When I started playing Fire Emblem with FE7, archers and bows were known to be pretty rough, but in recent games, bows have excelled! I look at what the issue with bows was in the older games, and how they have improved in entries where they are good.
Community Discord: / discord
Twitter: / actuallizardyt
Music:
Curing Sorrow - WhimsyHeath
Tranquility - Calculon
Under The Stars - Treatstar
A lot of people have asked about the rom hack of FE8 and the SRPG at the end. They are: Fire Emblem 8 Oops all archers: feuniverse.us/t/fe8-oops-all-archers-v2-0-beta/15253 Grey Heritage: store.steampowered.com/app/1772310/Grey_Heritage_Faded_Vision/
weird that you keep bringing up FE8 but don't really talk about FE9 where Shinon will solo every map and Rolf with a bit of effort is even stronger.
@@MrBubblebox FE9 Shinon and Rolf are both indeed awful (Shinon is ok early but borderline useless when he comes back), but Geoffrey and Astid are both good. Granted neither of the later are bow locked so that helps of course.
Mages can also fill a lot of archers roles, can attack from 1 or 2 range, wind spells can take fliers, and they can also hurt armored units.
That's true and bypassing defense can be really useful taking down fliers too since often res is slightly lower.
@@AdamTheGameBoyPegasus Knights have high resistances, an opposite to the Wyvern Knights. It usually takes a good mix of both weapon types to deal with flyers properly, especially when there's also Flyer effective damage tomes in the game(Wind tomes).
It's one of the main reasons archers kinda suck. They have to compete with magic users as well as with javalins/hand-axes etc. There isn't a lot of a niche left for archers...
I think bows work best as a secondary weapon as with assassins or bow knights, gives a sword unit range options.
@@zansolo5653 it depends on which game you’re referring to imo. Something like FE7 has very few pegasus knights in my experience and a ton of wyvern knights
You forgot the game where archers are at their most valuable, FE9. Rolf is the best unit in the game because he has the most important trait: My Favoritism.
I remember in Fe10, my Rolf with a double bow 😱 amazing, just to powerful
he also comes at lvl 1 and if you have enough patience to level him up he deletes everything like mine critted 12 times in a row in the last map in hard mode
It's by this logic that Marisa is the best unit in Fire Emblem in general
FE9 remains Haar emblem imo, also I prefered Shinon. Needs less investment plus he has sass for days.
@@Aardappelpurree you're thinking of fe10. haar isn't that great in fe9; mainly just an adequate replacement for jill if she died or received insufficient training. shinon also fucking sucks. he's useful in the earlygame, but he just doesn't exist for over a third of your playthrough, and when he comes back, his great stats are now abysmal and his superb growth rates can't save him. saying shinon needs less investment than rolf is a weird argument to make, since it's not even really true, and even if it was, that doesn't make him good. rolf is a meme unit, and being marginally better than him isn't something to be proud of.
I personally think that more access to 3 range should be given to archers. I never understood how someone could throw an axe as far as they fire an arrow. More than 3 range though can be a bit much. I just like the idea that if bows are the dedicated long range weapon, they should have a longer range than other options
I wish the tiered longbows from Radiant Dawn became a series staple. It would give archers progression in 3 range options more than the regular longbow which tends to be rare or bad or both. It would give archers the meaningful depiction to use a safer but weaker 3-range option or use the stronger 2 range option where they can be retaliated against by other 2 range users.
2-3 range really is the sweetspot. 1 range is most melee weapons, 1-2 is hand axes, javelins and magic, pure 2 is most bows, and 2-3 is lategame bows. It really creates a niche with its specific feel for archer units.
i do think that having bows with 3 range is pretty useful in fe fates ninjas have a 3 range wpn and it feels kinda niche, it can't double or proc skills but it's 3 range and that's enough poking at 3 range feels really nice even if ninjas don't have stellar str stat, snipers also have a 3 range wpn but in that game ninjas are just better archers(though they are also the best combat units in general) with 1-2 range wpns and highest speed making then impossible to get doubled they strugle poking at high def units(armor knights) but thats not that much of a downgrade since most phisical classes also strugle against those guys what i wanted to say is a 3 range wpn is good enough, doesn't need to be 2-3, if that wpn can double it is more than enough, though acc migh be an issue since dev shit on those wpns since it's pretty lame to get hit from that far away
Honestly, this and the backup addition added in Engage. Would be an amazing niche. Tiered Longbows, or Sniper's giving +1 range. Or even just straight up changing bows to 2-3 by default. (Maybe make longbow 3-4?)
Yeahp. All bows should be 2-3, with the longbow having a bit more; either 2-4 or maybe 3-5 (amplifying the close in weakness in exchange for range that's pushing 'problem' territory). 2-3 being the 'base' range also means enemy archers aren't a huge deal; it's easy to just not give longbows to everything.
CQ Archers are peak. They're very similar to traditional archers but with a few tweaks like increased bow Mt and addition of bows to the weapon triangle. Archers being as strong as they are in CQ is just impressive, and it does speak to how much CQ's map design can influence things like that.
Bows having a ton of power also makes sense with how they worked in real life. Videogames tend to portray bows as the "fast but weak" weapon while crossbows are "slow but powerful", while in reality it was the exact opposite.
@@BigKlingy bows were actually fast and powerful, while crossbows were slow and weak - one of the deciding factors in multiple battles of the Hundred Years War was the British longbowmen, who were able to kill crossbowmen on the French side before they could be shot, due to the fact that a skilled longbowman can shoot many times before a crossbow can be reloaded.
What is GQ archer?
@@BigmanDogs "CQ" is short for "Conquest", as in Fire Emblem Fates: Conquest.
@@Gnarfledarf ohh okay. I'm not super involed in the online fire emblem community so it went over my head haha.
I remember playing Conquest for the first and being shocked that my endgame team had 3 bow users, something I thought I’d never do, but nowadays having multiple bow users is just the norm and it feels like such a step up from older games where having more than one bow unit was generally seen as a mistake, aside maybe from PoR because of Astrid and Geoffrey.
FE6 waa good for bow users as well. Its just the later GBA titles and Tellius where they're completely lesser.
Even then, you would typically want to use Astrid and Geoffrey more for Axes with the former and Lances with the ladder then either one for Bows anyway.
Hey it was never a mistake to make use of the bow triangle attack in PoR because it's funny It just implies you used Rolf and opted to choose bows for Oscar...
@@Xeconis it also implies you trained Boyd into a warrior which you shouldn’t really do imo since you’ll generally end up with at least 4 or 5 mounted axe units, if not more, who will all surpass him
@@maximeminassian6002 Game is more than easy enough for it to not really be an issue though, it's just specifically training Rolf or picking Bows is a "feels bad" moment, while using Boyd doesn't tend to end up that way
Grey Heritage Dev here. I was not expecting the shoutout at the end! I think archers can be kind of difficult to balance. My favorite version of them are Echoes personally. I think they have more utility due to long bows and reliable for kills instead of chipping. I do think they can be a little too strong in Echoes though. Great video as always!
FE9 is funny because it has really bad archers and 2x effectiveness. Rolf has awful bases for his join and Shinon is good in the tutorial maps but doesn’t return until he’s outclassed. The best bow user is Astrid because she’s a Cavalier and has Paragon. On promotion she can get Axes and become a god like the other mounted units.
Something that helps Astrid a lot is joining right when you’re fighting a bunch of Raven laguz. With paragon at level 1 even just chipping them gives her a full level. And then as she keeps finishing off low-ho enemies, it’s suuuper quick and easy to get to promotion, which as you say is when she basically loses bows by virtue of getting a better weapon lol.
When talking about conquest maps that are designed well for archers you neglected to mention chapter 10 which I feel is another good example of where archers shine. Cause I specifically always reclass Mozu into an archer for that map just because there are a ton of fliers that will just B-line it to the green tiles so having an extra archer like Mozu helps a lot in being able to deal with it all. There are also two balistae on that map only archers can use so having an extra one in addition to niles again helps a lot with chipping down enemies from a distance
Chapter 10 is a huge reason why Mozu is actually a very good unit in Conquest despite being a trainee and requiring one of your early Heart Seals to be useful. She’s probably the best trainee/est in the series in terms of unit viability, and a big part of that is being able to significantly contribute to one of the toughest maps in her game (and bows in conquest just generally being well designed in stats, classes, and enemy/map configuration).
Chapter 10 is a huge reason why Mozu is actually a very good unit in Conquest despite being a trainee and requiring one of your early Heart Seals to be useful. She’s probably the best trainee/est in the series in terms of unit viability, and a big part of that is being able to significantly contribute to one of the toughest maps in her game (and bows in conquest just generally being well designed in stats, classes, and enemy/map configuration).
Counterpoint, ballistician Arthur for no reason other than it's funny
@@LoudWaffle cyril in three houses is also a good trainee, though for him its in spite of him being a trainee, not because of it bro has both vengeance AND point blank volley, the latter of which he learns at C+ bows which is ridiculous
I think looking at the rises and many falls of the swordmaster class might be an interesting one to look at next because I think they're even more inconsistent than bows in terms of how good they are
Were they ever that good though? They've always sufferes from low(er) movement and being locked to swords.
@@SurfingKyogreNL FE6 Swordmasters are pretty good.
@@turtersvongenbu 120% Crit Rutger
@@turtersvongenbu My bad, you're right. Forgot about Rutger.
@@SurfingKyogreNL Radiant Dawn Swordmasters since they have reliable 1-2 range that for some reason uses their STR Also Astra is really good in RD
I know people might complain about it, especially since this is a video game and not real life, but I appreciate that bows have become so powerful in FE, because in historical warfare they were probably one of the biggest contributors to an army’s victory.
That's a bit of an overgeneralization. sure some culture and country really liked bows, like the Japanese, the Mongols, or even the British, but some other country and culture barely used them, like the romans, the greek, or even the French that preferred crossbow other them. Sure if an army fielded a lot of bow, they often used tactic where bows would greatly contribute. But bows never changed how warfare was waged like guns did.
@benjaminparent4115 Bows have changed many, many battles. The only reason they didn't change warfare the way firearms did was that bows are much harder to use effectively, and thus the number of effective archers an army could support is much more limited.
I am not claiming they weren't important for many battles, I am claiming that they never became so good to the point every army had to field them. You can't claim that bow were one of the biggest contributor to battlefield victory throughout history, when entire culture existed for centuries, and won battles without ever fielding archer.@@edwardking9359
@@benjaminparent4115 I think one is allowed to generalise a lil when you're talking about the entirety of recorded human history lmao. Some exceptions don't change the fact that bows have had a high degree of influence over the development of warfare
Also worth noting is bows funnily enough getting defensive value in FE12 Lunatic Reverse and FE13 Lunatic/Lunatic+. In FE12, enemies are strong, and on Lunatic Reverse they all get what's basically Vantage+, enemies will ALWAYS attack first regardless of whoever's initiating combat. Being able to avoid counterattacks becomes a very nice ability so you're not putting yourself in danger on player phase. And in FE13, enemies can sometimes have the Counter skill, which can utterly destroy careless enemy phasing. If you're leaving Robin with a tome, making them attack at 1-range, it may leave them open to just blowing themselves up on a random enemy with Counter. Bows happen to be a 100% reliable way of ensuring that surprise Counter is never a problem.
Long Bows in Shadows of Valentia are 2-6 range, they do not have 1 range counter attacks, but they out range every single enemy in the game and that is why Long Bows are the superior bow in that game. Dealing damage while not taking damage is the greatest form of strategy you can have, and the freeze ability on long bows also gives hit rate too.
Wasn't expecting to wake up this morning and see someone playing Oops All Archers. It's a stupid little hack but it's still kinda surreal that people play it lol. I agree with most of the things said here, I don't like 1-2 bows being the norm, although having stuff like the sidelong bow and the mini bow in Fates are cool, as they allow you to 1 range in a pinch in exchange for some of your archer bonuses (flier effectiveness and 2 range on the mini bow, being able to double on the sidelong bow). In general, archers get way better the more things are going on. Archers are actually a really efficient unit type on player phase; they don't need healing most of the time, they typically have an ability to operate some siege weaponry, and the range of their bow often allows them to contribute while still staying out of overlapping enemy ranges. I also like giving archers utlity functions like steal/thief utility, rallies, or staves, so that archers can fall back on their other niches if the next map is not player phase heavy enough for them
Oops all archers has become a bit of a cult classic in the Discord server. We're trying to get enough people to play it so we can draft it lol
archers in sov are incredible. leon is such an incredible unit for his ability to easily dispatch scary mages on celica's route, as well as the many slow terrain maps present on her route (poison swamps my beloathed). Yeah, there's not a lot of fliers, but being able to safely counter mages is invaluable, especially considering mages tend to have low defense. I also always have at least one archer on alm's route just to deal with witches, since alm's cast has. pathetic res on all fronts. sov archers my beloved. leon fire emblem is the guy of all time.
I agree ! Echoes archer are the best, and they carried my playthrough too ! My most used unit was Python, who participated in 555 battles, and got 295 victories, and my others most used unit were Tobin, Kliff and Leon
Their range is freaking infinite in SoV. I use the villager class trick for Atlas and now he's an OP Archer Sniper.
using Tobin and Python in SoV and just spamming Hunter's Volley just felt like cheating but it was really fun
Dont even need those bozos just have alm do it
I find it very interesting how others evaluate units and their usefulness I always just used units that I like best and made due with them. I never really sat down to think about "efficiency of play".
This is me when I play too! I’ve always used bow users and never really thought they were bad or unfavorable cuz I use who I like and what I like.
Same, and I always play games on max difficulty. 🤷 Even doing meme runs in TH on Maddening is still manageable (making Edelgard a Healer, Bernie a Tank, and Linhardt a Grappler). Most people just suck at video games and logic in general, and need min maxed guides to play anything. I just finished a NG0 Maddening Classic, No Divine Pulse/Iron Mode (no save scumming) run of TH, with little difficulty, albeit a lot of game knowledge.
I think the mod to add Lynn into FE6 really showed me how much better bows are in that game than 7. Lynn goes from being a bit of a joke to actually being a useful asset. Getting bow on promotion is one of those things where in fe7 is virtually a useless promo bonus but in 6 you actually use the bow a lot because you keep finding reasons to do so.
When I made a FE mod. Buffing the offensive capabilities of your foes, and somewhat nerfing cavaliers did wonders for the archers. I also gave Snipers 2-3 range. While Bow Knights got Canto+. With the former being something of a sniper, while the bow knights are more of a skirmisher. This was done to make the 2 classes a bit more distinct from eachother though. It taught me that archers do not need a buff, they only need a game that contextualizes them better, like both Conquest and Engage did.
One possible solution from other games is overwatch/attacks of opportunity. Basically on enemy phase, have them automatically shoot at enemies that pass through their 2 range. You can give it limits like "only if you didn't attack on player phase" or "only once per turn" or "reduced accuracy" or "must have higher speed than target", etc. It's odd that archers are such a player phase unit in fire emblem when they have extremely strong defensive utility in real life.
one thing I liked about 3 houses was that there was no reason not to give every member of your army a bow to hold onto. since anyone could use any weapon, buying a bunch of iron bows meant every character had a 2 range option at all times
Three range, even, with minimal investment
Feel like with 3 Houses, bows being buffed the way they are and as strong is also well justified by one of your potential lords being a bow user, so they have to be good in this game because otherwise Claude would be just a bad Lord, when he already weaker than Edelgard and Dimitri.
@@shizachan8421The lords in three houses don't really need to be balanced against each other, though. They just need to be balanced against the enemies they face.
@@edwardking9359 I mean, they kinda need to, because in the end, they operate unter the same systems in terms of gameplay and I think the devs did a good job with Edelgard and Dimitri, where people are debating over who is actually stronger as a Unit, but imagine if bows were bad in FE3H, it would just push Claude into being the least desirable Lord.
@shizachan8421 Doesn't matter how strong a unit is compared to other units that don't fight the same enemies. Strong player units vs strong enemy units and weak player units vs weak enemy units will end up feeling about the same. When the lords end up deciding which maps you face in part 2, how strong that individual lord happens to be is only half of what might make them desirable.
Never forgett the bow knigths of fe4-5 The abuse of hit and run tactics with these guys are pretty efective
With he example he threw at the end of the video I just thought about how many chapters I could throw Robert, with so many levels from deleting flyers, against a wall in any fort and he would delete all that was in the other side. Playing safer is insanely valuable but it is not valued enough
Great analysis of the class! I also love it when random series-inspired indie games get a shoutout in such videos.
A video about archers without mentioning the gods Claude and Takumi?
This was a great video! I love this kind of analysis!
Starting with 3 Houses not to mention Claude's route really warped my perception of how valuable an archer is. Now that I've played quite a few of the titles that's changed and it was Awakening that showed me how weak they can be. Didn't have a single bow unit as a part of my army unless it was a force deploy.
I feel like Claude had to be the reason why bows had to be good in 3H, because otherwise you would end up with one of your potential Lords just being lackluster or incentivized to not use his standart weapon type which also had his relic weapon. The game also has Bernadetta, who is a monster of a bow unit.
I don't mind the idea of archers having a 1 range option. To be specific, I think a skill or specific weapon (like a short bow) that allows 1 range works as a sort of trade off. For me, Fates and Engage have the best archers. Fates made the bows have way more might than normal and made a few unique versions. I'd also like to mention Claude's S rank bond ring which gives an extra range on bows at full hp. Also shout out to Project Ember's 2-3 range bows.
The thing about Bow users is that they get better the more player phase the game is. Generally stronger units in general compared to your units and more powerful fliers. As for Three Houses and Echoes they just have big range. Like 5 range wtf? Btw for Wyverns in engage the best units who can reliably kill them is a warrior Etie with a forged silver bow, Radiant bow Fogado, or Radiant Bow Anna. They are either fast or deal a ton of damage and have a high strength growth
The Radiant Bow in Engage has to be the silliest, yet my favorite way to make sure archers can do big damage to fliers in a game that scales pretty hard by endgame. "Here's a bow with 57 mt on fliers. Forge it up and give it an engraving and it can have 75 mt. And you can buy multiple copies of it."
fire video bro. glad this was recommended to me. definitely subbing.
Idk how to feel about the SoV archers. It was fun to just shoot from range and position around enemy archers, but i felt like using them was too easy. 3H twice as much. Fates having limited 2 range options in a game with lots of high-mobility threats really made bows/daggers feel satisfying to use.
Fe 10, Radiant Dawn, had really good bow users. Crossbows helped give a range 1 option, their crit and skill activation meant they trigger triple damage most of the time, and an S rank bow with range 1-3, and I think marksman extended range by one.
Crossbows are only really useful for their effective damage, which triples weapon might, crossbows having high might because they don’t take unit strength into consideration. Leonardo actually has a niche because of this of being able to oneshot any laguz at base with Beastfoe and his Prf in Part 3, or any flier without Beastfoe. But it’s not a particularly valuable niche and takes BF away from a frontliner you want to feed exp to, and he’s not good at all outside of that. Rolf and Astrid are pretty bad. And then Shinon’s great but like Birthright Takumi, this is much more in spite of being an archer/sniper than because of his class; he comes with the highest stats among the whole Greil Mercenaries and is the second closest to promotion, so getting him to third tier with practically a OHKO skill (not unique to snipers, all 3rd tier classes have those) and three range bows is very doable. It also helps that most of the P3 GM maps have lots of deployment slots compared to the size of your army, so when people start to get benched Shinon is competing against units like Illyana, Brom, or Kyza. It’s very nobrainer to keep him around and have him continue getting experience. So basically I disagree that bows are good in Radiant Dawn. Shinon is good, and it’s not because he uses bows. There are also much fewer enemies bows are strong against in this game because Hawks/Pegasi are limited, but Wyverns aren’t weak to arrows. I’m pretty sure Shinon doesn’t even encounter a single bow-weak enemy until Part 4.
@LoudWaffle I mean, radiant dawns balance is all over the place, but I think the mechanics are there for bow users to be good in a game where Haar, Ike, and laguz royals don't make every other unit redundant. And then Titania, Gatrie, Soren, Mia, Edward, Boyd, Elincia, Volke, Shinon, Jill and Aran exist, competing for any slot not taken by royals, making anyone else not listed, even if they could match their stats in the end, just fluff.
An interesting case study here is Radiant Dawn Shinon. He's basically the hypothetical Innes with amazing stats. RD is a pretty enemy phase heavy game without that many fliers to harass you, but Shinon still manages to be a decent unit in Sniper by virtue of his raw numbers and quirks like crossbows. The fact that Marksman gets 2-3 range (which becomes 1-3 range once you get the Double Bow) also gives him a niche to flex his muscles in.
I agree, RD always felt like a game where Bows were decent... but it was almost entirely because Shinon was so good. Rolf is unreliable and Leonardo is eh, but Shinon's stats are insane and Marksman gets 1-3 range and a small crit bonus.
@@BigKlingy with some transfers iirc he also can cap some stats so he just gonna keep on snowballing
I actually really liked Rebecca in my Blazing Blade playthrough. I don't know if I just got REALLY lucky with her growths, but she was actually one of my strongest units.
Her growths are really really good, but she also starts out in such a poor spot that it's very difficult to feed her kills. Especially on HHM where despite the many pegasi early-game, she can't one-shot them, and thus you have to go out of your way to get her killing blows.
GBA emblem pretty universally gave its archers absolutely incredible growths relative to the game around them, the problems were just the inherent difficulties of the class. Neimi is probably the worst, and while she's lackluster in FE8, Niemi is still very good. It's just... archer problems.
I think everyone has had at least one blessed Rebecca run. I know i always use her despite everything. She sadly can't use Rienfleche effectively.
Of the games I've played, I think Valentia still has my favourite approach to archers. Locked to 2, occasionally 3 range in games like Awakening just made bows bad tomes, which also had 2 range, but worked at 1 range too, often had useful effects, and hit resistance where the rest of your army is already hitting defense. On top of that, the class identity of bow classes has tended to be "have more Hit", but since you can't have a higher hit rate than 100%, that's only really valuable against very high Avo enemies, and high Avo enemies are rare because they're frustrating for players who haven't realised they need to spec someone to deal with avo enemies. The Valentia approach solves both of these problems - having much higher range than tomes gives them a niche that mages can't also do and lessens the vulnerability of not being able to counter at 1 range, and having attacks that make use of that increased range suffer an accuracy penalty makes the high Hit of archer units valuable against enemies that aren't high Avo. It also makes the 4-5 range attacks a lot less annoying because without actually investing in those extra Hit skills, the hit rate can be low enough at these ranges that the units functionally only have 2-3 range.
Absolutely fantastic and comprehensive video! I just have one anecdotal point to add about archers that makes them better in newer games. In GBA Fire Emblem, enemy AI priority is heavily weighted towards units that are unable to counter, even if the enemy would do more damage to one that can. I believe this is changed in newer games, and enemies prioritize average damage much more. This means archers can do enemy phase combat more reliably, as enemies will often let themselves eat a counterattack for the sake of doing more damage. Of course this isn't a sweeping mechanical change that makes archers more viable, but it's just another small change I noticed that also works out in archers' favor.
I think the issue with bows is that mages tend to just be strictly better in most cases. Rather than giving archers 1-2 range, I think it'd be better to give them their own identity, with either longer range, or the option to attack multiple units at once. The latter would solve their xp issues nicely and provide a counter to the deathball gameplay that is so strong in the series. Or something like overwatch, where they'll make a free attack when a unit enters their range once per round, which would make them more useful on enemy phase. That would also give armor knights a good use: tanking overwatch attacks so the squishy units can get in.
that overwatch is amazing idea making 2 under utilized classes feel more valuable, armored knights and archers
Ive always loved bows even when i tried to play older games. I would always baby them and they would usually ended up some of my favorite units
This was a great video, hadn't thought about making Citrine into a sniper before, I promoted her into a mage knight for movement so she'd be a quite mobile magic cannon. Has definitely gotten me to consider Pairing Anna up with Lyn since Anna is my magic Archer.
Whoa Grey Heritage mentioned! I get so pumped when I see an srpg studio game in the wild Another problem with archers (similar to an armor knight problem) is that it's hard for archers to get the EXP they need due to the limited number of actions they get per map. For armors, it's hard for them to get kills, and for that matter it's hard for them to reach the action at all, so they tend to struggle to get EXP. On the other hand, archers don't have trouble keeping up with the party (usually - shoutout to Archanea), and they're not terrible at killing on player phase in some games, but the lack of enemy phasing at all prevents them from getting chip EXP and WEXP that most other class types still get to enjoy since they're only allowed that one player phase action. I think that's another interesting thing about CQ archers. They're the exact same archers as always, still very player phase focused, but in Fates specifically archers are allowed to get more than one player phase action in a turn thanks to Attack Stance. An archer standing diagonally from an enemy can allow for two more allies to attack that enemy at 1 range while using the archer's dual strike, meaning the archer actually gets 3 actions in that turn. Even an average turn will usually have opportunities for archers get 2 actions. Plus as you mentioned, those actions are meaningful - archers counter a particularly strong class type, bow Mt is high, 1-2 options are usually weak, etc. (It's so funny that archers are such a commodity in CQ where they're great, while in BR it feels like you get tons of archers but they're so poorly suited to the game. Raijinto just obsoletes bows lmao)
As a player born in the deeps of shadow dragon and gba games I think the archers are very useful in higher difficulties But when i play birthrigth and conquest i see the archers can be the killer machine gun of your army Thanks for all Takumi and Niles, you carry me to the end
Tactics Ogre Archers: look what they need to replicate a fraction of our power
3 Houses has a lot of buff to archers. The archer and sniper class getting +1 range, the bow knight getting +2, and getting soon a skill that allows them to counter at one range.
A lot of times archers just have their growths in the wrong place I think. With them usually having skill and luck as their best stats. I feel like luck in particular is the worst stat on an archer since if they're implemented right you're using them on enemies that can't fight back, so the critical evasion isn't too important, whereas strength or speed can make or break an archer.
Plus on average you don't really need a lot of luck, the buffs it gives aren't super huge and outside of unit with a low luck gimmick you wont notice it, it's my go to bane on avatars cause of that. Unless there's something I'm unaware of in madness modes and the like.
@Castersvarog luck is something that's always good to have, cuz you can definitely feel it when it's gone and you're getting hit by enemy crits. But it's definitely not as important as say, strength or speed, and while it usually improves hit and evasion, it's a much lesser impact than skill or speed in either of those categories. So luck just adds to an archers hit rate, which is already high in most games, while the damage they deal is negligible. Personally, I'd say archers should focus mostly on strength and skill, with average speed. This let's them do what they want to with chip damage. And in games where reclassing isn't a thing, I'd argue archers should have a higher xp gain than every class except the staff locked units.
I agree with you....But you missed 1 thing and that is bow accuracy. 2 ranged axes and spears miss Pegasus knights very frequently but a bow will almost always hit. And when playing the older game or on the hardest difficulty a missed attack can mean a restart of the map. I viewed Bow users as optional until Fire Emblem Path of radiance from that point they are damn near mandatory.
I think archers shine when they can have longer range than anyone else: Shadows of Valentia - long range (and can counter attack with non-longbows) Three Houses - same as Shadows of Valentia Engage - has Warriors, but also has Claude's S Rank Bond Ring for +1 Bow Range
Archer is my favorite class, you got me excited to play Three Houses and Engage! I'm excited they are good now
Sorry if this question was already answered but what was thhe rom hack you played in the beginning? It looked interesting
I've always wondered. what'd happen if you made all other bows a 2-3 range in FE6-8 and the longbow a 3-10 range?
So a covert unit gets the bonus to astra storm. I'm always wondering what makes that shoot so far
Hey Lizard, im curious about your opinion on the Mini Bow
Seeing a rally in the fe8 bg gameplay was wild
Oops all Archers fe8 is a hell of a drug
I'd say another aspect that hurts bows especially in FE 7 and 8 is the fact that Mages exist and get the benefit of 2 range without the downside of being unable to counterattack and while being able to attack from 1 range if they need to. Also if memory serves magic in SoV costs some health to use which I'd say is a somewhat indirect buff to archers in that game since it makes them a bit bulkier and longer lasting sustain wise than mages due to not needing to expend health to attack unless using a skill and thus ultimately needing to be healed less often as well freeing up healers and healing supplies for more in need units.
Another benefit to using bows in three houses is that everyone can use bows in addition whatever other weapon type they want. In maddening every physical unit wants a bow as an option
Nice topic, good food for thought.
Whats that game show at the end? I didnt catch the name
I’m always amused because I always used the archers GBA fire emblems and found them to be amazing because I could have them crush mages. But I also turtled a lot as a kid. Ironically I use them less in later games even though they are stronger, because I’ve became more aggressive.
I've always like xcoms take on snipers where they can't move and shoot with the sniper on the same turn. That could maybe be tweaked to balance the range aspect of archers. So before moving they could have the 5 range, but if you move that turn it could go down to 2. I also agree that 1 range is an important trade off with using a bow, maybe a short bow like the surge spell could work so
As someone who watched Excelblem's Shadow Dragon Iron Man Hard 5 run, I disagree with Gordon being used as just a chipping unit. But then again, no one sane would ever grind the boss in chapter 1 for a lv 20 Gordon.
This is why I like how project ember made bows by just giving them 2-3 range and now they're suddenly a really good class, archers all they really needed is an extra point of range
Agree The main problem with archers, besides enemy phase, is how prevalent 2 range is, and so how little they contribute over some random cavalier with a javelin or Fighter with a handaxe. There's just no reason to take the minuscule advantages over a character with most of the same utility, who ISN'T crippled at 1 range beneath it. Especially since, frankly, flier effectiveness just isn't needed against pegasus when handaxes usually mangle them anyways
Probably the best archers in an SRPG I’ve played would be those in Vestaria Saga (Shouzou Kaga’s most recent projects). High enemy quality, an abundance of dragons which most units can’t deal with reliably, and really good bows mean that archers are some of the best units in the game. Dune is probably a better archer than any in the mainline FE franchise.
Hella late but great video! One other game that’s forgotten is FE12(New Mystery). It throws at you some of the scariest flying enemies in the series: 12 move wyverns. On normal to H2, they have 1 range, but are 1-2 range on H3/4. Their blistering speed and damage make it so having well trained bow users for forged bows or Parthia will save you so much headache. FE12 snipers having base C rank bows is also very helpful for raising any unit into a competent bow user
Three Houses Maddening was great because it was the first Fire Emblem game I had played where bows were extremely important to have. But Close Counter could at times also make bows feel like the same sort of boring enemy phase weapon as handaxes were in 7. I always thought the solution was obvious - the mini bow has 1-2 range but can't double at 1 range. Close Counter, likewise should not allow follow up attacks. That would also make it less of a "must take" skill on anyone using bows.
I like Three Houses solution best with archers being able to simply equip a sword, axe or something. If archer is not bow-locked the point of picking an archer is skills and growths, not being locked t9 entire package that might end up sub-par.
something about Shadow Dragon and New Mystery specifically, it has one of the most busted forging and reclassing mechanics. For starters, you can change people in and out of Bow classes at will, so you can do things like raise sword ranks for future Horseman and raise bow ranks for future Generals or Warriors. Also, you can forge Iron or Steel bows to be stronger than Silver with low weapon rank requirement and pop fliers in one shot
11:35 I disagree, what makes archers stand out is enemies with 1-3 and 1-5 range and the 9 might 90 hit 30 crit 2 weight killer bow that you get about halfway through the game. Hunter's volley only helps vs a small number of enemies in celica's route (mostly dread fighters), leon is mostly an enemy phase button who needs 2 different healers to work. Kliff dread loops into archer and uses hunters volley a grand total of 0-2 times over the game, but dread looped archer kliff is still one of your best units because of his enemy phase combat with the killer bow. In SOV you have a lot of enemies that units that are not archers cannot counter-attack, if you watch my echoes Expected turn count playthrough you'll see that the main use of archers is in their ability to counter-attack, and hunter's volley is a sideshow.
I kinda like how the mini bow in engage is 1 range rather than 1-2 means archers still don't get 1-2 or god forbid 1-3 range, but you could potentially forge some might onto it for things like, idk, effective damage on a wyvern on enemy phase, likely with a chain guard probably not good on Maddening, but I'll take it on Normal
Im surprised you didn't bring up Ballistican, who on top of boosted range has AoE, a very rare trait in FE. Not to mention it just looks awesome in fates.
Yeah bows are pretty cracked in 3h and echoes, having killer bow BKs really carried me especially on alms route. In nuibabas castle for example, I literally ran circles around that map, just kiting and picking off all the enemies until it was safe to warp someone inside I agree tho the way CQ helped bows with the maps and stuff was cool (even though I like my strong 1-2 range options in other games). It’s kind of a shame the guy with the legendary bow is on BR, takumi would definitely appreciate the CQ maps
This brings me back.. used to cheese the map where you get Innes, and have him level all the way to 20 or close to it in the arena. Coming out of that map with a massively over levelled sniper was OP
I also liked the crossbows and damaging Deadeye additions to FE10 Radiant Dawn, as well as the permanent 2-3 range upon promotion to Marksman, the Double bow allowing for 1-3 range for them in the tower. Also the otherwise questionable addition of ledges giving archers fantastic opportunities to choke point with high ground advantage, as well as often being one of or the best options for shooting upward with their high accuracy.
Here's something I wonder: maybe Archers/Snipers should be the class to get Chain Attacks? It feel it'd make sense for them to contribute "covering fire" to mounted knights crashing into enemy lines, and it'd encourage you to keep Archers in the rear as your front-liners charge in, which seems to be how the game intends you to use them. And imo Swordmasters, Heroes and Warriors Chain Attacking doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Spearmen and Archers fit that role better. And we've seen how good Longbow Chain Attacks are.
I mean whenever I use a bow unit I feel a deep dread as a thief sneaks right by and says hi. Because often it would be in 1 range and the bow user just has to kinda take it. Unless you were actively an engaged Lief and your unit was a warrior or bow knight. Otherwise I actively have to really plan and umm and err on when to use an archer. Meanwhile a mage who is often not very tank as well and would need to resort to being a avoid tank if possible (rarely). I'm secure in the knowledge they have a counter attack and if given Vantage. They can mostly kill before the enemy even attempts to attack as most units that come up close rarely have high res. This however is not great a scenario for archers. Mages can magic tank at least. But archers are not tanking vs everything. I mean they're not as light in hp as mages tend to be as I said. Least mages can tank vs magic.
Even as far back as the second western fire emblem game, Sacred Stones, we've seen good Archers. Neimi, once you maxed her support with Colm, was a devastating force on the battlefield that was more than capable of killing enemies player phase, so long as she had a support bonus. The problem with Archers has almost always been what I'm going to call the range tax, an easy way to "balance" a ranged unit so they don't dominate the game is to make them deal less damage. You don't want a unit who does respectable damage *and* doesn't get countered *and* can double. That is the unholy trinity in FE's design from a developer perspective, and any unit who can do all of that is flatly overpowered. You at most pick two. The problem is, if archers can't kill, they just get benched for units that can, since killing enemies is the ultimate form of damage reduction you will take on enemy phase
I feel like GBA archers are actually fine. Because they're outside of the triangle, they have reliable damage. Plus, longbow can be clutch.
One thing I notice, at least from my experience and observations, is that often times Mages compete with Archers for deployment slots as, not always, but typically both classes are relatively frail ranged units that specialize is hitting specific units or abusing specific weapon effects. Like you get Niles and Odin in the same map but if you only have 1 slot you feel is open why would you choose Odin who's magic is just worse than Niles' options? I think Archers are weakest in Awakening and one of the reasons why is because why would you ever use Virion over Tharja or Henry? Why use Noire as an archer and not reclass her into a mage? Why turn Chrom into an archer when you can use Robin for range and keep him up close?
A lot of archers also have bad stats
I've only been playing Fire Emblem since it's come to the US a couple decades ago, but I love my ranged units (mages are hands down my favorite units, but archers are second). But I also play defensively. Where possible, I tend to run a front line with high defense/health/evasion units in the front and mages and archers immediately behind them. I get plenty of free hits and the backline mostly takes no damage.
I always thought having just one archer in the older games was amazing if you supported right and used them as a for sure critical hit machine.
In my hack I'm working to make archers more viable or at least unique. So I was thinking to gave bows 2-3 range instead of 2. So that thsy can be the "long range class" thay were supposed to be.
i agree that i dont like 1-2 counters on archers but what i *do* like is the 1-range only mini bows because of how you can take advantage of one of my favourite mechanics in all of FE: using one unit to shuffle another's equipment around via trade. if you were gonna put a unit beside them anyway it's free real estate!!!!
It's not like archers are COMPLETELY useless on the enemy phase. They're usually the best option to fight other archers with during enemy phase, especially if they have a longbow.
many tactical game provide some units the right to suppress fire a zone => either through stunning people in it or by setting up a retaliation fire triggered by movement or action in said zone. It can be a way to set a chokepoint, or even to protect some objectives. That would give archers a way to deal damage in enemy phase (multiple times, but without the choice of whom they deal it to, as well as risking breaking your bow so fast you'd rather face a bank run) without making them counter on 1 Range. many games limit the number of time said capacity can be triggered, that's (to me) a big mistake because enemy often just ignore the danger zone... or rush through with it's tank and so your archer is then wasted.
Great video! I agree with all of your points and am desperately hoping the inevitable remakes of these games (Blazing, Sacred Stones, etc.) buff bow users in some way. They're my favorite weapon type and I love the bow users in nearly every game.
Imo archers and snipers should feel threatening in enemy hands as historically they served an integral part of combat. I haven’t played it myself yet but I like the idea Project Ember incorporates. 2-3 range bows allow for archers to outrange most unit/enemies, making them an active threat and something you can’t easily enemy phase. And giving the bow a bit more might as well as the archer a bit more strength means their chip can be deadly if not taken into account. With that extra power and range they are extremely useful in the player’s hands on player phase, and a threat you can’t ignore on enemy phase. It makes them feel more like mages do in most of the series. Able to either safely chip an enemy for a large chunk of their health, or outrange them for an easy kill. And if you really want a player to fear an archer, give snipers innate crit like swordmasters. Nothing would terrify a player more than a sniper with 2-3 and 60 crit killer bow behind a wall
one thing i really liked from fe10 was Marksmen (Tier3 snipers) had innate 2-3 range. while it didn't fix the innate problems of bows, it's a neat niche to fill, allowing archers to be good at staying out of range of even 1-2 range attacks. but most games with 2-3 range like longbows give those weapons horrendous stats. it was one of the earliest instances where archers got a distinct niche that made them stand out from javelin tossers. it wasn't a great niche, but it was an interesting and distinct one. it's something i wish was standard with all bows rather than on rare longbows or for late game class
I remember Radiant Dawn’s double bow having 1-2 range and the sniper class having an unlabeled ability to extend its range to 3. And giving Shinon the gamble skill was broken since it’d just raise his crit rate to 100 percent and garuntee a crit. It felt like you had Legolas from Lord of the Rings on your team. Of course the trade off was you were given access to 4+ Leguz kings who could tank 8 hits before health becomes a problem.
What is the rom-hack of FE8 the footage is from at the start of the video?
Fe8 oops all archers evolved. Highly recommend it!
@@actuallizard I'll have to give it a try
Whats the background rom hack?
I loked what they did in Rad8ant Dawn. The longbows had accurscy issues, but they could be mitigated by high ground. Also the marksmen had improved rwnge, the perfect reward for puting in that much effort with Leo Rolf or Shinon. The big issue with the longbows could be fixed my making them and the other stronger/ less accurate weapon variants forgeable.
This is unrealistic considering how irl Bows & Spears were the king and queen of the battlefield. Every army needed them.
You talked around it without actually saying it, so I have to ask: are bows good in Engage, or is the Radiant Bow good in Engage?
I think bows are fine in engage without radiant bow. That said, the Radiant bow exists, so there's no reason not to consider it when determining if bow users are good in engage, imo
I think the way I would ideally like archers to be handled is that they have 2-3 range (2-4 or 2-5 with a longbow), high Might, and be in a game that isnt necessarily ALL scary enemies, but has a good handful of scary enemies in each map to give the archers a use (killing/chipping the scary enemies on player phase) while still allowing melee units to enemy phase
You know, I gotta ask; How did you get Sniper Effie?
Mozu A+
I started with three hous. Bow where one of my favorit weapon just for sniping at 3 range and not get it. I was a bit sad it was nerfed in engage. Then I started fe 8 on emulator and yeah... Outside hit throu walls there nothing. Nothing that magic or hand axe couldn't have.
One thing that you forgot to mention about Fates and Conquest: Snipers and Bows are absolutely jacked. Bows have as much mt as Axes, versus prior games shere they're hardly as strong as Lances, and Hoshidan Snipers having incredible bonuses to hit and crit just for existing or having the option to reclass into a *flying* unit. Outlaws being min maxed in speed and being able to promote into 9 move cavalier was fantastic too. A good example of how strong archers are is Mozu. If one takes the time to recruit her after chapter 7 and level her during chapter 8 (by benching effie who can afford to skip that chapter) she will be on par with everyone else by 9 and during chapter 10 she will gain Quick Draw, a skill that gives 4 Atk. And if she's evenly leveled at that point in the game Mozu will become your second highest damaging unit behind Camilla in terms of speed and attack, and she will never really let up as far as Gen 1 goes besides maybe some Corrin builds.
Or then there is Awakening. In every other mode than Lunatic+ bows sucks because there are anyi flyer tomes that do the exact same role as bow. But in lunatic+ ? Bow are actually mandatory because ennemies can have the COUNTER SKILL and you absolutly that make close range fight Kinda suicidal in many situation Also the final boss is pretty lunch immune to everything exept Brave bow so yeaj
Something that wasn’t mentioned that I think has benefited them in the eyes of the player is the removal of the rank system at the end of the game, allowing for people to play more experimentally without being worried about their “perfect run”.
What i got from this video is either bows can be good or heavy knights can be useful but not both.
Bow Knights in 3H are the worst ennemies to fight for me, these bastards will hit you from 5 tiles away and then fuck off in the distance just out of range. I hate them with a burning passion, espacilluy in maddening where every ennemy have Poison Stricke.
It would be cool to look at how magic differs across the games in the same way to see why magic seems good in some games and mediocre in others. Things like the specific tomes, classes, characters, enemy strength and composition, magic weapons, etc