My biggest pet peeve with Armor Knights

Community
1

Before I get into the actual topic, I want to be clear that I’m not dissing any hack/fangame that does this, even if it’s a design decision I personally do not like. Don’t take this too seriously, I’m definitely gonna exaggerate my distaste for effect here

Anyway, ahem.

Armor Knights are one of my top 3 favorite Fire Emblem classes. I use them in almost every game and hack/fangame I play (except for FE1 and 2 because those games are enough of a slog already without using Armor Knights), and I find them very fun to use. They have their downsides, and in fact aren’t usually very good at all, but to me having this walking tank trudge through the battlefield, barely taking more than chip damage from most enemies, is some of the most satisfying parts of the experience.

There is one decision that I despise though. It’s not something that happens often in the mainline series, but it’s something Engage did and oh my god it sucks so much. And that was the decision to give Armor Knights infantry movement, but only for the unpromoted class. To put it more simply, Armor Knights don’t gain a point of movement on promotion.

This piece of design doesn’t actually make Armor Knights worse than they are in most games, because throughout most of the series, Armor Knights have 1 less movement than infantry classes, and both types gain +1 on promotion, really it’s a buff if anything since they’re gaining their +1 as an unpromoted class instead.

So why do I hate it? Well, it’s because it feels bad. In most FE games, Armor Knights always have less movement than your other units. You’re used to it, it doesn’t feel wrong. But when Engage has them start with infantry movement, you get used to that, you get used to them having the same level of mobility as all your other infantry units. And then when your army starts promoting, suddenly your Armor Knights aren’t keeping up, and it feels terrible.

I know a lot of games (including a lot of the mainline games) operate under the philosophy that Armor Knights are an earlygame utility that’s supposed to fall off later, similar to a Jagen, but I don’t like that philosophy. It works for a Jagen because that’s just one unit, but applying the same design to an entire class? Especially one as unique as Armor Knights? That feels terrible! I want to be able to bring my funny metal turtle to the endgame and have them feel powerful!

I do wanna make one very specific exception for this though, and that’s in games where most classes don’t gain movement on promotion. This is relevant because I’m playing Dream of Five right now, and that’s exactly how that hack operates. Armor Knights start at 5 move and don’t gain any on promotion, but that’s fine, because most infantry classes start at 6 move and don’t gain any on promotion. It doesn’t feel bad because the Armor Knights aren’t falling behind

Anyway this was a stupid rant thanks for coming to my TED talk or whatever :stuck_out_tongue:

10 Likes
2

It was prolly done in Engage as a compromise between giving armors infantry movement and keeping them 1 below like most games do. It’s a weird and pointless compromise as if they wanted to give armors more move, just do that. General is not that strong. 5 move wouldn’t make the class overpowered.

ofc this just makes great knight an even better option than it would otherwise be since it has 6 move like nothing general does is worth giving up +2 of the most important stat

anyway i’m not as against reduced armor knight movement as i used to be cuz armor knights really aren’t the most important class to get right

mounted units are almost always the cornerstone of every fe army and they really should be somewhat strong

i like armored units as a “beginner’s trap” unit where they’re bad on purpose to teach the player the value of high movement and flexibility (the role they serve in a lot of fe games)

5 Likes
3

Honestly I like Armor Knights that are strong. They’re almost never efficient to use, because they have limited movement, but because of that you can basically make them invincible to everything that isn’t magic/effecitve weapons and they still won’t be “good” units

I kinda just want them to be viable and fun to use, which isn’t hard to do while still keeping them balanced. Low SPD and movement is enough to keep them from being above B tier even when they’re goated like Oswin, so I say go wild honestly

As for Engage, I lowkey just don’t like how Engage handled movement in the first place, 4 move on most of your unpromoted units just feels wrong :sob: I still like Engage’s gameplay cuz it’s very intentionally designed and tight as hell but some of the decisions like that just feel really weird

7 Likes
4

Strong armor knights have their place.

Armored units are inherently earlygame units so having a strong armor knight early on is a pretty solid way to implement the class. Eases up on earlygame while the movement-focused mid and late game aren’t affected much at all.

Armors are strong in Gaiden too but that’s for completely different reasons. Mostly cuz they replace axe fighters in that game (so high str) and can actually double the many slow enemies on Alm’s route (plus infinite range warp to get them to the frontlines)

I don’t think armors being bad is inherently terrible design though as the class is kinda going to trend that way in a very movement-focused series. It’s fine to accept the class’s flaws and focus on higher-move units instead.

Armors just work better as enemy classes, especially bosses. How many Generals have we seen as enemy commanders? They make great damage sponges to incentivize using magic, effective weaponry, and rare weapons like silvers and killers.

3 Likes
5

I don’t think it’s bad design for Armors to struggle by any means, it’s completely just my own personal preference, I just like Armor Knights that can be strong in the latter half of the game. I don’t have any issue with earlygame Armors existing in the same way that Jagens do, but I like growth Armors as well and I especially appreciate when games give Armors something to do across the runtime

It’s true that Armors are way easier to design as enemies though. Enemies aren’t usually working on time-sensitive objectives, their only goal is to stop you, so their low movement doesn’t really hurt them much at all

2 Likes
6

That’s understandable.

IMO if you want to design your games around armors then aggressive enemies are the best move. Incentivizes the player to be active but also gives high-bulk low-move units something to do.

2 Likes
7

I did the opposite in Host of the Dark lmao

4 move armor and 6 move general, like they’re adjusting to the heavy armor

Plus is also allows greater payoff for going into general and justifies the more frequent hammers and armorslayers running around

I think unpromoted infanatry movement is fine though, they’re meant to tank and if the only way to let them do that is to turtle, then they dont really do their job well

3 Likes
8

That’s… Interesting. Can’t say much more without playing the hack to see it in practice but honestly I don’t mind it? Sounds like a good way to make training an Armor have a big payoff

I don’t necessarily mind infantry movement on Armors, I prefer them to have lower movement but infantry movement is fine as long as they’re unique in some other way. I do think the game can be designed to have side objectives or choke points for lower move units though; honestly, even having reinforcements come from behind for the Armor to fight is enough in many instances (though obviously you shouldn’t do that for every map)

9

Yeah… I did the 5 move Armor to 5 move General, too. But then, I gave Armors and Archers something else too; reduced forest and pillar move cost.

It does something slightly different with how the player can utilize those units on certain maps when they’re allowed to take up higher valued positions that are normally reserved for fliers.

4 Likes
10

ooo, that’s creative. I’m picturing a big armored General just crashing through the fucking trees jumpscaring the red units.

5 Likes
11

Yeah, exactly! They don’t need to watch out for fallen logs, roots, poison ivy, brambles… etc etc, they can just… GO.

5 Likes