I like how conquest designed chapters around what you had at the start. Chapters like chapter 10 feel tailor made for what you had at your disposal, like balistas that Nyx and Niles could wield. Archers on the right side that Selena should handle with an Arthur pair up, chokepoints that Effie, Silas, and Corrin can plug up, then there's the pegasus knights that come in around the time Beruka and Camilla come in to help you out. There's not a lot of purposeful map design like that in 3H due to the variance in class selection like you said.
While Engage has reclassing, it doesn't hurt the game as much as 3H because of how optional it is. 3H is like a build-a-unit sandbox and the maps have to accommodate for that because the devs have 0 clue what you're gonna do with anyone, even if they know certain units gravitate to certain classes. The maps have to be open ended so any army CAN win. Engage, like a classic FE game, has everyone start in a certain class (lets say armor knight), and you can promote them to the advanced version of that class (General) or a similar class with some tradeoffs (Great Knight). The option of second sealing to a completely different class also exists, but that's an intentional deviation which you can completely ignore, and since skills are inherited from emlems rather than classes you never need to put anyone in dumb classes to gain strong skills. This allowed the devs to design good varied maps around the units and emblems the game gives you. On my second playthrough I've only reclassed Alear, Jean and Anna, but the playthrough feels very different because I'm using different units, and I have to figure out how this different set of tools can beat the challenge compared to what I had my first time.
You allude to this at the end here, but I think this video would be better labeled as the systemic flaws that unbridled reclassing brings to FE game design. It allows for a dominant strategy that is 1) not fun for repeat playthroughs and 2) can ruin otherwise interesting maps. I really enjoyed my first playthrough of 3H, but on a second route I ended up having a lot of characters go through brigand to get death blow and feel the temptation to make them all mounts. These are just too useful of skills with no downsides, and that's a design problem. Also, I think it would be good to show some of the maps you mean though in these kinds of videos, show how easy it is to cheese some maps with multiple wyverns vs other games with limited classes.
Fair point! I am not much of an editor and more inclined to go for an unscripted talk. I don't have any footage of myself playing 3H to use, so I wanted to be careful about lifting it. But I did the same thing - once you know how the class system works it breaks the maps. I think the class system in a vacuum could work with balancing, but more importantly, if the maps accounted for all the variables that it offered you. A class system in a vacuum doesn't matter as much - it's the application in maps - which is why I labeled it as a map design issue rather than a game structure issue.
The other thing i hate about 3H reclassing is the lack of a weapon triangle. It doesn't feel like there's a big difference between swords/Lances/axes so it doesn't feel like picking one over the other really matters.
I just think Thracia has some of the best map design in the entire series. Literally, if there was a game that had the map design of the Manster Chapters, but the whole game, I would die happy.
I definitely think there is merit to a game being designed such as to allow more organic avenues for the player to set the difficulty of their own experience than just one singular Easy/Normal/Hard selection at the start of a new file (or even like, in the settings menu or something), but I also think that that's... not something classic Fire Emblem failed to do? Like, in FE1, you could make Cain, Abel, and Hardin your main Cavaliers, and they're all really good and will serve you really well. Alternatively, you could use Matthis, Roshea, and Vyland as your main Cav squad, and they're all... less good, but still usable. You could use Barst, or you could use Bord or Cord. You could use Jeorge, or you could use Gordin or Tomas. Giving the player different units of varying strengths and weaknesses sort of inherently allows them to customize the difficulty of their experience in that way. This isn't some new thing Three Houses is only just now introducing to the series, so I think it's entirely fair to criticize how it implements that.
You mention that its equally difficult to go for any class, but this isn't necesarily always the case, as different characters have different boons and banes on ranks; my first run I made Bernadetta an armor unit and she had a harder time getting ranks for this than anyone else did (she has banes in axe and armor), and was ultimately worse than she would have been in a bow class that would have taken less effort to reach. Granted this does go the other way as well, with some units having a harder time getting to better classes (flying Dedue comes to mind) and this doesn't mitigate the problem entirely as it's unit-specific and generally more often than not promotes going towards the best few classes, but its still a piece to the system you've possibly overlooked
Hey Sme! That's true - not all classes are easy for each unit to get into, but the barriers to getting them there are not insurmountable. It just means more grinding is necessary to get them there, but you still can go those routes with all characters, which is my primary issue with the system and how the maps don't account for this enough, if at all.
It might not be my place to speak since I'm not even done with my first playthrough. But I'm not sure if worse is necessarily bad. You can raise a unit to become a member of a good class, like a swordmaster, and they are still going to be useful in all the things a swordmaster is good at, even if they are not as great as a wyvern lord.
I agree with your main point conceptually but it’s hard to give credence to it because you didn’t talk about any specific examples in 3H. I personally think the actual layouts and enemy placement in 3H are way better than most of the games before it and they clearly had a lot of thought put into them, even if they can sometimes be cheesed with reclassing. Granted I’ve only played the game once but it was definitely the most fun I’ve had with a new FE since I first started playing the GBA games.
Totally fair. The placements don't really matter as much when you can easily skip or cheese them, imo. The first go around blind is great, but through the 2nd playthrough I found it to be easy to deconstruct the maps without a ton of foresight or effort. For maps that are easily cheesed, it basically comes down to when you get to Wyvern and when you get warp. I'd argue the game hits a sweet spot in part I post-Miklan map but before you have everyone in a flying class or get access to warp. Part II I think is where the lid gets blown off a bit with regards to being able to cheese. I'd spend so much time in the monastery to just be able to warpskip to a boss or fly around everything that the map had laid out - as though the devs didn't intend for these tools to be in my arsenal.
@@nadnap I don't think the appeal of the game is trying to break it it's using different builds on each play through. To be fair warp skipping was there since fe1 so I don't see the problem if you want to you can't but if you don't feel like it don't. It's hard to balance warp without making the maps huge for it which I don't think the did or that they just deal with it.
Excuse me no, enemy placement in 3h isn’t good, enemies are too space out and even more too spaced put when considering battalions as a crowd control mechanic an easy example of this is the volcano map, archers aren’t in range of other group of archers so if you have at least two fliers they can fly freely with 0 problem and that’s on a map that heavily advantage fliers, which is why they put next to no enemy fliers and only at the back of the map 🤦♂️
I like how conquest designed chapters around what you had at the start. Chapters like chapter 10 feel tailor made for what you had at your disposal, like balistas that Nyx and Niles could wield. Archers on the right side that Selena should handle with an Arthur pair up, chokepoints that Effie, Silas, and Corrin can plug up, then there's the pegasus knights that come in around the time Beruka and Camilla come in to help you out. There's not a lot of purposeful map design like that in 3H due to the variance in class selection like you said.
They would assume you would use all the characters and they don't give you the resources to play the game like you would because lack of money
While Engage has reclassing, it doesn't hurt the game as much as 3H because of how optional it is. 3H is like a build-a-unit sandbox and the maps have to accommodate for that because the devs have 0 clue what you're gonna do with anyone, even if they know certain units gravitate to certain classes. The maps have to be open ended so any army CAN win.
Engage, like a classic FE game, has everyone start in a certain class (lets say armor knight), and you can promote them to the advanced version of that class (General) or a similar class with some tradeoffs (Great Knight). The option of second sealing to a completely different class also exists, but that's an intentional deviation which you can completely ignore, and since skills are inherited from emlems rather than classes you never need to put anyone in dumb classes to gain strong skills. This allowed the devs to design good varied maps around the units and emblems the game gives you.
On my second playthrough I've only reclassed Alear, Jean and Anna, but the playthrough feels very different because I'm using different units, and I have to figure out how this different set of tools can beat the challenge compared to what I had my first time.
You allude to this at the end here, but I think this video would be better labeled as the systemic flaws that unbridled reclassing brings to FE game design. It allows for a dominant strategy that is 1) not fun for repeat playthroughs and 2) can ruin otherwise interesting maps. I really enjoyed my first playthrough of 3H, but on a second route I ended up having a lot of characters go through brigand to get death blow and feel the temptation to make them all mounts. These are just too useful of skills with no downsides, and that's a design problem. Also, I think it would be good to show some of the maps you mean though in these kinds of videos, show how easy it is to cheese some maps with multiple wyverns vs other games with limited classes.
Fair point! I am not much of an editor and more inclined to go for an unscripted talk. I don't have any footage of myself playing 3H to use, so I wanted to be careful about lifting it.
But I did the same thing - once you know how the class system works it breaks the maps.
I think the class system in a vacuum could work with balancing, but more importantly, if the maps accounted for all the variables that it offered you. A class system in a vacuum doesn't matter as much - it's the application in maps - which is why I labeled it as a map design issue rather than a game structure issue.
The other thing i hate about 3H reclassing is the lack of a weapon triangle. It doesn't feel like there's a big difference between swords/Lances/axes so it doesn't feel like picking one over the other really matters.
Flashbacks to the Petra and Bernadetta paralogue...
I just think Thracia has some of the best map design in the entire series. Literally, if there was a game that had the map design of the Manster Chapters, but the whole game, I would die happy.
I definitely think there is merit to a game being designed such as to allow more organic avenues for the player to set the difficulty of their own experience than just one singular Easy/Normal/Hard selection at the start of a new file (or even like, in the settings menu or something), but I also think that that's... not something classic Fire Emblem failed to do? Like, in FE1, you could make Cain, Abel, and Hardin your main Cavaliers, and they're all really good and will serve you really well. Alternatively, you could use Matthis, Roshea, and Vyland as your main Cav squad, and they're all... less good, but still usable. You could use Barst, or you could use Bord or Cord. You could use Jeorge, or you could use Gordin or Tomas. Giving the player different units of varying strengths and weaknesses sort of inherently allows them to customize the difficulty of their experience in that way. This isn't some new thing Three Houses is only just now introducing to the series, so I think it's entirely fair to criticize how it implements that.
You mention that its equally difficult to go for any class, but this isn't necesarily always the case, as different characters have different boons and banes on ranks; my first run I made Bernadetta an armor unit and she had a harder time getting ranks for this than anyone else did (she has banes in axe and armor), and was ultimately worse than she would have been in a bow class that would have taken less effort to reach. Granted this does go the other way as well, with some units having a harder time getting to better classes (flying Dedue comes to mind) and this doesn't mitigate the problem entirely as it's unit-specific and generally more often than not promotes going towards the best few classes, but its still a piece to the system you've possibly overlooked
Hey Sme! That's true - not all classes are easy for each unit to get into, but the barriers to getting them there are not insurmountable. It just means more grinding is necessary to get them there, but you still can go those routes with all characters, which is my primary issue with the system and how the maps don't account for this enough, if at all.
It might not be my place to speak since I'm not even done with my first playthrough. But I'm not sure if worse is necessarily bad.
You can raise a unit to become a member of a good class, like a swordmaster, and they are still going to be useful in all the things a swordmaster is good at, even if they are not as great as a wyvern lord.
Are you gonna make a video about engage, or how u feel about it? I beat ur game btw, was fun
I agree with your main point conceptually but it’s hard to give credence to it because you didn’t talk about any specific examples in 3H. I personally think the actual layouts and enemy placement in 3H are way better than most of the games before it and they clearly had a lot of thought put into them, even if they can sometimes be cheesed with reclassing. Granted I’ve only played the game once but it was definitely the most fun I’ve had with a new FE since I first started playing the GBA games.
Totally fair. The placements don't really matter as much when you can easily skip or cheese them, imo. The first go around blind is great, but through the 2nd playthrough I found it to be easy to deconstruct the maps without a ton of foresight or effort.
For maps that are easily cheesed, it basically comes down to when you get to Wyvern and when you get warp. I'd argue the game hits a sweet spot in part I post-Miklan map but before you have everyone in a flying class or get access to warp.
Part II I think is where the lid gets blown off a bit with regards to being able to cheese. I'd spend so much time in the monastery to just be able to warpskip to a boss or fly around everything that the map had laid out - as though the devs didn't intend for these tools to be in my arsenal.
@@nadnap I don't think the appeal of the game is trying to break it it's using different builds on each play through. To be fair warp skipping was there since fe1 so I don't see the problem if you want to you can't but if you don't feel like it don't. It's hard to balance warp without making the maps huge for it which I don't think the did or that they just deal with it.
Excuse me no, enemy placement in 3h isn’t good, enemies are too space out and even more too spaced put when considering battalions as a crowd control mechanic an easy example of this is the volcano map, archers aren’t in range of other group of archers so if you have at least two fliers they can fly freely with 0 problem and that’s on a map that heavily advantage fliers, which is why they put next to no enemy fliers and only at the back of the map 🤦♂️