Duel at the Valkyria Chronicles Corral

[hidetoshidecide]

Where I can post some additional thoughts while safely ensconced on my rotting throne of cypress, safe from the bleating cries of chilluns who react negatively to game discussion on a games forum.

Yesterday I messed around a bit with the Ghirlandaio and Jaeger's Tank missions.

Ghirlandaio - Run a scout carefully up the right side (I suppose you could do the left, as well, but I always went right) and capture a base behind the tank, spawn the lancer from the base and then have them take out the tank.

There are three tanks in the initial assault on Ghirlandaio. One is located in the first line of imperial defenses, and the other two are in the second line, behind the wall and minefield. All three are initially set up with their fronts facing perpendicular to the Gallian axis of advance, which does in fact expose their rear radiators.

However, your strategy won't work, for a variety of reasons. The most important is that if you don't kill them on turn 1, the tanks move from those exposed positions. The other, related to this, is that while you can base warp in VC1, you have to wait a turn for the unit to show up. So even if you are able to capture the base that is in the rear of the two tanks in the second line of Imperial defenses- which is unlikely, I would add, because it's defended by a heavy gatling gun, which is a hard(as opposed to soft) target that will be difficult for a scout to destroy on its own. Even if/when you do warp in a lancer via this base, his/her LOS and movement will be severely restricted by the switching yard structure and minefield in front of the base in question.

One way of doing things is to sweep up the right side of the map with a scout and shocktrooper on turn 1. There's an imperial scout/shocktrooper(I forget which) along this route which can be easily defeated, and put you in position to fire away at the rear of the tank in the first defensive line. It has 1500hp and can be easily destroyed with a shocktrooper. You can then continue to move your scout along the right side of the map, around the Imperial defensive wall and into the rear of one of the two tanks in the second line of defenses. It also has 1500 hp and can be destroyed in a couple of activations by a scout.

However, the same strategy will not work on the left side of the map. The tank on the left(Imperial right) has 2500hp and can't be destroyed by an unboosted scout in any reasonable amount of time- certainly not by the end of a turn 1 in which you have also destroyed the other two tanks.

So even employing this optimal strategy, which relies on prior knowledge of the scenario, you're still left to deal with at least one tank in a very strong position- hull down due to the wall, protected in the front/side by the minefield.

Two points leap out at me here. The first is that a player is very unlikely to play the scenario this way on their first time through the game, thus they will have to deal with two or even three of the tanks in much stronger positions from turn 2 onward. The second is that the sort of multilayered defense the Imperials have at Ghirlandaio, where multiple, mutually supporting defensive belts must be overcome, cannot be recreated in VC2. The maps just aren't big enough or open enough.

Jaeger's Tank - Move the Edelweiss up to the closest base and capture it, then end your turn. On the next turn, you'll have enough command points to blow its armor off in a single turn by repeatedly spamming it with a lancer, then you can either run another up behind it or just kill it from the front.

The tank I was referring to in this mission is in the base, and supported by several Imperial shocktroopers. Also, tanks can't capture bases.

The first time you played VC1, the tactics to succeed weren't as obvious.

I beg to differ. I have been playing tactical wargames like VC for 15 years or so. VC owes a lot to games like Steel Panthers, Squad Leader, and Combat Mission. The tactics it requires are not terribly
different from those you'd use in any squad level tactical WWII wargame, and that's what I cut my teeth on.

It doesn't matter how big a map is when your objective is so streamlined. When you're under assault from multiple directions and forced to hold down multiple objectives (ala VC2), it's a lot more difficult than to just run to a particular area and capture it (which is most of what you did in VC1). Huge maps often hurt the mechanics of VC1, making it so that expediently finishing a mission required taking the unit with the most movement (the scout) and having them zip from point A to point B.

Oh, but it does matter. See above comments about the Imperial defensive works at Ghirlandaio.

I did like the defensive missions in VC2 more than much of the other content, but ultimately I felt that they were a valiant failure. The game's AI just wasn't up to the task, probably aided and abetted by the smaller number of on-screen units. When I played a defensive mission, the AI always came in piecemeal and got slaughtered.

[Ike]

Shouldn't it be Dual at the VC Corral

:U

[hidetoshidecide]

Get thee to a punnery.

[kitten]

Mar 11, 2011 9:28:45 GMT -5 hidetoshidecide said:

However, your strategy won't work, for a variety of reasons.

Alright, so my strategy was truncated for the sake of convenience. I'll replay the mission so I can go step-by-step.

Start by deploying a tough shocktrooper in the upper right corner of your little square (who should be able to survive any interception fire, as they spawn directly in cover, otherwise, spawn two shocktroopers or whatever you want in the top, middle two areas to protect the base and protected from fire on all sides, obviously make sure Rosie is deployed for extra CP). Deploy Alicia and Largo inside the base as far to the right as you can.

Immediately begin by running Largo to the right, DIRECTLY BEHIND a tank and then blowing it up. Tank gone. Strategy. Largo will be ignored for the rest of the game both by you and enemy units provided you leave him behind the building.

Order "Caution" onto Alicia and run her up the right side, killing the shocktrooper, then end her turn being able to see both the gatling turret and sniper elite and gatling turret. Alternately, run a shocktrooper up to kill the other shocktrooper, and have Alicia kill the sniper elite - this will better protect your shocktrooper in the corner at the beginning and make the enemy lose a (useless) CP. Immediately after that, order another turn, and have Alicia run down the stairs in front of the gatling turret to capture a base and move on, using ragnaid if necessary. Move Alicia a final time, having her kill a Sniper Elite as she runs to get near the gatling turret on the far right of the map.

Summon a lancer from the recently captured base. End your turn.

Have the Lancer move twice, on the second turn killing the gatling on the far right of the map.

Move Alicia up the right side of the map, capturing the base in the top-right corner. Position her behind a sandbag, or have her take another turn and kill the sniper who should be near that base. It doesn't really matter.

Summon a Lancer from the new base (or two). Summon two shocktroopers from the new base. End your turn. I guess you would use demolition boost on Alicia and blow up the tank, you have more than enough CP.

Have the Lancer you summoned blow up the tank by walking behind it. Have the other Lancer, if you summoned one and really want to do this, waltz up the top center and clear the Tank Destroyer at the top (you can get behind it well enough to kill it in one hit) and maybe try to kill the completely useless Heavy Tank that does nothing the entire game in the center of the map with the same Lancer.

Have the two shocktroopers run up and take the base in the top middle, killing the sniper elites on the way.

Have Alicia run over to the right side and find out where Selvaria is. It doesn't matter if she dies at this point. If Selvaria close enough, have the two shocktroopers kill her. If not, don't. I'm sure by now, you know how to use a decoy to turn her around and another soldier to blast her in the head and kill her quickly (if you didn't get Alicia killed, you only need one of the previous shocktroopers and can use her as a decoy). If you really need to, you can use caution and/or attack and defense boost... You have enough CP to do whatever you want.

There. You just really easily beat Ghirlandaio in three or four turns (highest rank possible) with hilariously excess CP by having a scout zip straight to the important places and having lancers walk behind tanks.

Yes, this requires knowledge of how the level works in advance, but only a bit. The level is incredibly punishing the first time around because you have no idea where anything is or how to kill Selvaria, but there are many VC2 levels that are equally ridiculous the first time. These same tactics used to dominate this mission dominate almost every mission in the game and make them require only basic strategy. Caution is really the only command I ever need to use to completely break an entire level, and I generally only have to use it once - just like in this level! Even without using it, the strategies rarely become more complex. Heck, if I had been patient, or used demolition boost and just had Alicia kill the gatling turrets, I could have finished the level without using caution or any commands at all.

Most difficult VC2 missions require considerably more strategy than this (although the difficult ones are often spread out by filler missions or unlocked post-game), and many of the easier missions that are useful to replay for parts/exp have enemy placement/boxes you need to retrieve move around. This makes it fun (for me, anyway) and challenging to be able to finish these missions as quickly as possible.

The second is that the sort of multilayered defense the Imperials have at Ghirlandaio, where multiple, mutually supporting defensive belts must be overcome, cannot be recreated in VC2. The maps just aren't big enough or open enough.

VC1 suffered heavily because of reinforcements not coming in on the same turn they were summoned (which made it stupidly easy to steamroll the opponent) and having the objective generally just be "get here" or "kill that." VC2 is much more complex in that you have to defend multiple positions, and enemies can unexpectedly call in tons of reinforcements if you don't manage to secure your perimeters.

The tank I was referring to in this mission is in the base, and supported by several Imperial shocktroopers. Also, tanks can't capture bases.

Tanks can't capture bases!? Are you serious!? Gee, it couldn't have possibly been implied that I meant you clear the base with the Edelweiss and take it with someone else. Come on, dude, like I would argue something that ridiculous. I did get my strategy a little mixed, though, so I'll type it out.

Move the Edelweiss to the first boss, launch a mortar and kill the shocktrooper in the back. Move the Edelweiss again, this time shooting the tank in the back (with the amazing strategy of just getting behind it) and killing it in one hit, turn the Edelweiss around so that it is looking at the street, but not in site of the Lupus, and knock the shocktrooper so that he's facing the Edelweiss.

Run an engineer (preferably Dallas, cause I love her so much) up to the base and kill the shocktrooper, then capture the base. End your turn.

The enemy's turn will likely do nothing that really hinders you, except possibly hurt a Lancer you positioned in your central base.

Spend a bunch of CP having your Lancers NUKE THE HELL out of the Lupus, use the Engineer (if necessary) to refill ammo. Lancers should have their unlocked potentials by this point, so use the ones with Ultimate Anti-Armor and hope it activates. Provided you had enough Ultimate Anti-Armors activate, you can nuke the shell of the Lupus incredibly quickly, if not, you should still be able to take care of it.

Move the Edelweiss up to the lupus, shoot it. Move it behind it on a second movement and kill it. Level over.

Oh, but it does matter. See above comments about the Imperial defensive works at Ghirlandaio.

See my strategy that still ends the mission incredibly quickly I devised both of these strategies by myself, and rather quickly for the one in Ghirlandaio (it wasn't until I was on my second run through the game that I found how easily the battle against Jaeger was broken, it had initially given me more trouble than any other mission in the game).

Most of my challenges the first time through VC were from learning exactly how the mechanics of the game operate. Using that knowledge playing VC2, I definitely had an easier time going through the story, but still felt that many points in it required more thinking than VC1's story's most difficult parts.

I did like the defensive missions in VC2 more than much of the other content, but ultimately I felt that they were a valiant failure. The game's AI just wasn't up to the task, probably aided and abetted by the smaller number of on-screen units. When I played a defensive mission, the AI always came in piecemeal and got slaughtered.

What I liked about the defensive missions was that, alternatively, to get an A-Rank, they were seek-and-destroy missions where you couldn't leave a single unit alive (which is the only thing I would do). It added variety to the game and additional challenge.

Like I've said repeatedly, you can play VC2 from the beginning of the story to the end of the story without caring about rank and with only a few challenging missions. My first time through every single story mission that I finished (I would sometimes fail a couple times on some of the more challenging levels before I understood exactly what to do - I found it very confusing how to kill Dirk, at first, for example) aside from one single tutorial level netted me an A-Rank (although I still found it difficult to get several, more difficult than most VC1 missions). Going through the optional content and making sure I had full A's was much more challenging than anything in VC1, however.

[hidetoshidecide]

Mar 11, 2011 11:32:04 GMT -5 kitten said:

Mar 11, 2011 9:28:45 GMT -5 hidetoshidecide said:

However, your strategy won't work, for a variety of reasons.

Alright, so my strategy was truncated for the sake of convenience. I'll replay the mission so I can go step-by-step.

Thanks for this, although it appears as though we are talking past each other. I was talking about the mission that has you assaulting the gates of the fortress; you appear to be talking about the subsequent one which takes place inside the fortress where you fight Selvaria.

That was one of my least favorite ones. If I had to pick a single mission from the first game that is most like VC2, it'd be this one. A wonky setup, and lots of constricted LOS.

Yes, this requires knowledge of how the level works in advance, but only a bit.

The fact that any foreknowledge at all is required for these optimal strategies make them irrelevant to a first time playthrough, though. As I mentioned before, I played VC2 in the same way that I played the first game, and wasn't really taxed at all. The exact same style of play in VC1 resulted in a wonderful experience.

I can see how you'd like VC2 if you're the sort of person that likes getting the highest ranks and whatnot. My point is that, if you're a narrative gamer like me, VC2 is an abject failure. And I suspect there are more narrative gamers out there than A-rankers.

These same tactics used to dominate this mission dominate almost every mission in the game and make them require only basic strategy.

I largely didn't use orders in VC1. It wasn't intentional, I just kept forgetting about them. I didn't use them much in VC2 either, although that was as much because they cost more than simple forgetting.

In any case, I was able to wring a great narrative out of VC1, orders system or no(I agree that they're on the dumb side). But I don't know what I could have done to get that out of VC2.

VC1 suffered heavily because of reinforcements not coming in on the same turn they were summoned (which made it stupidly easy to steamroll the opponent) and having the objective generally just be "get here" or "kill that." VC2 is much more complex in that you have to defend multiple positions, and enemies can unexpectedly call in tons of reinforcements if you don't manage to secure your perimeters.

I don't see what is complex about leaving someone to garrison a base. That was one of my gripes, though. In VC2, you're already down to six squad members, from ten. The need to defend those bases robs you of more manpower. And this while they added several new classes. I didn't get the combined arms feel that I did from the first game.

Move the Edelweiss to the first boss, launch a mortar and kill the shocktrooper in the back. Move the Edelweiss again, this time shooting the tank in the back (with the amazing strategy of just getting behind it) and killing it in one hit, turn the Edelweiss around so that it is looking at the street, but not in site of the Lupus, and knock the shocktrooper so that he's facing the Edelweiss.

There is not enough room between the two buildings to do this. You cannot get a rear shot on the tank using the Edelweiss. It is possible but risky to do so with a lancer, due to the shocktrooper. And taking out the shocktrooper first is problematic because of the op fire from the Imperial tank's coax MG.

My initial solution was to blast the tank with Jan and Largo- this worked, but used up most of a turn. In any case, the tank is in a strong, well-supported position and cannot be destroyed by a scout rush. This is one instance where a lancer rush is feasible, but it's as likely to fail as to succeed.

Spend a bunch of CP having your Lancers NUKE THE HELL out of the Lupus, use the Engineer (if necessary) to refill ammo. Lancers should have their unlocked potentials by this point, so use the ones with Ultimate Anti-Armor and hope it activates. Provided you had enough Ultimate Anti-Armors activate, you can nuke the shell of the Lupus incredibly quickly, if not, you should still be able to take care of it.

Yes, the Lupus Regnum is not terribly strong once you're in a position to hit it hard.

See my strategy that still ends the mission incredibly quickly I devised both of these strategies by myself, and rather quickly for the one in Ghirlandaio (it wasn't until I was on my second run through the game that I found how easily the battle against Jaeger was broken, it had initially given me more trouble than any other mission in the game).

Emphasis mine. You seem to think that I'm arguing that you can't use prior knowledge to optimize your tactics. I'm not. But even by your own reckoning, the optimal tactics are not the obvious ones. And it's not a systemic issue, either. It's the scenarios you need to know, not the system.

What I liked about the defensive missions was that, alternatively, to get an A-Rank, they were seek-and-destroy missions where you couldn't leave a single unit alive (which is the only thing I would do). It added variety to the game and additional challenge.

Yes, that's what I ended up doing. I didn't like that. Am I defending, or attacking?

Going through the optional content and making sure I had full A's was much more challenging than anything in VC1, however.

You make my point for me. If a game's greatest strength is in the optional content, that's a grave weakness to my mind. I put 30 hours or so into VC2 and didn't get to what you say is the good stuff. So apparently, in the best case, VC2 has awful pacing. And that's for someone who shares your playing style. What we have is a game that's highly flawed for an A-ranker like you, and a failure for a narrative gamer.

[kitten]

Mar 11, 2011 12:53:11 GMT -5 hidetoshidecide said:

I was talking about the mission

Which is a mission that is even easier to zip a scout through :[ I aced that one the first time barely even having to try.

As I mentioned before, I played VC2 in the same way that I played the first game, and wasn't really taxed at all. The exact same style of play in VC1 resulted in a wonderful experience.

Yes, but you played VC1 before you played VC2. Having played either before the other will make the second you play seem much easier. If I had played VC2 before VC1, I would be burning through VC1 at an embarrassingly quick rate.

I can see how you'd like VC2 if you're the sort of person that likes getting the highest ranks and whatnot. My point is that, if you're a narrative gamer like me, VC2 is an abject failure. And I suspect there are more narrative gamers out there than A-rankers.

I said several times there are a lot of legitimate reasons to dislike VC2 and have only been contesting that you've said it's "devoid of strategy." I already said I like the original VC more, myself.

I don't see what is complex about leaving someone to garrison a base. That was one of my gripes, though. In VC2, you're already down to six squad members, from ten. The need to defend those bases robs you of more manpower. And this while they added several new classes. I didn't get the combined arms feel that I did from the first game.

The limited number of units you could deploy at once were something I thought added to the strategy, especially on levels that you knew were going to take multiple turns to even get an A-Rank on. Knowing when to leave an area and when to leave a guy positioned at it is very important.

There is not enough room between the two buildings to do this. You cannot get a rear shot on the tank using the Edelweiss.

Do I have to take a picture proving you wrong? I will do it, if necessary.

Yes, the Lupus Regnum is not terribly strong once you're in a position to hit it hard.

A "position to hit it hard" just means waiting one turn for it to come down the street. Your lancers have clear line of site with nearly 100% accuracy to hit the thing while it's too far to launch its own interception fire.

You make my point for me. If a game's greatest strength is in the optional content, that's a grave weakness to my mind. I put 30 hours or so into VC2 and didn't get to what you say is the good stuff. So apparently, in the best case, VC2 has awful pacing. And that's for someone who shares your playing style. What we have is a game that's highly flawed for an A-ranker like you, and a failure for a narrative gamer.

I think you've seriously missed some of the things I've already said. To quote myself from earlier in this very same argument -

Mar 9, 2011 16:36:43 GMT -5 kitten said:

Unfortunately, there's a lot of fluff to sift through to get to the more difficult parts and an emphasis placed on caring about what rank you get. If you ignore rank, optional missions and optimizing your army, you're missing out on where VC2 really shines.

It's completely reasonable to dislike - or even hate - VC2 because of its emphasis extra crap making it more directed to players willing to sift through hours of filler content. I'll agree that from the perspective of someone just wanting to beat the game, that it's very disappointing. However, to accuse it of being devoid of strategy is something I find it incredibly wrong to accuse it of. A-Ranking all of VC1 is a breeze compared to A-Ranking all of VC2, or even beating every mission on VC2.

I enjoyed the pacing, and I don't see why you seem confident that I didn't. One of my favorite things in the game was to try and hunt down every single enemy ace (or enemy with item drops) and get an A-Rank on the same run and on my first try. It was gratifying to succeed at, and although it was a self-imposed challenge, it kept any sense of tedium from getting to me. I consistently felt that the game was fun to play even when it was easy, too, so the grind actually felt appealing. It's one of the rare games I've enjoyed just grinding in, because I felt I could always do a little bit better than before - the SRPG genre, in general, seems to be heavily populated with games that have thick grinding. It's not really that strange VC2 leaned in that direction, and it's certainly likely a lot of fans other than myself were actually just fine with it doing that.

So, yes, VC2 had a lot of filler content, and while I find it fully reasonable that it would be disliked because of that, I don't consider it something objectively unappealing like you seem to (I mean, shit, the Disgaea games still have people buying them and that's practically all that they have to them, aside from bad humor and ugly design). Reviews weren't much lower and fan reaction to the game was generally positive. The game lasted me a much longer time and I was enjoying myself thoroughly every time I played it. While it was lacking and disappointing in more than one category, I felt the mechanics were tuned to be both more varied and balanced, and the amount of content as well as the increased difficulty were very strongly appealing.

So, I mean, bottom line here is that I just don't think you played it enough (or cared enough about rank) to accuse it of lacking strategy, and I strongly disagree with it having less than the original. I don't really get why you're so insistent on proving it was so awful. For you to go as far as accusing it of being "highly flawed" even for someone with my playstyle makes it seem like you've got some sort of vendetta against the game for having insulted you in some deeply personal way.

[TheGunheart]

I'm about to play that mission. I'll let you to know how it turns out.

[hidetoshidecide]

Mar 11, 2011 18:26:17 GMT -5 kitten said:

Yes, but you played VC1 before you played VC2. Having played either before the other will make the second you play seem much easier.

Why? I have been playing this kind of game for years. You keep insisting on this premise.

Do I have to take a picture proving you wrong? I will do it, if necessary.

Go ahead. I don't think there's enough room to get the Edelweiss behind the Imperial tank, and there certainly is not enough room to be able to depress the main gun of the Edelweiss for a rear shot on the tank.

So, yes, VC2 had a lot of filler content, and while I find it fully reasonable that it would be disliked because of that, I don't consider it something objectively unappealing like you seem to (I mean, shit, the Disgaea games still have people buying them and that's practically all that they have to them, aside from bad humor and ugly design).

Yes, I always consider it to be a poor design decision to lard a game up with filler. Which is why I'm so unmoved by declarations that over thirty hours of playtime was not sufficient to see the brilliance of VC2.

I don't really get why you're so insistent on proving it was so awful.

Pour encourager les autres...

[kitten]

Mar 13, 2011 10:33:28 GMT -5 hidetoshidecide said:

Why? I have been playing this kind of game for years. You keep insisting on this premise.

What other strategy game is there similar enough to Valkyria Chronicles to make you think you'd be just as experienced going into VC1 for the first time as you would be going into VC2? You even said yourself that you ended up playing both games the same way, I don't see how you can argue against the first game having given you knowledge that would make VC2's story less of a challenge.

I frequented GameFAQ's VC2 board from when the game came out to when I put it down, often helping other users who had questions about the game, which took about a week to a week and a half, wherein I spent about 100/110 hours playing the game. As already stated, aside from the very last secret mission that costs a 10,000,000 dct entry fee I didn't bother grinding for, I killed every ace and A-ranked every mission (without any outside help). I'm pretty darn good at these games, and I've got a lot of playtime under my belt, too. On GameFAQs, the general consensus seemed to be that the game was about as difficult as the first, aside from bonus content, which was much more difficult.

Go ahead. I don't think there's enough room to get the Edelweiss behind the Imperial tank, and there certainly is not enough room to be able to depress the main gun of the Edelweiss for a rear shot on the tank.

Notice this is directly on the reactor, not just "hey my circle could hit here if I'm lucky." I don't know how on earth you couldn't figure out how to do this, much less indirectly accuse me of lying because you couldn't figure it out, it's incredibly simple.

Yes, I always consider it to be a poor design decision to lard a game up with filler. Which is why I'm so unmoved by declarations that over thirty hours of playtime was not sufficient to see the brilliance of VC2.

The story is easier than the rest of the content so that more casual players can still get a reasonable sense of accomplishment out of the game. The extra missions and ranking system are there so that more skilled players and perfectionists have something to fill their time. It's not unusual for an RPG to do this. Like I've said over and over again, you can hate filler content and hate the game for it - that's perfectly legitimate to do and I'm not going to contest that - but to say the game is devoid of strategy is just wrong and reeks of some ignorant agenda against the game.

[hidetoshidecide]

Mar 13, 2011 11:52:00 GMT -5 kitten said:

What other strategy game is there similar enough to Valkyria Chronicles to make you think you'd be just as experienced going into VC1 for the first time as you would be going into VC2?

Didn't I already name these? Squad Leader/Advanced Squad Leader, Steel Panthers, the Close Combat series, the Combat Mission series, Lock 'n Load. The tactics are roughly similar to what you'd use in any low level tactical WWII wargame.

Valkyria's innovation was taking that grognardy core, simplifying it a bit, and putting it in an anime wrapper, and doing it on a console instead of on the PC or a tabletop.

Notice this is directly on the reactor, not just "hey my circle could hit here if I'm lucky." I don't know how on earth you couldn't figure out how to do this, much less indirectly accuse me of lying because you couldn't figure it out, it's incredibly simple.

I didn't think you were lying, just talking about some other mission or another part of this one- IIRC there's another tank besides that one and the Lupus Regnum. In any case, you're obviously quite right.

As for how I couldn't figure it out- I obviously misjudged the space between the tank and the building. There's space for it to get through, but just barely. I was always really conservative with the Edelweiss for obvious reasons, and this kind of a move is likely to end in a Game Over if you do it without any foreknowledge.

but to say the game is devoid of strategy is just wrong and reeks of some ignorant agenda against the game.

I was exaggerating, but only a bit.

[justjustin]

Mar 13, 2011 10:33:28 GMT -5 hidetoshidecide said:

Mar 11, 2011 18:26:17 GMT -5 kitten said:

Yes, but you played VC1 before you played VC2. Having played either before the other will make the second you play seem much easier.

Why? I have been playing this kind of game for years. You keep insisting on this premise.

I've noticed this is true for all genres. If you have a good amount of experience in a genre, all other games in that genre become easier. The only things you have to overcome are the variations in the other games. However, I find it's more true for some genres than others. Beat-em-ups (as much as I love them) are limited in the sense that if you change too many elements it no longer becomes a beat-em-up. So there can only be less variation between games in that genre, thus if you can master just one of them you'll have a huge wealth of knowledge to conquer all the others. SRPGs belong to a more dynamic genre (compare Fire Emblem to Valkyria Chronicles-- massive difference) so there can be more variation, thus the knowledge transfer isn't quite as useful (but still important) since there are more differences to overcome.

[hidetoshidecide]

Mar 13, 2011 12:25:01 GMT -5 justjustin said:

I've noticed this is true for all genres. If you have a good amount of experience in a genre, all other games in that genre become easier. The only things you have to overcome are the variations in the other games.

I probably ran afoul of this in VC. One of the unusual things about VC was that tanks and snipers didn't have op fire. Given all of the hours I've spent playing Steel Panthers and Combat Mission, I'd expect to get blown apart if I tried on that move that KCC just posted screenshots of.

SRPGs belong to a more dynamic genre (compare Fire Emblem to Valkyria Chronicles-- massive difference) so there can be more variation, thus the knowledge transfer isn't quite as useful (but still important) since there are more differences to overcome.

I'd agree that FE and VC have little in common. I think of Valkyria as a tactical wargame. I see much more of Squad Leader in it than of Fire Emblem and that ilk.

[lanceboyle94]

Mar 13, 2011 12:30:18 GMT -5 hidetoshidecide said:

SRPGs belong to a more dynamic genre (compare Fire Emblem to Valkyria Chronicles-- massive difference) so there can be more variation, thus the knowledge transfer isn't quite as useful (but still important) since there are more differences to overcome.

I'd agree that FE and VC have little in common. I think of Valkyria as a tactical wargame. I see much more of Squad Leader in it than of Fire Emblem and that ilk.

I've always seen Valkyria as some sort of Front Mission, but with tanks instead of giant mechs, and with troops as well.

[megatronbison]

I think of Valkyria as all kinds of awesome.

[Deleted]

I think the first game is great, but really would have preferred if they'd kept to a more realistic plotline, rather than yet another supernatural anime tale.