Court Records
https://forums.court-records.net/

Fire Emblem series
https://forums.court-records.net/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=20235
Page 12 of 13

Author:  General Luigi [ Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I pulled it off, though only because Bolt mentioned it earlier in this thread.

Author:  Anthony [ Fri Mar 18, 2016 3:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I managed to find my FE:A game that was missing in my room. And I deleted all my save files. Reason is because I wanted to start new all over again. :gymshoe: Now I'm trying to figure out what asset/flaw I should go with to make my guy be well destructive.

Author:  Franzise Deauxnim [ Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

+Mag -Def
Vantage Vengeance
kill all the things

Author:  Anthony [ Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I sorta went with +speed/-defense. o.o

Author:  General Luigi [ Mon Mar 21, 2016 2:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I'm starting to dislike the "mass of marriage candidates" system. In Revelation, there are nineteen possible pairings that can be created (twenty if the player character marries an "Avatar only" candidate). As has been discussed before, a lot of the support chains are handled in a way that makes the romance at the end come off as forced. The big problem is that some characters have only one romantic support chain that I like while others have several (and one character has none), and my preferences don't line up in a way that allows everyone to get married unless I don't pursue some of my favorite pairings. As such, if I want to prioritize the pairings I'm especially fond of, some characters will have to either not marry or marry someone I have trouble picturing them with. I suppose I should be happy I have so little interest in recruiting the children...

Author:  Pierre [ Mon Mar 21, 2016 8:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

General Luigi wrote:
I'm starting to dislike the "mass of marriage candidates" system. In Revelation, there are nineteen possible pairings that can be created (twenty if the player character marries an "Avatar only" candidate). As has been discussed before, a lot of the support chains are handled in a way that makes the romance at the end come off as forced. The big problem is that some characters have only one romantic support chain that I like while others have several (and one character has none), and my preferences don't line up in a way that allows everyone to get married unless I don't pursue some of my favorite pairings. As such, if I want to prioritize the pairings I'm especially fond of, some characters will have to either not marry or marry someone I have trouble picturing them with. I suppose I should be happy I have so little interest in recruiting the children...


Welcome to the team!

Here's your "Quality over Quantity!" Badge and Picket sign.

Author:  CoolFencer [ Mon Mar 21, 2016 11:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

General Luigi wrote:
I'm starting to dislike the "mass of marriage candidates" system. In Revelation, there are nineteen possible pairings that can be created (twenty if the player character marries an "Avatar only" candidate). As has been discussed before, a lot of the support chains are handled in a way that makes the romance at the end come off as forced. The big problem is that some characters have only one romantic support chain that I like while others have several (and one character has none), and my preferences don't line up in a way that allows everyone to get married unless I don't pursue some of my favorite pairings. As such, if I want to prioritize the pairings I'm especially fond of, some characters will have to either not marry or marry someone I have trouble picturing them with. I suppose I should be happy I have so little interest in recruiting the children...

The funny thing is that I was just thinking of how my avatar has a b support rank with Jakob, but I see my avatar with Silas. I thought I was the only one with a weird preference like that so good to see someone with the same thoughts

Author:  General Luigi [ Mon Mar 21, 2016 8:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

What a coincidence. In my playthrough of Birthright, I made my avatar female and ended up marrying her off to Silas.

Author:  Planetbox [ Mon Mar 21, 2016 9:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I at least understand why they make so many support conversations. If they only have a character marry, like, 3 other characters, then even if those conversation are really good, it would still make it easy to have the child permanently missable. Personally, I'm ok with having all of the available supports, but they could be done better.

What I don't understand are the cases where some characters can't get support with anyone at all...

Author:  General Luigi [ Mon Mar 21, 2016 9:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Planetbox wrote:
What I don't understand are the cases where some characters can't get support with anyone at all...

Actually, every character is capable of supporting with the player character at the very least. That said, yes, there are six characters who can only marry an avatar of the opposite gender.

Author:  Planetbox [ Mon Mar 21, 2016 11:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

General Luigi wrote:
Planetbox wrote:
What I don't understand are the cases where some characters can't get support with anyone at all...

Actually, every character is capable of supporting with the player character at the very least. That said, yes, there are six characters who can only marry an avatar of the opposite gender.


Well yeah, I meant other than the Avatar there. I mean, I understood it for Awakening when you got people from the Bonus Paralogues and stuff, but when someone you get in the main story gets no supports, then it's just weird.

Author:  General Luigi [ Tue Mar 22, 2016 12:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Even Awakening has Flavia, Basilio, Say'ri, and Tiki, all of whom can only form S-Level Supports with an Avatar of the opposite gender. There's also the matter of Chrom and Sumia, both of whom can only marry five different playable characters. Still, yes, it is rather strange that the developers would include some characters who are limited in whom they can marry when a lot of characters can marry pretty much anyone of the opposite gender (the aforementioned exceptions notwithstanding).

Author:  CoolFencer [ Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:24 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I'm aware of the 5 supports limit in the games (minus awakening which doesn't have the rule), but anyone know if that rule is in fates or not. Fates was made after aweakning and I haven't heard of it being present in fates. Anyone know anything about this?

Author:  Planetbox [ Tue Mar 22, 2016 2:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

General Luigi wrote:
Even Awakening has Flavia, Basilio, Say'ri, and Tiki, all of whom can only form S-Level Supports with an Avatar of the opposite gender. There's also the matter of Chrom and Sumia, both of whom can only marry five different playable characters. Still, yes, it is rather strange that the developers would include some characters who are limited in whom they can marry when a lot of characters can marry pretty much anyone of the opposite gender (the aforementioned exceptions notwithstanding).


Three of those at least make sense. Tiki and Anna are characters from optional prologue, and Flavia and Basilio join about one episode before he game ends. Say're has always been weird to me. She joins in about the middle of the game, and is a fairly important character, so J'be always thought it was weird that she has no supports.

As for Chrom and Sumia, I don't know what they were doing. I assume that some higher-up really ships Chrom and Sumia for some reason, ignoring the fact that their support conversation is absolutely terrible.

Author:  General Luigi [ Tue Mar 22, 2016 2:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

CoolFencer wrote:
I'm aware of the 5 supports limit in the games (minus awakening which doesn't have the rule), but anyone know if that rule is in fates or not. Fates was made after aweakning and I haven't heard of it being present in fates. Anyone know anything about this?

If there's a maximum number of supports any given character can have in Fates, I have yet to hit that limit.

Author:  CoolFencer [ Tue Mar 22, 2016 2:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

General Luigi wrote:
CoolFencer wrote:
I'm aware of the 5 supports limit in the games (minus awakening which doesn't have the rule), but anyone know if that rule is in fates or not. Fates was made after aweakning and I haven't heard of it being present in fates. Anyone know anything about this?

If there's a maximum number of supports any given character can have in Fates, I have yet to hit that limit.

Thanks! I know there's a limit in path of radiance and the other earlier games, but there's no limit in aweakning, so if the limit route in was taken in fates I'd like to know. I haven't heard anything about the limit thing for a while now though, so I'm guessing it will be taken out entirely.

Author:  General Luigi [ Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Planetbox wrote:
Three of those at least make sense. Tiki and Anna are characters from optional prologue, and Flavia and Basilio join about one episode before he game ends.

I disagree. In FE7, there are three characters who join in optional missions (Canas, Jaffar, and Karla). All three of them have multiple support chains available to them. Karla in particular is an odd case, as she joins in Chapter 31x ("x" denoting an optional mission after the original mission with that number). Only three missions remain after that, one of them being an optional mission. Despite that, there are four characters she can Support with, one of whom she canonically marries. There are other examples from linear games in the series, though the ones from FE7 are the first ones that come to mind for me.

As such, I don't think joining late can justify Basilio and Flavia having only three possible Support chains in a game that provides other characters with far more options, to say nothing of the fact that Awakening allows the player to pursue side missions that provide additional opportunities to build supports.

Author:  CoolFencer [ Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

General Luigi wrote:
Planetbox wrote:
Three of those at least make sense. Tiki and Anna are characters from optional prologue, and Flavia and Basilio join about one episode before he game ends.

I disagree. In FE7, there are three characters who join in optional missions (Canas, Jaffar, and Karla). All three of them have multiple support chains available to them. Karla in particular is an odd case, as she joins in Chapter 31x ("x" denoting an optional mission after the original mission with that number). Only three missions remain after that, one of them being an optional mission. Despite that, there are four characters she can Support with, one of whom she canonically marries. There are other examples from linear games in the series, though the ones from FE7 are the first ones that come to mind for me.

As such, I don't think joining late can justify Basilio and Flavia having only three possible Support chains in a game that provides other characters with far more options, to say nothing of the fact that Awakening allows the player to pursue side missions that provide additional opportunities to build supports.


I think it's actually reasonable for Basilio and Flavia not having that many support options. As they join late in game, most of your army should already be paired up, so there shouldn't be that many options for them to began with no matter how many options they have.

Author:  Anthony [ Fri Mar 25, 2016 4:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I still have yet to get all the female love scenes with Male MU. Flavia Aversa and Emm are the three girls left.


And when it comes to Olivia, Lissa, and Maribelle leveling them up is long just to get to Dark Flier.

Author:  Bolt Storm [ Wed Mar 30, 2016 5:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I've been playing through Birthright Lunatic the past couple of weeks. The first two-thirds of the game are unmistakably easier than Conquest Hard (though to be fair I have used a decent amount of optional maps, so maybe if I was going pure no-grind it would be closer.) That said I'm at chapter 23 and boy is that ever a difficulty spike. Conquest at least tended to have objectives other than rout, so you could get away with ignoring reinforcements or certain areas of the map in some cases; Birthright's "rout the enemy" all the time gets obnoxious when it just decides to fling wave after wave of reinforcements and a massive starting army at you.

Also, let's be frank: this is Ryoma Emblem. Xander was good and all but Ryoma is straight-up an unstoppable force of nature.

Author:  CoolFencer [ Wed Mar 30, 2016 11:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Bolt, I've only been playing conquest so far but plan to buy birthright later, you have played both and started with conquest. So would you say that after playing the more difficult conquest, that birthright became boring with the drop of difficulty?

Author:  dullahan1 [ Wed Mar 30, 2016 4:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Having played Conquest first myself, playing Birthright second really did feel quite boring in terms of gameplay. Not only were the enemies overall weaker I feel from the overall campaign, but the lack of unique objectives and overall strategy made it very lackluster for me. It mostly just became to me just a game where I could throw out any unit I wanted to without any real risk of dying considering there was really no need of strategizing on where and when to use your units.

I do feel Birthright did have a bit of a better story compared to Conquest, but at the same time, playing Conquest first did help make some plot points in Birthright hold more significance and vice-versa. Then again, maybe Birthright's story had a bit more impact on me because I was going up against characters that I had gotten to know through playing Conquest as well.

Ironically, having played both on the same difficulty, I actually thought Birthright's Chapter 27 was a bit more difficult than Conquest's.

Author:  CoolFencer [ Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

dullahan1 wrote:
Having played Conquest first myself, playing Birthright second really did feel quite boring in terms of gameplay. Not only were the enemies overall weaker I feel from the overall campaign, but the lack of unique objectives and overall strategy made it very lackluster for me. It mostly just became to me just a game where I could throw out any unit I wanted to without any real risk of dying considering there was really no need of strategizing on where and when to use your units.

I do feel Birthright did have a bit of a better story compared to Conquest, but at the same time, playing Conquest first did help make some plot points in Birthright hold more significance and vice-versa. Then again, maybe Birthright's story had a bit more impact on me because I was going up against characters that I had gotten to know through playing Conquest as well.

Ironically, having played both on the same difficulty, I actually thought Birthright's
Chapter 27 was a bit more difficult than Conquest's.


That's what I thought. I've heard that in conquest is gameplay > story and birthright is stroy > gameplay.

Author:  Spider [ Sat Apr 02, 2016 11:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

*steps in*

Um... hi. Just wondering... where is the best place in the series for someone new to start out? I'm looking into Fire Emblem because I played the demo for Awakening and it seemed pretty good. And then there was a bunch of news regarding Birthright/Conquest. I just kind of want to know how to jump in here.

Author:  Pierre [ Sat Apr 02, 2016 11:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Awakening is SUPER accessible. You can start there without fear.

Author:  General Luigi [ Sat Apr 02, 2016 11:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Pierre wrote:
Awakening is SUPER accessible. You can start there without fear.

One caveat, though: the Pair Up mechanic was introduced in that game. Older games in the series won't have it, so you might be in for a rude awakening if you pick up, say, Sacred Stones while expecting to be able to exploit the Pair Up mechanic.

Author:  Spider [ Sun Apr 03, 2016 12:06 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

General Luigi wrote:
Pierre wrote:
Awakening is SUPER accessible. You can start there without fear.

One caveat, though: the Pair Up mechanic was introduced in that game. Older games in the series won't have it, so you might be in for a rude awakening if you pick up, say, Sacred Stones while expecting to be able to exploit the Pair Up mechanic.

Like I mentioned before, I've already played the demo to Awakening and it allowed the pair-up mechanic. I still don't have a grip on everything 100%, but I got it fast enough.

Thanks for letting me know, though!

Author:  CoolFencer [ Sun Apr 03, 2016 2:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I agree with Pierre, if you want to start the series, probably awakening, but it's up to you. I started on shadow dragon, which is probably not where a newbie should start, especially since aweakning was already on the out and in the store :gymshoe: but i have no regrets! (RIP my entire army on chapter 5). Anyways, it's always nice to see other people wanting to play this truly great, and a bit underrated (although it is gaining attention), series. It's a bit stressful and complicated at first, but trust me, the stroies, the gameplay, it's all worth it in the end.

Author:  dullahan1 [ Sun Apr 03, 2016 3:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

The only thing I'd say is Awakening is really easy compared to most of the series and it becomes more of just building the best units to just obliterate everything rather than using strategy to conquer foes.

Author:  General Luigi [ Sun Apr 03, 2016 4:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

dullahan1 wrote:
The only thing I'd say is Awakening is really easy compared to most of the series and it becomes more of just building the best units to just obliterate everything rather than using strategy to conquer foes.

There's that, too; a lot of the games are more linear and provide the player with less room for grinding.

Author:  CoolFencer [ Mon Apr 04, 2016 2:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

General Luigi wrote:
dullahan1 wrote:
The only thing I'd say is Awakening is really easy compared to most of the series and it becomes more of just building the best units to just obliterate everything rather than using strategy to conquer foes.

There's that, too; a lot of the games are more linear and provide the player with less room for grinding.

Yeah all the earlier titles except for the gba games. Grinding makes aweakning a bit easier, but for new players with perma-death lurking, it's necessary.

Author:  Bolt Storm [ Mon Apr 04, 2016 8:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

CoolFencer wrote:
Bolt, I've only been playing conquest so far but plan to buy birthright later, you have played both and started with conquest. So would you say that after playing the more difficult conquest, that birthright became boring with the drop of difficulty?


I'm at the final chapter now. I'm not sure I'd call it boring per se, but it's definitely less engaging. Very few enemies have skills, so often times fights are much less strategic and more "which unit is flat-out strong enough." This isn't helped by the fact the later levels just fling massive amounts of units at you.

The story's slightly better than Conquest but still pretty dumb, and I think I preferred Conquest's cast.

Author:  Planetbox [ Mon Apr 04, 2016 9:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I just found out today that if you marry the Male Avatar too a first generation female, it becomes impossible to get all the children! That's... brilliant. I mean sure, there are two different version of the game, so you can set it up to get all the children across all three games, but that's still pretty stupid. As much of a completionist as I am, I'm definitely not marrying a second-generation or Avatar-only character in Revelations just to get all the children.

My favorite part of this is that the same thing happens if you marry Azura. So, the Fates team decides to throw in all this ship tease for the two of them, give them a different support conversation for each game, and add a bunch of other stuff for people who ship them, then prevent those same people from getting a child. Well done.

Author:  General Luigi [ Mon Apr 04, 2016 10:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

I suppose I should be thankful my preferred love interest for a male Avatar (Flora) can't marry anyone else. As such, I'm able to avoid that problem in Conquest and Revelation. Still, yes, it is unfortunate that the developers didn't take this possibility into account. Makes me miss the old days when two characters falling in love didn't result in a playable child.

Author:  Planetbox [ Mon Apr 04, 2016 11:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

You see, that's the thing I don't understand. It doesn't seem like it could be some kind of simple mistake, or a possibility they didn't think of, because the problem arises if the Male Avatar marries someone in the first generation. Considering a majority of male players probably married someone from the first generation, because a lot of people get married without waiting to get all the kids and see all the avatar-only characters (especially considering people like Flora and Izana, who have weird recruit requirements anyway.) And like I mentioned, the same problem occurs with Azura, a pairing the game seems to like pushing at every opportunity. I feel like some playtester should have noticed this. So, either this was intentional, or the developers just weren't paying attention at all...

Author:  Spider [ Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Wait, I skimmed, but I think I just gathered that marriages and children for the characters based on your actions. If that's the case... I'm bi, so I'm just asking... are homosexual relationships an option? I just came from a bunch of youtube comments, so I don't want to ruffle anyone's feathers just by asking, lol.

Author:  Franzise Deauxnim [ Tue Apr 05, 2016 3:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Spider wrote:
Wait, I skimmed, but I think I just gathered that marriages and children for the characters based on your actions. If that's the case... I'm bi, so I'm just asking... are homosexual relationships an option? I just came from a bunch of youtube comments, so I don't want to ruffle anyone's feathers just by asking, lol.

Yes, there's two homosexual options.

Spoiler: Just in case you don't want to know who
Rhajat (F) and Niles (M) can be wed to an avatar of either gender. Birthright has Rhajat, Conquest has Niles, and Revelation has both.


However, if you take one of those options, you lose out on at least one child.

Author:  Spider [ Tue Apr 05, 2016 3:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. :godot:

Author:  CoolFencer [ Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Bolt Storm wrote:
CoolFencer wrote:
Bolt, I've only been playing conquest so far but plan to buy birthright later, you have played both and started with conquest. So would you say that after playing the more difficult conquest, that birthright became boring with the drop of difficulty?


I'm at the final chapter now. I'm not sure I'd call it boring per se, but it's definitely less engaging. Very few enemies have skills, so often times fights are much less strategic and more "which unit is flat-out strong enough." This isn't helped by the fact the later levels just fling massive amounts of units at you.

The story's slightly better than Conquest but still pretty dumb, and I think I preferred Conquest's cast.

Thanks for taking the time to answer the question bolt! I kinda suspected that. I still thank I'm going to give birthright a try after I finish conquest though.

Author:  Pierre [ Wed Apr 06, 2016 10:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fire Emblem series

Hey folks, I can see that the original Fire Emblem on GBA is on sale in the virtual store. Is it any good any worth getting.

Page 12 of 13 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/