emblem.

[Humanoid]

1 hour ago, Glennstavos said:

Don't inflate the stats of armor knights if there's reclassing. Because then everybody will just be an armor knight for the sake of having uber stats for fighting. And when everybody has low movement, nobody has low movement. 

Unless your game has no reclassing, in which case it doesn't matter how unbalanced classes are and you can focus on balancing individual characters around them. I miss those days of fire emblem.

Just double their defense stat while they're in an armoured class, I suppose.

[thecrimsonflash]

unique skills and stat inflation (including spd, just higher stat totals in general), also diminishing the stats of mounted units would also be a good idea both cavaliers and fliers are generally about as good as infantry but with a niche weakness that you probably don't have a proper counter on hand, keeping low movement is fine if you ask me, I'd rather give them advantages in combat rather than demand they just be given paladin movement to make them better outside of combat.

actually, I would like for the main series to go for a more heroes style set up for classes, giving armors access to every weapon through extra armor classes rather than just knights, great knights, and generals, have armored variations of archers and mages, make armors more of a commander class which is better in combat but with lower movement.

this also can be applied to other movement types, cavs and fliers being given access to every weapon type in one way or another would be nice just to add to general class variety.

[Cysx]

10 hours ago, Jingle Jangle said:

Game design that isn't focused on getting from point A to B

That's all there is to it, Heroes is about killing and absolutely not dying. There's also no dodging, accuracy or crits involved, none of which knights are typically good at/against. By that metric, generals were also a pretty solid choice in the gba link arena, it's just that nobody cared. Point being, there's no real lesson to be taken from Heroes on that front, except making the class' bases/caps better, which already tends to be the case. Careful though, because making them invincible is not the way to make things interesting.

I think they stroke an interesting balance with Effie, even though that didn't really help other armors(or incite you to make her a general) because most of the good about her was from the character herself. Just give knights +4 base strength or something, make them hurt a lot in one hit. And yeah, not necessarily a drastic change in game design, just something more inclusive, with objectives to reach and ones to defend on the same map, for example. Shortcut/warp tiles for units that aren't mounted. Things like that.

Edit: Also, something I brought up a while ago: Include endurance objectives on certain maps. As-in, legitimate rewards for surviving longer before completing the chapter; and do make them difficult. Probably best for the enemies involved to give no exp, by the way(and maybe same for healing/dancing until the objective's completed), so that the rest of the game remains relatively balanced whether you clear these or not.

Edited March 31, 2019 by Cysx

[Icelerate]

18 hours ago, This boi uses Nino said:

Oh but their shitty bases stay the same? ok...

Bases usually aren't a problem except with Meg and Gwendolyn. 

[Rezzy]

One thing that's not really in FEH, but I've thought of is making Armor units immune to critical hits, which could make them better walls and offset the armor slaying weapons being a liability, since armors often don't even have that much more defense than your non-armored units.

[Hanes]

32 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

Bases usually aren't a problem except with Meg and Gwendolyn. 

Except that they are because of low speed, and you literally use those bases to level up and even with fantastic growth a bad base is going ot make the stat remain bad for some time after you have done arduos babying, and if their stat caps aren't ridiculously high then they will just cap out and in the end are just 5 mov killing machines as opposed to 8 move killing machines or 10 move if you give the boots to those 8 move killing machines.

[DLNarshen]

I'm not convinced armors really need to be balanced for high level, low turn-count play styles.  Many armor knights throughout the series are perfectly serviceable units as crutches for new players, or to simply be a reliable physical wall for slower, more casual playthroughs.  Bummer they can't keep up in a high-octane LTC run, but that doesn't make folks like Oswin or Gatrie bad units for the majority of the player base.     

It is also worth considering that armors have historically been one of the most abundant enemy types, and so have to be balanced around that as well.  They are already some of the most annoying enemies on the field, being difficult to consistently one-round with conventional weaponry.  The few occasions the class was given something to make them stand out, it only served to make them even more infuriating to deal with -- think back to all the Generals/Barons in Genealogy with Pavise, or the Wary Fighter Generals in Fates.  No thanks.      

[Flere210]

The majority of the playerbase use general Amelia. Oswin and gatrie(and Effie) are perfectly serviceble, but most knights are not:

-LolArden

-LolWendy and it's not like the others are good.

-LolMeg

-Dalshin is kinda serviceble, but Kaga hate him on a personal level and gived enemies lots of hammers just to screw him over.

-In Archanea remakes, sacred stones and fateswakening they have either reclassing, great knight promotion, or both, and with the added flexibility sometimes you enjoy bringing one. Still, staying in knight and promoting to general are not always good ideas.

 

Overall, knights are on the weak side even as casual player. As i mentioned in the other thread, they are balanced around the fact that many red units are knights/generals, wich guve them weakness that makes sense on enemies(for example by encouraging you to mix physical and magic attacks) but are criplling to playble units(can't even tank properly if there is a mage around.)

 

 

[Icelerate]

On 31/03/2019 at 7:45 PM, This boi uses Nino said:

Except that they are because of low speed, and you literally use those bases to level up and even with fantastic growth a bad base is going ot make the stat remain bad for some time after you have done arduos babying, and if their stat caps aren't ridiculously high then they will just cap out and in the end are just 5 mov killing machines as opposed to 8 move killing machines or 10 move if you give the boots to those 8 move killing machines.

Well I would give them higher stat caps as well to coincide with higher growths. Early game Oswin is your second best unit with only Marcus being better. Tauroneo is unstoppable in part one. Gatrie is only worse than Titania and Shinon. Gilliam is only worse than Sethe and maybe Franz. Lyn mode Wallace is unstoppable. Don't see how their bases are bad at all because of "low" speed especially since enemies in early game are extremely slow and weighed down even further. 

Edited April 2, 2019 by Icelerate