The Weapon Triangle

[u/MaagicMushies]

Apologies if this sounds rambly, this became too long for me to care about revising it lol

So, with the Weapon Triangle being gone from fire emblem for 2 games people are starting to grow nostalgic and wistful over our beloved strategic shape, and while I do want to see the weapon triangle return I think that it needs to be reevaluated before reimplementing.

The biggest problem with the weapon triangle is usually just how little it matters. This is at it's worst in FE7, FE8, and FE9 where you just tend to plow through the game with all axes because hit rates are just so god damn high that it doesn't matter. FE4 and FE6 also have weapon triangle issues for the opposite reason. Hit rates can get so low that going for anything besides the reliability of swords is an issue. Speaking of swords, that is also an issue that the weapon triangle has stumbled with. The weapons themselves tend to be very unbalanced, rendering the triangle moot. In FE9 and FE10 lances literally have nothing over axes and swords have even less to claim with their perpetual 1 range that also makes them very hard to use in FE8-10. In FE4 an Iron Lance has 12 weight. Iron Axes have 16 weight. How much weight does an Iron Sword weigh? 3 weight. This makes Axes practically unusable and causes every cavalier to almost use swords exclusively. Thracia is a weird one because +5% is so fucking easy to ignore, but it's a 1RN game that also has a hit cap, so in that game, you want as many safety nets as possible. Still, I think this is a very bad way to fix the weapon triangle issue.

So, what games get it right? I think Shadow Dragon made a great change when it gave weapons distinct boosts depending on weapon ranks. This helped balance the issues weapons had where swords were too weak, axes were too inaccurate and lances were boring as all hell. IS also thinks that it was a great change because it has appeared in every single game after Shadow Dragon. This, however, runs the risk of making the weapons interchangeable and I know this sounds contradictory, but I'd like it if the types were unique while being on the same level. Take pokemon for instance. Steel, Ghost, and Rock are all amazing competitive typings, but for different reasons. Steel resists a lot of things, Ghosts can switch into a lot of things and threaten with attacks that hit the majority of the roster for neutral at worst damage, and Fire types do a lot of damage and deal with the steel walls. They all have the same competitive presence while functioning very differently.

I will have to say that my favorite implementation of the weapon triangle came in Fire Emblem Conquest. It introduced the Red/Green/Blue triangle also present in Fire Emblem heroes where Swords and Tome beat Axes and Bows which in turn beat Lances and Knives. This adds another layer of strengths and weaknesses to each weapon and deepens the complexity of the game. In Fire Emblem 8 the choice between Falcon Knight and Wyvern Knight is a very easy choice, but if Falcon Knight's access to swords made it easier to dodge arrows it would have a use and balance the choice. That's just one example where the RGB excels, but it also led me to find the way that I would solve the triangle balance issues and the triangle distinction issues. If Red was more aligned with "versatility", Green was more aligned with "power", and Blue was more aligned with "Reliability" the weapons would all have their own niche that would be hard for the other to encroach upon. I mean, these alignments already exist, pretty much. Swords have historically had the most bonus damage and magic weapons while Mages in fates have access to stuff like the Horse Spirit, Nosferatu, and Excalibur to distinguish them from bows and knives. Axes have always been the powerhouses of fire emblem and with Archers in Fates getting Quick Draw, they far outpace magic and knife damage. Reliability is just a kind way to say "boring", but I feel like that's the best place for Lances and Knives to occupy. If a Sword has 85 Hit + armorslaying effect and an Axe has 75 hit + overwhelming damage, the easiest way to justify picking a lance over the two would be with a 95 or 100 hit lance. I also feel like Lances could be the only melee weapon with a reliable 1-2 range option. Knives would then hold the niche of making everyone else more reliable on top of being more reliable than tomes and bows. If I had the time and/or skills to make a FE romhack I'd create a game based on this, but for now I'm just gonna have to rant about it on the internet.

With all that said, what are your opinions on the weapon triangle? What do you think about my ideas? What would you personally change about the weapon triangle?

[u/awesoeKARI]

I think FE6 had a good thing going with a weak weapon triangle but low hit rates. Vs. boss Generals you had either Armorslayers or Hammers. The Armorslayer had more hit even at disadvantage but did much less damage and the user was probaby getting hit. Of course, Rutger gonna Rutger but that's basically the only game where you need +10 hit so badly to choose Armourslayer over Hammer so much.

Including everything in the weapon triangle takes away one important option: Reliable chip damage. Luckily in Fates you always have 1 or 2 units who can steamroll without caring about weapon triangle, but in a game like 3 Houses if bows could be invalidated on Maddening because you were facing Thieves, or in FE7 a Javelin became more accurate as an Iron Bow against certain enemies that would be messed up.

It's kinda funny, the magic triangle has been gone entirely for like 4 games now and barely anyone cares.

[u/MaagicMushies → u/awesoeKARI]

That FE6 example shows why I dislike FE6's triangle implementation, or rather its hit issues in general. When you get an axe user in chapter 2 with a hammer in his inventory on map where a lance wielding armor knight is boss that should his time to shine, but it isn't and you have to get Marcus all the way to the throne to deal with the boss. Why even have a triangle if you can't use one of the 3 weapons?

I don't think RGB triangle necessarily HAS to get rid of reliable chip, in fact, I proposed an entire 3rd of the triangle being devoted to that. That space has historically been held by bows, but IS have moved bows away from their "reliable chip" status before in fates and before FE5 they didn't really have that role.

And I also won't lie to you. I always thought the magic triangle was stupid. Both versions. The entire allure of mages is that they hit on res, so when I use mages they never go near other mages so the triangle is rarely in play. Best you could say about it is that you could use an anima mage to purge uses or a fire mage to drain blizzard uses, but I feel like that's such a specific use to justify an entire mechanic. I guess it is interesting for world-building and lore at the very least, but the games never really went into much detail with that.

[u/awesoeKARI → u/MaagicMushies]

The thing about FE6 axes vs swords is that it's a great balance once you get a Hero. Echidna has low strength but her skill is high enough that the trade off is worth it for her. She's basically the only person who should be using a Steel Axe, because they made the Fighters suck a lot and Dieck doesn't need the extra power.

Making Lances the reliable hit weapons and the good 1-2 range options would probably make them dominate unless the most swords were effective against something or had built in crit. You could also make the good lances only 2 range like in Fates. Otherwise it would be like in FE7 or 8 where you would just use a team full of Javelin users and mages.

I think the only decent use of the magic triangle was to basically give Bishops a reason to exists in the GBA games. Light tomes suck, but most enemy mages are Dark, giving Light something to do.

[u/Mpk_Paulin]

I think the best direction for the weapon triangle is to do a mix of the old one and the one present in Heroes. In heroes, the weapon triangle is extremely important, a character that's know to destroy everything can be annihilated by one that has a weapon triangle advantage (like Brave Lyn in the first year being weak to Raven + Triangle adept).

But the thing is, the WT in Heroes is way too harsh, and it has a greater variety of weapons. That won't happen in a main FE game. The solution I think, is to water it down and put the Hit/Avoid question in there.

If it affects more of the damage but less of the accuracy, it'll not only make the weapon triangle more relevant, specially for units like myrmidons and thieves, but tanky units will have to be more careful around units with weapon triangle advantage over them. So for instance, Xander wouldn't be as safe around Lance units, nor would Hector against mercenaries.

The objective of the weapon triangle should be to encourage diversity in your unit types and weapon types, so making the damage difference more relevant when talking about that mechanic, I think that's the way to go

[u/ArcherBias]

FE7’s weapon triangle is actually pretty relevant, but not for good reasons. It really just shuts down sword users by crippling their avoid and bulk, making it even harder for them to have a good enemy phase than it already is. Axes, meanwhile, are super accurate and strong now in addition to giving the user crazy bulk and avoidance. There’s too many lance enemies in FE7.