How to fix the game in a few easy steps >remove rating reward for taking fewer turns >instead reward for using fewer resources, taking less damage, using fewer orders, killing more enemeis
There, now you have no incentive to just pick a scout, stack orders and run to the objective
Most rebalance mods are poorly designed because all they do is reduce the damage bonus on headshots and make enemy soldiers stronger. It becomes annoying because you're just rolling the dice on every attack since if you even make enemies on the same playing field as you they duck and dodge all your shots.
Honestly the only thing that needs to be done was gut orders and rebalace rankings to be more like Advance Wars: separate ranks based on speed, kills, and survival and your overall rank is the average of the three.
The game doesn't reward you well for dispatching enemy aces, their firearms are inferior to the ones you develop.
It's a problem with map design. Later games all address this in some way mechanically too, with the APCs of later games and squads of VC4. Unfortunately VC4 has other issues like an absurd amount of annoying gimmick stages and story beats that often range from nonsensical to insulting.
Nah, you just need to give everyone the same movement and just call scouts riflemen with only the newly added mortar units moving slower since they are more personal artillery. It's imperative people march and move at the same speed in real combat
have you even played VC?
do you even know what people are complaining about when they mention a scout rush cheese?
I think you have absolutely no idea what this is and yet you puff your chest, confident in insulting other people
Shock troopers in real military are meant for storming and are meant to be fast since you can't just slowly walk into an entrenched position. You literally see this play out in VC since in VC they are just too slow to move in to attack, entirely defeating the purpose of them. What scouts do in VC is what shock troopers are meant to do in real life. If you want to limit them, then go with real life limitations in that they were expensive to equip and train so there werent' as many of them. Have riflemen actually be useful for the longer range maps.
Anyways sorry I hurt you homosexualy little feelings you thin skinned woman.
What's funny is that, at release on PC, the enemies' guns were firing at double speed because it was tied to the framerate. That unironically made the game more fun as it fricked with scout rushing.
Sadly the fixed the FPS thing with a patch later on...
How to fix the game in a few easy steps >remove rating reward for taking fewer turns >instead reward for using fewer resources, taking less damage, using fewer orders, killing more enemeis
There, now you have no incentive to just pick a scout, stack orders and run to the objective
Sounds boring. Just give scouts less AP and have orders have a bit less potency. Make it so that half the maps arent seize objectives where you can just run in with def order and chuck a grenade to move the enemy far away enough to seize the base
That said, rating should have been fewer turns AND enemies killed, side objectives, etc
Not really considering a beeline charge from A to B is the most braindead strategy possible in a strategy game.
It's not even a Zerg Rush strat, it's literally just drawing a line and blowing up obstacles while ignoring units.
It's like if in chess the board was twice as long but there were no pawns in front of the king and queen. The optimal strat is always to just send the queen forward without using any other pieces.
As an another anon said, have turns clears be only one factor in rank. Really, thats the problem. The game rewards me too much for cheesing. Cheesing has its place but if I run waffle girl across the map killing like 3 people then take the base in 2 turns, I should be penalized for the 3 tanks and 20+ units that are still on the map.
Alternatively, introduce more side objectives that give exp or something, but arent suited for scouts. Stuff like "create a road block to hinder enemy movements for the other war front" (lancer) or "have a unit interfere with enemy communications" (engineer is quickest), stuff like that. That way you have to be smart and try to balance scout blitz with having a more well rounded squad. Hell, instead of extra exp, you could make it so that failure to clear side objectives makes each subsequent map harder and harder, either they have more barricades, more tanks, more infantry, etc. So it gets harder and harder to cheese because higher enemy density starts preventing you from running across the map. And of course that would force you to bring more storms, lancers, and snipers to deal with said high unit densities, engineers to heal the tank since youll be taking more damage, etc.
>just move slowly along the map with lancers and snipers killing everything
sounds super boring, you need a time incentive in every T rpg to actually force some strategy and on the fly thinking and optimization , just add those objectives on top of the time limit instead
>muh scout spam
Congrats, you looked up a guide or read online discussion about the game giving you the meta for a single player game.
This is a non issue, stop looking for solutions online you zoomer fricks. No one playing the game blind knew about it.
When you're playing it the first time, orders taking up a units move feels like a big cost.
Also ngl the first time I played it took me hours to realize you can press R1 on the training screen to upgrade other classes besides scout.
It becomes an issue when the game literally expects you to play this way buy punishing any other approach heavily with garbage ratings and worse rewards.
you could probably fix it by offering different A rank criteria, e.g. no knocked out units/less damage taken
but then you would reveal how moronic the AI actually is the longer the games take
It took me like 2-3 missions to realize you just move the scout because the movement speed is absurd compared to all the other units, and all you need to do is get to the flag. You might be moronic if you finished the game without seeing it.
It's an ok game, I enjoyed finishing it, but there isn't much replay value.
Scout rushing is only about half of the game. Like half the missions are some type of odd gimmick mission where you need to accomplish random shit instead of getting to the flag: Some missions need you to kill tanks, which the scout can't damage, so you need to use (and protect) your tankbusters or own tanks. Some missions are boss fight scenarios where you need lot of dudes to do dps, which scout lacks. And some are just rare unique stuff like sneaking around. And it's not like the scout rushing is entirely trivial either, you need to think where and how to move and who to shoot first.
I think VC4 had the right idea somewhat, but it ruined it with things like the APC allowing very safe rushing while also giving too many ways to clear up any bigger threat.
running my baker girl a cross 200 enemies and capturing their base in front of them is very fun though
>muh scout spam
Congrats, you looked up a guide or read online discussion about the game giving you the meta for a single player game.
This is a non issue, stop looking for solutions online you zoomer fricks. No one playing the game blind knew about it.
if you didnt figure it out after you get your first orders you are brain damaged anon sorry, and i played the game on release
You can always opt for not giving a frick about rankings
>dont try get more exp/funds to make your units stronger and get cooler shit
No, thats fricking moronic. RPGs are about progression. If you dangle something as critical as the two finite resources in a tactical game, why the FRICK would you get mad that people try to get that? It should be on the devs to atleast attempt to balance the fricking game. Obviously there is going to be a "best" strategy and there is such a thing as exploits, but this isnt an exploit and the amount of usefulness of the scout eclipses other units to the point of absurdity. >w-well just use the units you like!!!
Ok, I want to use Largo, Walter, and Nils because frick yea lancers. Obviously I cant just use them, that would be ridiculous... oh wait, you can do that with scouts. Well ok whatever I like lancers, I'll make this work. Maybe I'll give them cover fire with snipers or something, theyre cool. Ok so I need to get my Lancer bros stronger so they can do more damage. I need more exp to level them and funds to upgrade my shit. Alright, how do I get more of that?
Oh. By beating the map faster. Something that scouts do the best by a long shot. My lancers and snipers barely fricking move so even if I kill shit fast, it takes forever to seize the objective and I lose more exp and more funds and now the units I want to use are weaker than if I had just blitzed with scouts.
Do you not understand how fricking polarizing this is? Why is the impetus on me to balance the fricking game? Why cant the devs have seen that maybe scouts were busted and either changed map design or nerfed them?
>lancers can barely move >have to get behind tanks to actually kill them with the anti-tank unit >cant move behind them because you cant move >Wow.
Always seemed stupid, then in later VC you could get the mortars and just murder tanks from 800 miles away from any angle, gg Lancers, no re.
I would be ok with it if they were more accurate since they can normally 3-shot a tank without hitting crit. The trade off from Welkin doing it being that you Welkin is more risky since him dying leads to an instant loss. But theyre also fricking inaccurate as hell so you got to storm into fire and take damage just to fricking hit it, why even bother at that point
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
The aim issue isnt a problem later in the game, which is sad because by then you've learned to just scout rush everything (or just use an assault with penetration orders to rape the tank instead)
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Ah, yea that sucks. I really think they should have made ranking based off of infantry and tanks killed to balce out with turns. Like it looks like you get extra exp for taking them down but its not nearly as much as just A-B ranking. It should have all just been lumped together, or high ranking it gives you a lot less resource or something, like 30% less. More weight on other things.
Motherfricker I just started playing right now, completely blind, and it took me all of two missions to realize that scouts have monstrous move and an accurate rifle in a game where you can headshot crit. And apparently they get even better somehow, I dont know, Im on chapter 6. The point is that if you played any sort of tactical RPG in your life, you know that high movement is usually a pretty solid indicator of some of the best units just because you have more options to do shit.
. I like how you keep ignoring that people figured this out extremely fast. Again, in most tactical RPGs, high movement is a pretty good indicator of who is going to be a strong unit. Not always, but a lot of the times. It takes a few missions at most to see that my scout can zip across the map to get the objective, and once you play around with orders for 5 minutes you realize that just plopping defense on something is absurdly broken when you can just take the objective.
This isnt hard to figure out, I'm not some sort of tactical genius. Its not unorthodox or hard to miss, for fricks sake the beginning few chapters are just scouts. Then you get others and theyre ok, like shock troops and stuff, but youre USED to scout movement and Alicia is obviously a big character for the story. Hell I think Welkin was a scout too before he got the tank. Its not hard to put two and two together when you realize that ranks dictate your exp and funds and that you can crit if you hit a headshot. I was hoping that the game did something to stop you from snowballing but it looks like thats not the case at all.
Again, the impetus for balancing shouldnt be on me. Just because youre a moron and didnt pick up on this within a few mission doesnt mean the rest of us are. Its a flaw in the game, a really fricking bad one even though Im liking it so far.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Thing is, you are complaining as if anyone is forcing you to play the game in that way. Everyone can recognize it's unbalanced but you could try to beat all enemies or something instead.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
And again, as I outlined, you are actively depriving yourself a huge amount of finite resource tied directly to unit progression to do this. If I want my Lancers/snipers to be stronger I need to get more exp/funds. But I need to beat the map fast to get more of that. This would be fine if the differences between A ranking and C/D ranking werent so extreme, but they are. Again its getting to the point that my Lancers are actively weaker if I dont used scouts to blitz. It feels like Im punished for not using scouts a lot with less resource. That is shitty and poor game design. And the game's first introductions were about scouts, so dont try and act like they werent guiding me to use them.
And foremost, its a tactical game with finite resource. The entire point is to be tactical. You are supposed to make smart decisions. That doesnt mean it needs to be absolutely optimal, and you can have your own flavor of what you like or dont like, but when one unit is woefully superior to another AND gives you more of the finite resource tied to unit progression, its a big fricking ask to self nerf. Every game that exists has this obviously, but you want to atleast limit it a bit if you can. It would be one thing if you got like 10-15% more exp/funds from scout blitz, sure why not. But its like 50-60% or more minimum from what I can tell. Thats insane.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>It would be one thing if you got like 10-15% more exp/funds from scout blitz, sure why not. But its like 50-60% or more minimum from what I can tell. Thats insane.
This. And its more than that depending.
D-rank: 0 exp
C-rank: standard exp and money
B-rank: standard exp and money x 1.5
A-rank: standard exp and money x 2
Its usually pretty hard to D-rank because you have to play really really slow, but C-rank can be pretty standard without scout cheese. So anon is asking you to actively say no to 100% more exp and money.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I think they weren't really sure how to go about it because if the shocks had even 3/4rd of the scout's movement they would be absurdly powerful as they can destroy any tank in the game (in VC1) faster and more reliably than lancers and mog every entrenched unit with flamethrowers. Could see that in VC4 where a scout towing a shock or two near an outpost means anything in it is going to die and captured no matter what is in there. Their base design was so that either scouts or shocks would be stupidly powerful so it was set up to fail. I think the glaring issue is that lancers and engis are kind of redundant, lancers should be much more resistant to gunfire at least but they're squishier than shocks. Engis in VC1 are near useless besides the few times you need to clear mines because you shouldn't ever use vehicles anyway unless forced by the mission. Maybe removing headshot bonuses from non-sniper units or scouts having no grenades could work. At least then they couldn't just walk into any cap point and flush out the dudes behind the sandbags.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
NTA but I still think a lot of this shit could be solved by better maps/objectives. If most of the maps werent "take xyz base", then you immediately eliminate most of the cheese of scouts running up to kill the 3 people defending the base. They probably should have been more of a utility/bread and butter to shocks. I know that people tend to bulk at fog of war in most games, but scouts being able to, you know, scout and spot shit for you sounds more in line of what their role probably should be. It would keep them viable but could help eliminate cheese stuff. Then just have RNG on slight differences in enemy unit placement every load so you couldnt just memorize positions. Shocks would be fine if you just brought scouts more in line. Agreed on Lancers, they should be walking tanks. Engineers have potential to do some great stuff with their ability to reload people, but the primary purpose is fixing the tank and as you said, using the tank feels wasteful half the time... though again, this might be because scouts are too dominant. Maybe engineers could set down sentries?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Maybe engineers could set down sentries?
This, or maybe being able to deploy a machine gun around cap points so they could act as a rear guard. Right now weirdly shocks make the best point guards, which isn't really something they should be doing. Also being able to set mines would be nice, since they can disarm them already.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Now that you mention it, it is actually weird as frick that they cant set down mines. But yea, I could see that working out. The best part is that sentries could be flexible enough for both defensive and aggressive play styles in theory
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Wait a second, there's no techs in the game?
VC2/3 had armored techs which had shields, melee weapons, could disarm mines, set their own mines and repair sandbags.
I've yet to play VC1 but the more I hear about it, the more it sounds like a prototype.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Nope
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>using the tank feels wasteful half the time
This was probably my biggest pet peeve in 1. Having a tank in a game with mostly infantry should be cool. It should be strong, I should be at half mast every time I click on it and mow down a bunch of enemies. Instead >costs 2 CP rather than 1 >yet deals less damage to infantry than most of your infantry units with everything except it's shitty, low range, inaccurate guns >meaning that while I can easily expect 1CP = 1 kill on my scouts, shock troopers, and occasionally snipers, I can expect that most of my arsenal is going to result in, at best, a few injured enemy units from mortar but no one dead >oh also instant game over possibility because enemy lancers, unlike yours, have sniper level accuracy, so your supposedly big beefy steel machine is actually a liability >can't even go over trenches wtf
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yea, the tank really only worked as an active sentry turret when there were no lancers near by to frick it up. And occasionally you get a good mortar in. I have a theory that the reason why Lancers arent that great is because they didnt want to make them outshine the tank, but the tank also isnt great so they were doomed to suck
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
The best utility for it was to collapse enemy sandbags so the dudes around them would have to stand up and then get headshotted by infantry. But even then it was wasteful use of CP.
At least in VC4 you don't instantly lose if the tonk gets blapped, just lose your orders.
>use conventional, dev intended strat of balanced team composition >lancers are worthless >tanks are borderline worthless except as mobile cover >have to "strategize" in a "strategy" game that gives you little to no info about damage done, damage you can expect from intercepting fire, range of your own intercepting fire (why isn't there a toggle to show it, x meters means frick all to the player) or enemy dodge chance >lol surprise reinforcement events like a tank coming out of nowhere that can either be irrelevant (shock trooper was in position to empty a mag into its backside) or completely fricks you (one of your units was out of cover because everything else was killed)
Between all that and the heavy emphasis on turn VC at its best is a puzzle game not a strategy game. At about the halfway point I discovered scout rushing and breathed a sigh of relief as I didn't have to engage with a complete lack of information in every decision i made.
Do the testers not even try to break the mold? The whole "Armor-piercing order + Imperial assault rifle" combo casually defeating 90% of the tanks in the games vastly more efficiently than a Lancer can always felt particularly egregious.
This is what I dont understand. I know nothing of game testing and I assume its mostly just for trying to figure out if there are game breaking bugs or whatever. But surely there must be SOME balance testing, right? And even if there are only a few people to do it, just coordinate. One guy plays standard, another guy tries out some unorthodox shit that is a 50/50 if it works well or fails miserably, another person just tries to use a meme build and sees how far he can go. Then have another 1-2 people do a self imposed challenge of not using a particular subsystem that the devs want you to use, see if it makes things much harder or if it can be easily ignored with zero repercussions. Obviously they cant catch everything but I fricking refuse to believe that not one fricking person didnt realize that scouts could just shit on half the missions almost completely by themselves. Its the first unit you are given, its not that out-there.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>engineers are better at scouting than scouts >scouts are better at assaults than shocktroopers >shocktroopers are better tank killers than lancers, bosses excluded >lancers aren't good at anything except for very rare mandatory explosive damage situations >snipers snipe good, shockingly
VC1 is a strange game.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
It's a funny game because you'll struggle if you try to play it like it's seemingly designed to be played and only start getting results once you figure this ass backwards system out.
In my playthrough of VC1 I wanted to understand how the hell you were supposed to get the highest ranks and eventually figured out you can cover the most ground by just using scouts and occasionally snipers to clear out threats. Turns out I was onto something but didn't realize you could make it even easier with orders.
Then in VC4 I got all A ranks on my first playthrough, the new class only made it easier.
VC4 at least has the squad mechanic that lets you move a few units together with the scout, so it's more "balanced" by throwing the illusion of balance away.
It also didn't punish for using vehicles which was the thing I hated most about the first game. Using two CP per action was bullshit and ensured Edelweiss and especially the israelite tonk were best left parked at the start. Also the tonk getting whacked not being instant game over was great because the AI really got some absolute bullshit shots.
And it fixed the shock troop instakilling tanks cheese which was funny but obviously ridiculous.
>ally lancer fires shot at enemy tank's weakpoint at point blank range >does an Xcom curve shot and misses completely
>enemy lancer fires a rocket from deep downtown where I can't see them >hits a perfect pixel strike on the Edelweiss' radiator and blows up
Fix your game Sega
I know right. In the mission where you must save the not-jews from the gulag I moved the Edelweiss for one turn and an enemy tank shot it in the ass from across the map. And at that point I had already done several turns getting the infantry assault on the way, all fricking wasted. That made me savescum like frick from there on out, never know what might happen.
This is why you'd never want to use a lancer later in the game over a shocktrooper with an Imperial gun and anti-tank order, since they will pretty much one shot any tank.
I always max the Edelweiss' accuracy so I don't have to deal with that shit
I really only use lancers in a pinch-- I think I wind up using them to kill enemy lancers with headshots more than I do kill vehicles
scouts are one of the only classes to have a reasonable movement cost. shocktroopers are supposed to be your primary general use combat unit but they lose their breath after like 5 feet so i almost never bothered with them
orders are really fricking good if you bother experimenting with them; it's reasonable to assume that you'll use try using them on your primary combat units (i.e. scouts) to make them more efficient
I think VC4 had the right idea somewhat, but it ruined it with things like the APC allowing very safe rushing while also giving too many ways to clear up any bigger threat.
it's been awhile since i played vc4, but i remember some maps having enemy grenadiers with tank busters to discourage that. can probably just counter them with your own grenadiers/snipers though
>but i remember some maps having enemy grenadiers with tank busters to discourage that
Yeah, these are usually the biggest threat in any stage, but as you have pointed out it's trivial enough to get rid of enemy grenadiers with your own units.
Motherfricker I just started playing right now, completely blind, and it took me all of two missions to realize that scouts have monstrous move and an accurate rifle in a game where you can headshot crit. And apparently they get even better somehow, I dont know, Im on chapter 6. The point is that if you played any sort of tactical RPG in your life, you know that high movement is usually a pretty solid indicator of some of the best units just because you have more options to do shit.
Holy frick. See I dont get this shit, like I can maybe see the devs not understanding how bullshit scouts large AP was at first, but surely someone had to have realized Alicia getting a fricking AP refresh was absurd
>first few missions >try to use combined arms, assaults, cover, rocket dudes, snipers, etc >get all ~B ranks >learn that scouts with minimal sniper usage to clear certain enemies can just run entire boards on the first turn >all S ratings
Its even more blatant in the later games where the APC becomes dominant over the tanks simply because of the movement
The real issue in my opinion is that the game basically encourages you to do it since ranking is purely based on turns taken. Since the turn limit for S rank is usually something absurdly low like one or two turns you've basically got to cheese the levels with scouts to get it.
Sadly yeah. I would have liked to see if they finally attempted to fix ranking and punished rushing strats in a future VC5 but it never happened.
Still, I did enjoy some VC4 stages
If Sega truly is making a sequel to the Sakura Wars reboot, I don't think VC is off the table in the future.
Pretty much, but I always get a kick out of seeing it in the opening credits for the Sonic movies.
It's truly a shame. I really like it. I play without caring about rank at all. Just focus on killing all enemies whenever possible. Going for rank A just pointless and I stop doing it after first few early chapters, pretty after I know the requirements for it.
>kills a soldier by shooting them in the head >make a smug little happy anime sound
I don't have that image but I love to rout maps because of everyone's little celebration and poses upon killing.
Every game is like this, playing Banner of the Maid and the shy blond forest girl upon trying and finally succeeding says in a cute voice "I did it, I really did it yay" but she said that after defeating an enemy which means shooting them through the head.
Same thing with Advanced Wars, the main guy's Goku-moron spirit going "Hey you're strong, let's fight again (let's send more of our countrymen to die by bullets/exposions, that's fun!)".
Game really shined in thr custom maps, sadly no one bothered with them except achievements morons such as myself. You'd think they fix it in the sequels but nooo.
>You'd think they fix it in the sequels but nooo.
homie have you played the PSP games?
VC2 orders are practically unusable, segmented maps make scouts useless because every unit can be moved between bases for free and there are different objectives now so you'll have to deal with all those enemy units you would otherwise run past.
Kind of wish this game had a more real-time class-based third person shooter. The setting works perfectly for large scale wars so even an RTS could work too. Hell it could even copy XCOM and I wouldn't mind.
mechanically minverva is the same idea as alicia with the added cool ability of being a bus for other units. i think her skill set is almost exactly the same as alicia's but the devs heard the scout memes and balanced her better. she's still pretty strong but not as much of a grug solution like alicia was. also pretty funny she has all the signs of being a valkyria (similar skills to alicia, giant boobs) but she's just a normal girl powered by her frustration against claude.
>Her entire squad gets wiped in brutal combat with the imperial bastards >rescued by Claude, her long running rival. >has to live with the guilt and shame of all her dead comrades >LE WACKY jRPG TROPE FUN TIMES HAHA THAT'S OUR CLAUDE HAHA THAT'S OUR RAZ HAHA THAT'S OUR RILEY AND TRAITOR KAI (IT'S OK WE FORGIVE HER) OH NO WAR IS LE BAD I KINDA FEEL SORRY FOR THE IMPERIALS THEY'RE GOOD PEOPLE TOO
disgust is a warranted response.
>KAI
raz forgiving her was a stretch but kind of understandable; the fact that kai does not get immediately executed or imprisoned when everyone else learns the truth was when i stopped giving a shit about the story
Seriously lol. Not to mention that her platoon died waiting for Claude and ECo to sabotage the nearby enemy base.
I don't think the imps shoulda been e-girl nuked, but I definitely understand why Minerva would want that
she's just the right kind of b***h. also is a closet bawd. jumping at the opportunity to put on the most revealing swimsuit. so naughty.
>When she kicked in the door at the end one handing a rifle ready to activate the child nuke while dabbing on claude
Unfathomably based, unfathomably based devs giving the short, angry redhead with big jiggle physics (they bounce every time in her little kill confirmed animation) breasts the smallest bikini
I'm convinced they never tried it during testing and were too ashamed to admit their mistake by patching it afterward, so they just accepted it as optimal play to save face.
I've always found pretty ironic how Ganker shits on every turn based strategy franchise (according to Ganker Fire Emblem is the worst videogame franchise to ever exists and XCOM is just a coomer franchise) while fellating Valkyria Chronicles, a franchise where the optimal, encouraged by the developer strategy is just ignoring 99% of its gameplay mechanics.
It's similar to how DMC is mocked as a sandbag juggling simulator and Ninja Gaiden is denounced as just XYXXY spam while Senran Kagura is praised as an excellent action franchise with infinite potential.
In a way makes me glad that the VC franchise is dead for good.
As it stands VC is the worst of both worlds: the game itself is shit so can't stand as a videogame and at the same it doesn't have romance mechanics so otaku have no reason to buy the games either.
Which isn't enough for Ganker to stop wienersucking the franchise.
Any other game has a notorious flaw? 0/10 dogshit slop. VC? "Ahahahaha, this is our Alice"
Of course it isn't. Ganker is a hivemind that shares the same (hypocrite) beliefs and opinions. So games like Nioh 1 and Code Vein are (rightfully) shat on due to having garbage enemy variety while Dragon's Dogma 2 gets a free pass: "enemy variety is a meme, I'm having a blast".
VC1 praise was definitely colored by the console exclusivity early on, the then novelty of anime aesthetic with war/guns, and the enduring character designs later. But I'm really struggling to recall this gameplay praise you're referring to. People were painfully aware 1 was laughably imbalanced, that's the whole scout meme, and the early hype around the series was for future games to refine it with other aspects staying constant. Blindly defending any of the games you mentioned would be dumb, sounds more like you just have an axe to grind for whatever insane reason so you use this strawman to jump at ghosts over a decade later.
VC was praised, no one cared that much about the balance because scout rushing was fun to do and the gameplay was praised for what it did well, which is giving a new modern take on t rpgs. Which is also why people shit on the 2nd one despite it nerfing scouts and having (slightly) better balance.
I'm planning on playing them sometime soon but similar thing happened to me. I think it was because I bought a whole bunch of weeb games at once along with VC 1 & 4 and the 3-4 that I chose to play first were incredibly mediocre so I didn't feel like finishing the rest.
It's still funny to me that the most Raita-like design that any of the Selvaria clones have in game is Brunhilde, the only one not actually designed by Raita, because in every other game they tone his designs down, but in Revolution they actively tried to emulate his excessive style.
I absolutely loved VC1 and played it a bunch and even go the platinum trophy but I never finished even a single playthrough of VC4. Probably because I absolutely hated the entire main cast and the story was boring so I didn't give a single shit about what was happening.
It also doesn't help that VC4 played it so safe that they just lazily copied VC1. At least VC2 and 3 tried to do something different even if they weren't as good.
You're not alone, VC4 killed the series for a reason
Yeah, VC4 was absolutely terrible, I too could not stand the cast and trying to make war "terrible and grim" by having little girls bio engineered into nuclear bombs was so eye rollingly stupid and heavy handed that even the Japs should've been too embarrassed to greenlight into the games story.
One of the biggest shit games ever made, the entire concept looks like Xcom but anime but instead is just buff the runner unit and rush the flag in 1 or 2 turns making the rest of mechanics and gameplay completely pointless, and on top of that that shit is actually the best way to play it according to the devs themselves.
We could be getting a Ukrainian war ripoff in the works by now if Sega wasn't mishandling this game so badly
You have no idea how hard I thirst for anime war vidya
I really liked 4. 2 and 3 had some interesting changes but I can't stand the reused partitioned areas and mission spam.
4 had some great gameplay improvements over 1 plus the big elaborate maps.
I agree
Not really sure why everyone here is shitting on the gameplay just because it lets you Scout rush. I thought it was really novel, and comparing VC to XCom because they're both turn based strategy seems fallacious
I just wish there weren't those stupid gimmick tanks acting a roadblocks in the series. I didn't have to use orders at all and then all of a sudden it was impossible to blow up that general guy's tank without that defense negating order which I had to go back and get because I skipped it somehow. Then the final boss is more of the same nonsense. Yeah, it feels like a boss, but if it doesn't take damage without you scumming it, what's the point?
1 had some of that too.
In any case I really enjoyed the gameplay style after only trying out the games with the new releases. I just wish they balanced things here and there better. Real time aim shooting in a tactical RPG is great.
I feel like the setting needs a general reboot if they ever do a new game, but the gameplay should stick around.
For how I actually agree that the gameplay is better in 4. I just can't get invested due to how god damn unlikable every single character is.
The characters were okay, but after a certain point the story just wasn't doing it for me at all and instead felt like a tedious pre-mission requirement.
Actually the only sane and moral character in VC4, he realized both sides were horrendously evil and decided that the only thing he cared about was saving the lives of the innocent kids caught up in the crossfire between the nations.
>try scout rushing >haha that's kinda funny >game is now pathetic and not fun anymore >go back to playing normally
And I bet there are people who would whine if they took measures against these bullshit cheese tactics.
Scouts were squishier in VC4 but then fricking Minerva has double movement and boosted defense out of sheer hatred for Claude
We didn't get a Valkyria unit to play with in VC4 but Minerva was close to one
The funny thing about VC4 is that it actually made non-scouts more viable by LEASHING MOVEMENT TO THE SCOUTS via the leadership mechanic (forget what it was called)
Sega should stop being stupid for a few days and remake VC3 for pc and the consoles, using the same engine for VC4 even. I don't care if they recycle VC1/4 assets. In fact I encourage them to do it.
I want more games with VC's gameplay, I don't find other turn based tactics games as enjoyable.
Didn't Sega copyright it or something though? Maybe I'm thinking of another game.
is VC4 good? Does it hold up to VC1?
I only played 1 and I absolutely loved it but the characters put me off so much that I never played more of 4 than a couple hours.
If you liked the gameplay then you'll like VC4. There are a lot of quality of life improvements to the formula, non-scout classes are more viable and vehicles only take one command point to use now. The plot is weird anime stuff, but it's endearing in a way. Also all your squadmates get small side stories you can complete to improve their traits and give them more character which is really cool. In VC1 all you got was just a blurb of text of their background but now you get to see them actually interact with each other. Also this might be a spicy take but I liked the main characters in VC4 more than 1.
>Also all your squadmates get small side stories you can complete to improve their traits and give them more character which is really cool. In VC1 all you got was just a blurb of text of their background but now you get to see them actually interact with each other.
Wow, that sounds great. Maybe I'll give it another try.
Thanks anon.
Also to mention for the fellow minor character enjoyer, later in the game you get to promote a few squadmates of your choosing to become leaders, meaning they cannot die and will provide a command point when deployed. So you are not forced to always max out the major characters in every battle just to not lose out on command points.
It's worse in nearly every single way. It's maybe slightly better in gameplay but if you've already play 1 it doesn't mean shit because it's so samey to 1 that you feel like you're just playing that again.
That's all?
I admit it's a flaw but I didn't have much problem figuring it out and using the right units on the right missions to get them, never had to grind for them either.
Also just for the record, I'm not saying it's the best game in the series but I still find it silly how overhated it is.
> with her dlc in 4 and edy being edy, it's literally the story of an unreliable narrator maintaining the notion they were fighting simultaneously on two active fronts in different theaters of war > just like cotton hill, she killed fiddy men
As people already said, grab an emulator and either download an already patched ISO of 3 or patch the Japanese .iso yourself using this patch
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1D7sYKqA_bXad9MVYxut_memYc02CCLvn/view
Once you're done with 3 you can safely ignore the other two games and Revolution. If you're curious you can give 2 a try, which was the first attempt at 3's most innovative gameplay mechanics.
4 simply has nothing going on for it and can be skipped.
VC2 is a sequel, 2 years after the war.
It starts off with a highschool plot but at the end of the tutorial you do fight very real enemies in form of rebels during a civil war and also it has a completely new and powerful enemy unit exclusive to it.
VC3, just like VC4 takes place during the same war, on a different front, (VC3 is black ops behind enemy lines)
If you want to use more than scouts then go ahead, scout rushing just doesn't work in the PSP games.
They also somehow have more unit classes to use.
since the thread is dying. you're being had, 3 is fricking trash and just a slightly updated 2, much like how 4 is a slightly updated 1. frick off with your gay ass fake edge game. nice shitty sectioned off maps like 2, which are almost all recycled from that game. 2 and 4 are anime slop and 3 isn't? give me a break. bad guy is literally the pope who is a mustache twirler evilman like most villains in the series. homolust with the moronic former friend rival character. the final boss literally turns super saiyan, not because he has valk powers or whatever but because he has hecking anime fighting spirit and thinking about his dead wife thus he can tank bullets to the face. also cast is a penal squad even though literally none of them are actually criminals besides one guy you have to unlock. and the thing i hate the most about it is how 3's squad diminishes the accomplishments of the VC1 crew by being the *other* other band of misfits who won the war from the shadows. kurt's candy obsession is gay and the darcsen girl love interest's backstory is a plothole. frick 3 and frick whoever likes it. the fat scout and the aforementioned actual criminal guy were based though. pic unrelated, it's what the average 3 lover looks like probably.
>It would be amazing
Nah; you will shit on it, calling it Demake slop while claiming that the original has SOVL.
Remakes are always a waste of time and resources unless it's a big AAA franchise.
Who'd have thunk that to fix scout rushing you either needed to trim the maps or give everyone else much more MP.
Are there ANY mods to fix this?
Not every game is easily moddable without any official tools.
I know there's that gallian crossfire rebalance mod, but idk much about it
Most rebalance mods are poorly designed because all they do is reduce the damage bonus on headshots and make enemy soldiers stronger. It becomes annoying because you're just rolling the dice on every attack since if you even make enemies on the same playing field as you they duck and dodge all your shots.
Honestly the only thing that needs to be done was gut orders and rebalace rankings to be more like Advance Wars: separate ranks based on speed, kills, and survival and your overall rank is the average of the three.
The game doesn't reward you well for dispatching enemy aces, their firearms are inferior to the ones you develop.
yes, its called just playing VC4 where they give you actual mission variety
It's a problem with map design. Later games all address this in some way mechanically too, with the APCs of later games and squads of VC4. Unfortunately VC4 has other issues like an absurd amount of annoying gimmick stages and story beats that often range from nonsensical to insulting.
What they needed to do was to give up on the moronic shared AP idea
Nah, you just need to give everyone the same movement and just call scouts riflemen with only the newly added mortar units moving slower since they are more personal artillery. It's imperative people march and move at the same speed in real combat
>give everyone same movement
>now do a tankier shocktrooper rush instead of a scout rush
no
Shocktroppers should literally be for storming a position you absolute moron
have you even played VC?
do you even know what people are complaining about when they mention a scout rush cheese?
I think you have absolutely no idea what this is and yet you puff your chest, confident in insulting other people
Shock troopers in real military are meant for storming and are meant to be fast since you can't just slowly walk into an entrenched position. You literally see this play out in VC since in VC they are just too slow to move in to attack, entirely defeating the purpose of them. What scouts do in VC is what shock troopers are meant to do in real life. If you want to limit them, then go with real life limitations in that they were expensive to equip and train so there werent' as many of them. Have riflemen actually be useful for the longer range maps.
Anyways sorry I hurt you homosexualy little feelings you thin skinned woman.
What's funny is that, at release on PC, the enemies' guns were firing at double speed because it was tied to the framerate. That unironically made the game more fun as it fricked with scout rushing.
Sadly the fixed the FPS thing with a patch later on...
How to fix the game in a few easy steps
>remove rating reward for taking fewer turns
>instead reward for using fewer resources, taking less damage, using fewer orders, killing more enemeis
There, now you have no incentive to just pick a scout, stack orders and run to the objective
>how to fix scout spam
Fix scout spam
it IS that easy.
Most orders are worthless outside of the ones that support rush strategy.
Sounds boring. Just give scouts less AP and have orders have a bit less potency. Make it so that half the maps arent seize objectives where you can just run in with def order and chuck a grenade to move the enemy far away enough to seize the base
That said, rating should have been fewer turns AND enemies killed, side objectives, etc
>remove rating reward for taking fewer turns
Skill issue.
Not really considering a beeline charge from A to B is the most braindead strategy possible in a strategy game.
It's not even a Zerg Rush strat, it's literally just drawing a line and blowing up obstacles while ignoring units.
It's like if in chess the board was twice as long but there were no pawns in front of the king and queen. The optimal strat is always to just send the queen forward without using any other pieces.
>The optimal strat is always to just send the queen forward without using any other pieces.
>he doesn't know
As an another anon said, have turns clears be only one factor in rank. Really, thats the problem. The game rewards me too much for cheesing. Cheesing has its place but if I run waffle girl across the map killing like 3 people then take the base in 2 turns, I should be penalized for the 3 tanks and 20+ units that are still on the map.
Alternatively, introduce more side objectives that give exp or something, but arent suited for scouts. Stuff like "create a road block to hinder enemy movements for the other war front" (lancer) or "have a unit interfere with enemy communications" (engineer is quickest), stuff like that. That way you have to be smart and try to balance scout blitz with having a more well rounded squad. Hell, instead of extra exp, you could make it so that failure to clear side objectives makes each subsequent map harder and harder, either they have more barricades, more tanks, more infantry, etc. So it gets harder and harder to cheese because higher enemy density starts preventing you from running across the map. And of course that would force you to bring more storms, lancers, and snipers to deal with said high unit densities, engineers to heal the tank since youll be taking more damage, etc.
>just move slowly along the map with lancers and snipers killing everything
sounds super boring, you need a time incentive in every T rpg to actually force some strategy and on the fly thinking and optimization , just add those objectives on top of the time limit instead
>muh scout spam
Congrats, you looked up a guide or read online discussion about the game giving you the meta for a single player game.
This is a non issue, stop looking for solutions online you zoomer fricks. No one playing the game blind knew about it.
No after playing a few missions it becomes painfully obvious scouts are the best class
No scouts die to enemy fire. Only if you used orders which I didn't in my first playthrough would they make it past the enemy.
Why do you just ignore parts of the game? Isn't that like playing DMC and never using DT?
nta but orders cost CP and unless you know exactly how you want to play your turn(or even the whole battle), you will prefer to move units instead.
Imagine having dedicated order points every turn. Wouldn't that be nice?
It would be nice if you weren't allowed to put all your CPs on the same character. That would instantly stop both order abuse and scout rushing.
When you're playing it the first time, orders taking up a units move feels like a big cost.
Also ngl the first time I played it took me hours to realize you can press R1 on the training screen to upgrade other classes besides scout.
It is an issue when the missions are ranked. Pretty much makes it the expected way to play the game.
It becomes an issue when the game literally expects you to play this way buy punishing any other approach heavily with garbage ratings and worse rewards.
you could probably fix it by offering different A rank criteria, e.g. no knocked out units/less damage taken
but then you would reveal how moronic the AI actually is the longer the games take
It took me like 2-3 missions to realize you just move the scout because the movement speed is absurd compared to all the other units, and all you need to do is get to the flag. You might be moronic if you finished the game without seeing it.
It's an ok game, I enjoyed finishing it, but there isn't much replay value.
Christ, this game sounds awful.
Scout rushing is only about half of the game. Like half the missions are some type of odd gimmick mission where you need to accomplish random shit instead of getting to the flag: Some missions need you to kill tanks, which the scout can't damage, so you need to use (and protect) your tankbusters or own tanks. Some missions are boss fight scenarios where you need lot of dudes to do dps, which scout lacks. And some are just rare unique stuff like sneaking around. And it's not like the scout rushing is entirely trivial either, you need to think where and how to move and who to shoot first.
I think VC4 had the right idea somewhat, but it ruined it with things like the APC allowing very safe rushing while also giving too many ways to clear up any bigger threat.
There's playthrough on youtube that used only Alicia for the majority of all the missions.
>uses the most unfun strat possible
>"It's an ok game"
yeah no wonder
running my baker girl a cross 200 enemies and capturing their base in front of them is very fun though
if you didnt figure it out after you get your first orders you are brain damaged anon sorry, and i played the game on release
ranking in the game is based on turns taken, there is no other strat than speedrunning it
You can always opt for not giving a frick about rankings
>dont try get more exp/funds to make your units stronger and get cooler shit
No, thats fricking moronic. RPGs are about progression. If you dangle something as critical as the two finite resources in a tactical game, why the FRICK would you get mad that people try to get that? It should be on the devs to atleast attempt to balance the fricking game. Obviously there is going to be a "best" strategy and there is such a thing as exploits, but this isnt an exploit and the amount of usefulness of the scout eclipses other units to the point of absurdity.
>w-well just use the units you like!!!
Ok, I want to use Largo, Walter, and Nils because frick yea lancers. Obviously I cant just use them, that would be ridiculous... oh wait, you can do that with scouts. Well ok whatever I like lancers, I'll make this work. Maybe I'll give them cover fire with snipers or something, theyre cool. Ok so I need to get my Lancer bros stronger so they can do more damage. I need more exp to level them and funds to upgrade my shit. Alright, how do I get more of that?
Oh. By beating the map faster. Something that scouts do the best by a long shot. My lancers and snipers barely fricking move so even if I kill shit fast, it takes forever to seize the objective and I lose more exp and more funds and now the units I want to use are weaker than if I had just blitzed with scouts.
Do you not understand how fricking polarizing this is? Why is the impetus on me to balance the fricking game? Why cant the devs have seen that maybe scouts were busted and either changed map design or nerfed them?
>lancers can barely move
>have to get behind tanks to actually kill them with the anti-tank unit
>cant move behind them because you cant move
>Wow.
Always seemed stupid, then in later VC you could get the mortars and just murder tanks from 800 miles away from any angle, gg Lancers, no re.
I would be ok with it if they were more accurate since they can normally 3-shot a tank without hitting crit. The trade off from Welkin doing it being that you Welkin is more risky since him dying leads to an instant loss. But theyre also fricking inaccurate as hell so you got to storm into fire and take damage just to fricking hit it, why even bother at that point
The aim issue isnt a problem later in the game, which is sad because by then you've learned to just scout rush everything (or just use an assault with penetration orders to rape the tank instead)
Ah, yea that sucks. I really think they should have made ranking based off of infantry and tanks killed to balce out with turns. Like it looks like you get extra exp for taking them down but its not nearly as much as just A-B ranking. It should have all just been lumped together, or high ranking it gives you a lot less resource or something, like 30% less. More weight on other things.
The game is unbalanced for sure, but it's entirely your fault for not even trying to clear the game without reading guides like a cuck.
I didnt read guides dipshit. See
. I like how you keep ignoring that people figured this out extremely fast. Again, in most tactical RPGs, high movement is a pretty good indicator of who is going to be a strong unit. Not always, but a lot of the times. It takes a few missions at most to see that my scout can zip across the map to get the objective, and once you play around with orders for 5 minutes you realize that just plopping defense on something is absurdly broken when you can just take the objective.
This isnt hard to figure out, I'm not some sort of tactical genius. Its not unorthodox or hard to miss, for fricks sake the beginning few chapters are just scouts. Then you get others and theyre ok, like shock troops and stuff, but youre USED to scout movement and Alicia is obviously a big character for the story. Hell I think Welkin was a scout too before he got the tank. Its not hard to put two and two together when you realize that ranks dictate your exp and funds and that you can crit if you hit a headshot. I was hoping that the game did something to stop you from snowballing but it looks like thats not the case at all.
Again, the impetus for balancing shouldnt be on me. Just because youre a moron and didnt pick up on this within a few mission doesnt mean the rest of us are. Its a flaw in the game, a really fricking bad one even though Im liking it so far.
Thing is, you are complaining as if anyone is forcing you to play the game in that way. Everyone can recognize it's unbalanced but you could try to beat all enemies or something instead.
And again, as I outlined, you are actively depriving yourself a huge amount of finite resource tied directly to unit progression to do this. If I want my Lancers/snipers to be stronger I need to get more exp/funds. But I need to beat the map fast to get more of that. This would be fine if the differences between A ranking and C/D ranking werent so extreme, but they are. Again its getting to the point that my Lancers are actively weaker if I dont used scouts to blitz. It feels like Im punished for not using scouts a lot with less resource. That is shitty and poor game design. And the game's first introductions were about scouts, so dont try and act like they werent guiding me to use them.
And foremost, its a tactical game with finite resource. The entire point is to be tactical. You are supposed to make smart decisions. That doesnt mean it needs to be absolutely optimal, and you can have your own flavor of what you like or dont like, but when one unit is woefully superior to another AND gives you more of the finite resource tied to unit progression, its a big fricking ask to self nerf. Every game that exists has this obviously, but you want to atleast limit it a bit if you can. It would be one thing if you got like 10-15% more exp/funds from scout blitz, sure why not. But its like 50-60% or more minimum from what I can tell. Thats insane.
>It would be one thing if you got like 10-15% more exp/funds from scout blitz, sure why not. But its like 50-60% or more minimum from what I can tell. Thats insane.
This. And its more than that depending.
D-rank: 0 exp
C-rank: standard exp and money
B-rank: standard exp and money x 1.5
A-rank: standard exp and money x 2
Its usually pretty hard to D-rank because you have to play really really slow, but C-rank can be pretty standard without scout cheese. So anon is asking you to actively say no to 100% more exp and money.
I think they weren't really sure how to go about it because if the shocks had even 3/4rd of the scout's movement they would be absurdly powerful as they can destroy any tank in the game (in VC1) faster and more reliably than lancers and mog every entrenched unit with flamethrowers. Could see that in VC4 where a scout towing a shock or two near an outpost means anything in it is going to die and captured no matter what is in there. Their base design was so that either scouts or shocks would be stupidly powerful so it was set up to fail. I think the glaring issue is that lancers and engis are kind of redundant, lancers should be much more resistant to gunfire at least but they're squishier than shocks. Engis in VC1 are near useless besides the few times you need to clear mines because you shouldn't ever use vehicles anyway unless forced by the mission. Maybe removing headshot bonuses from non-sniper units or scouts having no grenades could work. At least then they couldn't just walk into any cap point and flush out the dudes behind the sandbags.
NTA but I still think a lot of this shit could be solved by better maps/objectives. If most of the maps werent "take xyz base", then you immediately eliminate most of the cheese of scouts running up to kill the 3 people defending the base. They probably should have been more of a utility/bread and butter to shocks. I know that people tend to bulk at fog of war in most games, but scouts being able to, you know, scout and spot shit for you sounds more in line of what their role probably should be. It would keep them viable but could help eliminate cheese stuff. Then just have RNG on slight differences in enemy unit placement every load so you couldnt just memorize positions. Shocks would be fine if you just brought scouts more in line. Agreed on Lancers, they should be walking tanks. Engineers have potential to do some great stuff with their ability to reload people, but the primary purpose is fixing the tank and as you said, using the tank feels wasteful half the time... though again, this might be because scouts are too dominant. Maybe engineers could set down sentries?
>Maybe engineers could set down sentries?
This, or maybe being able to deploy a machine gun around cap points so they could act as a rear guard. Right now weirdly shocks make the best point guards, which isn't really something they should be doing. Also being able to set mines would be nice, since they can disarm them already.
Now that you mention it, it is actually weird as frick that they cant set down mines. But yea, I could see that working out. The best part is that sentries could be flexible enough for both defensive and aggressive play styles in theory
Wait a second, there's no techs in the game?
VC2/3 had armored techs which had shields, melee weapons, could disarm mines, set their own mines and repair sandbags.
I've yet to play VC1 but the more I hear about it, the more it sounds like a prototype.
Nope
>using the tank feels wasteful half the time
This was probably my biggest pet peeve in 1. Having a tank in a game with mostly infantry should be cool. It should be strong, I should be at half mast every time I click on it and mow down a bunch of enemies. Instead
>costs 2 CP rather than 1
>yet deals less damage to infantry than most of your infantry units with everything except it's shitty, low range, inaccurate guns
>meaning that while I can easily expect 1CP = 1 kill on my scouts, shock troopers, and occasionally snipers, I can expect that most of my arsenal is going to result in, at best, a few injured enemy units from mortar but no one dead
>oh also instant game over possibility because enemy lancers, unlike yours, have sniper level accuracy, so your supposedly big beefy steel machine is actually a liability
>can't even go over trenches wtf
Yea, the tank really only worked as an active sentry turret when there were no lancers near by to frick it up. And occasionally you get a good mortar in. I have a theory that the reason why Lancers arent that great is because they didnt want to make them outshine the tank, but the tank also isnt great so they were doomed to suck
The best utility for it was to collapse enemy sandbags so the dudes around them would have to stand up and then get headshotted by infantry. But even then it was wasteful use of CP.
At least in VC4 you don't instantly lose if the tonk gets blapped, just lose your orders.
>cant balance unit classes in an RPG
Yes, its an ok game, could have been great if one unit wasnt outright superior.
>use conventional, dev intended strat of balanced team composition
>lancers are worthless
>tanks are borderline worthless except as mobile cover
>have to "strategize" in a "strategy" game that gives you little to no info about damage done, damage you can expect from intercepting fire, range of your own intercepting fire (why isn't there a toggle to show it, x meters means frick all to the player) or enemy dodge chance
>lol surprise reinforcement events like a tank coming out of nowhere that can either be irrelevant (shock trooper was in position to empty a mag into its backside) or completely fricks you (one of your units was out of cover because everything else was killed)
Between all that and the heavy emphasis on turn VC at its best is a puzzle game not a strategy game. At about the halfway point I discovered scout rushing and breathed a sigh of relief as I didn't have to engage with a complete lack of information in every decision i made.
Do the testers not even try to break the mold? The whole "Armor-piercing order + Imperial assault rifle" combo casually defeating 90% of the tanks in the games vastly more efficiently than a Lancer can always felt particularly egregious.
This is what I dont understand. I know nothing of game testing and I assume its mostly just for trying to figure out if there are game breaking bugs or whatever. But surely there must be SOME balance testing, right? And even if there are only a few people to do it, just coordinate. One guy plays standard, another guy tries out some unorthodox shit that is a 50/50 if it works well or fails miserably, another person just tries to use a meme build and sees how far he can go. Then have another 1-2 people do a self imposed challenge of not using a particular subsystem that the devs want you to use, see if it makes things much harder or if it can be easily ignored with zero repercussions. Obviously they cant catch everything but I fricking refuse to believe that not one fricking person didnt realize that scouts could just shit on half the missions almost completely by themselves. Its the first unit you are given, its not that out-there.
>engineers are better at scouting than scouts
>scouts are better at assaults than shocktroopers
>shocktroopers are better tank killers than lancers, bosses excluded
>lancers aren't good at anything except for very rare mandatory explosive damage situations
>snipers snipe good, shockingly
VC1 is a strange game.
It's a funny game because you'll struggle if you try to play it like it's seemingly designed to be played and only start getting results once you figure this ass backwards system out.
In my playthrough of VC1 I wanted to understand how the hell you were supposed to get the highest ranks and eventually figured out you can cover the most ground by just using scouts and occasionally snipers to clear out threats. Turns out I was onto something but didn't realize you could make it even easier with orders.
Then in VC4 I got all A ranks on my first playthrough, the new class only made it easier.
VC4 at least has the squad mechanic that lets you move a few units together with the scout, so it's more "balanced" by throwing the illusion of balance away.
Between grenadiers and the APC, it becomes trivial to clear out any threat and rush into the enemy camp. Didn't even remember the squad mechanic.
It also didn't punish for using vehicles which was the thing I hated most about the first game. Using two CP per action was bullshit and ensured Edelweiss and especially the israelite tonk were best left parked at the start. Also the tonk getting whacked not being instant game over was great because the AI really got some absolute bullshit shots.
And it fixed the shock troop instakilling tanks cheese which was funny but obviously ridiculous.
>captch: AAKYS
>ally lancer fires shot at enemy tank's weakpoint at point blank range
>does an Xcom curve shot and misses completely
>enemy lancer fires a rocket from deep downtown where I can't see them
>hits a perfect pixel strike on the Edelweiss' radiator and blows up
Fix your game Sega
I know right. In the mission where you must save the not-jews from the gulag I moved the Edelweiss for one turn and an enemy tank shot it in the ass from across the map. And at that point I had already done several turns getting the infantry assault on the way, all fricking wasted. That made me savescum like frick from there on out, never know what might happen.
This is why you'd never want to use a lancer later in the game over a shocktrooper with an Imperial gun and anti-tank order, since they will pretty much one shot any tank.
I always max the Edelweiss' accuracy so I don't have to deal with that shit
I really only use lancers in a pinch-- I think I wind up using them to kill enemy lancers with headshots more than I do kill vehicles
scouts are one of the only classes to have a reasonable movement cost. shocktroopers are supposed to be your primary general use combat unit but they lose their breath after like 5 feet so i almost never bothered with them
orders are really fricking good if you bother experimenting with them; it's reasonable to assume that you'll use try using them on your primary combat units (i.e. scouts) to make them more efficient
it's been awhile since i played vc4, but i remember some maps having enemy grenadiers with tank busters to discourage that. can probably just counter them with your own grenadiers/snipers though
>but i remember some maps having enemy grenadiers with tank busters to discourage that
Yeah, these are usually the biggest threat in any stage, but as you have pointed out it's trivial enough to get rid of enemy grenadiers with your own units.
Motherfricker I just started playing right now, completely blind, and it took me all of two missions to realize that scouts have monstrous move and an accurate rifle in a game where you can headshot crit. And apparently they get even better somehow, I dont know, Im on chapter 6. The point is that if you played any sort of tactical RPG in your life, you know that high movement is usually a pretty solid indicator of some of the best units just because you have more options to do shit.
Wait until Alicia unlocks her potential that refills the entire movement bar AND another to minimize damage from crossfire.
Holy frick. See I dont get this shit, like I can maybe see the devs not understanding how bullshit scouts large AP was at first, but surely someone had to have realized Alicia getting a fricking AP refresh was absurd
Apparently not enough since double movement also exists in VC4. At least it's not on a scout unit.
>This is a non issue
The rank system literally tells you that that's the way to play it and if you don't you are playing it wrong
>first few missions
>try to use combined arms, assaults, cover, rocket dudes, snipers, etc
>get all ~B ranks
>learn that scouts with minimal sniper usage to clear certain enemies can just run entire boards on the first turn
>all S ratings
Its even more blatant in the later games where the APC becomes dominant over the tanks simply because of the movement
>No one playing the game blind knew about it
Yeah. Maybe if they were literally blind.
The real issue in my opinion is that the game basically encourages you to do it since ranking is purely based on turns taken. Since the turn limit for S rank is usually something absurdly low like one or two turns you've basically got to cheese the levels with scouts to get it.
built for Yasuke
Alternatively play a better game (not hard)!
Aliasse is the best (and the only dicky) Valkyria!
If you didn't get every single leader, ace, tank and key target bonus on all of the maps, you DID NOT beat the game.
>that spine-breaking posture
good lord
So VC is 100% dead and buried right?
Sadly yeah. I would have liked to see if they finally attempted to fix ranking and punished rushing strats in a future VC5 but it never happened.
Still, I did enjoy some VC4 stages
It's truly a shame. I really like it. I play without caring about rank at all. Just focus on killing all enemies whenever possible. Going for rank A just pointless and I stop doing it after first few early chapters, pretty after I know the requirements for it.
If Sega truly is making a sequel to the Sakura Wars reboot, I don't think VC is off the table in the future.
Pretty much this.
VC was SW's replacement series and, apart from Project X Zone 1, have never seen concurrent pushes.
Pretty much, but I always get a kick out of seeing it in the opening credits for the Sonic movies.
>kills a soldier by shooting them in the head
>make a smug little happy anime sound
I don't have that image but I love to rout maps because of everyone's little celebration and poses upon killing.
Here.
You may not like it, but this is peak male privilege
Every game is like this, playing Banner of the Maid and the shy blond forest girl upon trying and finally succeeding says in a cute voice "I did it, I really did it yay" but she said that after defeating an enemy which means shooting them through the head.
Same thing with Advanced Wars, the main guy's Goku-moron spirit going "Hey you're strong, let's fight again (let's send more of our countrymen to die by bullets/exposions, that's fun!)".
>Banner of the Maid
Solid fire emblem like game. Just wish it was harder.
Hey Superman, why don't you put the whole world in a bottle?
good for her
Welkin should breed her more
hot
>Not proper Raita banana breasts
0/10
Raita bananas are too powerful
Mama Raikou makes me lose instantly
>order
>order
>order
>rush enemy base
Game really shined in thr custom maps, sadly no one bothered with them except achievements morons such as myself. You'd think they fix it in the sequels but nooo.
Next game for sure!
VC1 was what liberated me from achievement autism.
>You'd think they fix it in the sequels but nooo.
homie have you played the PSP games?
VC2 orders are practically unusable, segmented maps make scouts useless because every unit can be moved between bases for free and there are different objectives now so you'll have to deal with all those enemy units you would otherwise run past.
I wish they'd remake VC3, such a kino game trapped on the PSP's hardware llimitations.
they nerfed scouts but shocktrooper rush is even more degenerate in the psp games since they dont even need orders
do NOT post my lesbian gf on Ganker you fricking homosexual
Kind of wish this game had a more real-time class-based third person shooter. The setting works perfectly for large scale wars so even an RTS could work too. Hell it could even copy XCOM and I wouldn't mind.
>XCOM
I mind
Scout spam in VC1 is good because Alicia is the best scout, and no other reason
Alicia is great but you can do most stages by using any other scout unit.
Minerva is pretty damn strong in VC4.
mechanically minverva is the same idea as alicia with the added cool ability of being a bus for other units. i think her skill set is almost exactly the same as alicia's but the devs heard the scout memes and balanced her better. she's still pretty strong but not as much of a grug solution like alicia was. also pretty funny she has all the signs of being a valkyria (similar skills to alicia, giant boobs) but she's just a normal girl powered by her frustration against claude.
Her brokenness is a bit more situational and not as universal as Alicia.
Minerva is peak "stick up her ass" and I love her so much.
Built for forehead kiss correction
she's just the right kind of b***h. also is a closet bawd. jumping at the opportunity to put on the most revealing swimsuit. so naughty.
I also like Minerva a lot, her motivations seemed realistic to me, as far as games about ice sorceresses in AU WWII go
>Her entire squad gets wiped in brutal combat with the imperial bastards
>rescued by Claude, her long running rival.
>has to live with the guilt and shame of all her dead comrades
>LE WACKY jRPG TROPE FUN TIMES HAHA THAT'S OUR CLAUDE HAHA THAT'S OUR RAZ HAHA THAT'S OUR RILEY AND TRAITOR KAI (IT'S OK WE FORGIVE HER) OH NO WAR IS LE BAD I KINDA FEEL SORRY FOR THE IMPERIALS THEY'RE GOOD PEOPLE TOO
disgust is a warranted response.
>KAI
raz forgiving her was a stretch but kind of understandable; the fact that kai does not get immediately executed or imprisoned when everyone else learns the truth was when i stopped giving a shit about the story
Seriously lol. Not to mention that her platoon died waiting for Claude and ECo to sabotage the nearby enemy base.
I don't think the imps shoulda been e-girl nuked, but I definitely understand why Minerva would want that
>When she kicked in the door at the end one handing a rifle ready to activate the child nuke while dabbing on claude
Unfathomably based, unfathomably based devs giving the short, angry redhead with big jiggle physics (they bounce every time in her little kill confirmed animation) breasts the smallest bikini
cute
>tfw I will never raise a large Catholic family of 7 kids with Nico
Take me Pete
I seriously would like to see what the devs drank when they decided to make the game like that
I'm convinced they never tried it during testing and were too ashamed to admit their mistake by patching it afterward, so they just accepted it as optimal play to save face.
I see your arguments but I counter with
haven't heard that in a long time. thanks, OP.
I've always found pretty ironic how Ganker shits on every turn based strategy franchise (according to Ganker Fire Emblem is the worst videogame franchise to ever exists and XCOM is just a coomer franchise) while fellating Valkyria Chronicles, a franchise where the optimal, encouraged by the developer strategy is just ignoring 99% of its gameplay mechanics.
It's similar to how DMC is mocked as a sandbag juggling simulator and Ninja Gaiden is denounced as just XYXXY spam while Senran Kagura is praised as an excellent action franchise with infinite potential.
In a way makes me glad that the VC franchise is dead for good.
Contacting sega to turn VC into waifu emblem with dating mechanics.
As it stands VC is the worst of both worlds: the game itself is shit so can't stand as a videogame and at the same it doesn't have romance mechanics so otaku have no reason to buy the games either.
>waifu emblem with dating mechanics.
That's already VC but without the good gameplay
Everyone in this thread is bashing the ranking system thoughever
Which isn't enough for Ganker to stop wienersucking the franchise.
Any other game has a notorious flaw? 0/10 dogshit slop. VC? "Ahahahaha, this is our Alice"
Nobody cares about balance in a single player game.
Because at the end of the day you aren't forced to play for A ranks. Like I don't really give a flying frick about it in FE games
And still you shit on FE as the worst thing since Satan invented AIDS. Hypocrisy is a b***h.
Ganker isn't one person moron.
Of course it isn't. Ganker is a hivemind that shares the same (hypocrite) beliefs and opinions. So games like Nioh 1 and Code Vein are (rightfully) shat on due to having garbage enemy variety while Dragon's Dogma 2 gets a free pass: "enemy variety is a meme, I'm having a blast".
did you forget to take your meds this morning, kumar
I'm pretty sure 90% of Ganker just runs past all the enemies in souls games as well. Never trust Ganker for good judgement.
VC1 praise was definitely colored by the console exclusivity early on, the then novelty of anime aesthetic with war/guns, and the enduring character designs later. But I'm really struggling to recall this gameplay praise you're referring to. People were painfully aware 1 was laughably imbalanced, that's the whole scout meme, and the early hype around the series was for future games to refine it with other aspects staying constant. Blindly defending any of the games you mentioned would be dumb, sounds more like you just have an axe to grind for whatever insane reason so you use this strawman to jump at ghosts over a decade later.
VC was praised, no one cared that much about the balance because scout rushing was fun to do and the gameplay was praised for what it did well, which is giving a new modern take on t rpgs. Which is also why people shit on the 2nd one despite it nerfing scouts and having (slightly) better balance.
>tfw bought both VC 1 and 4 years ago, both complete versions I think
>never played them
Did the same, played 1 and felt scammed
same, it's boring and easy even without abusing scouts and the story is painfully weak, especially with how the military is presented
I'm planning on playing them sometime soon but similar thing happened to me. I think it was because I bought a whole bunch of weeb games at once along with VC 1 & 4 and the 3-4 that I chose to play first were incredibly mediocre so I didn't feel like finishing the rest.
It's still funny to me that the most Raita-like design that any of the Selvaria clones have in game is Brunhilde, the only one not actually designed by Raita, because in every other game they tone his designs down, but in Revolution they actively tried to emulate his excessive style.
I absolutely loved VC1 and played it a bunch and even go the platinum trophy but I never finished even a single playthrough of VC4. Probably because I absolutely hated the entire main cast and the story was boring so I didn't give a single shit about what was happening.
You're not alone, VC4 killed the series for a reason
It also doesn't help that VC4 played it so safe that they just lazily copied VC1. At least VC2 and 3 tried to do something different even if they weren't as good.
2, 3, and Revolution killed VC, 4 was just a death rattle.
Yeah, VC4 was absolutely terrible, I too could not stand the cast and trying to make war "terrible and grim" by having little girls bio engineered into nuclear bombs was so eye rollingly stupid and heavy handed that even the Japs should've been too embarrassed to greenlight into the games story.
The ending made me melt into a fine sludge
One of the biggest shit games ever made, the entire concept looks like Xcom but anime but instead is just buff the runner unit and rush the flag in 1 or 2 turns making the rest of mechanics and gameplay completely pointless, and on top of that that shit is actually the best way to play it according to the devs themselves.
>mfw a framerate glitch in the v1.0 steam port fixed the game balance by making Scout rushes nearly worthless
Einstein's daughter realizes she backed the true evil of EW2
>nipponese spy
VC: The Pacific never ever
>Valkyria Chronicles: e-girl-Nuke Cold War Black Ops
We could be getting a Ukrainian war ripoff in the works by now if Sega wasn't mishandling this game so badly
You have no idea how hard I thirst for anime war vidya
>Youjo Senki s2 is still mia.
I really liked 4. 2 and 3 had some interesting changes but I can't stand the reused partitioned areas and mission spam.
4 had some great gameplay improvements over 1 plus the big elaborate maps.
I agree
Not really sure why everyone here is shitting on the gameplay just because it lets you Scout rush. I thought it was really novel, and comparing VC to XCom because they're both turn based strategy seems fallacious
For how I actually agree that the gameplay is better in 4. I just can't get invested due to how god damn unlikable every single character is.
Apologize to my homey Raz or I will be forced to take action.
I shan't.
I just wish there weren't those stupid gimmick tanks acting a roadblocks in the series. I didn't have to use orders at all and then all of a sudden it was impossible to blow up that general guy's tank without that defense negating order which I had to go back and get because I skipped it somehow. Then the final boss is more of the same nonsense. Yeah, it feels like a boss, but if it doesn't take damage without you scumming it, what's the point?
1 had some of that too.
In any case I really enjoyed the gameplay style after only trying out the games with the new releases. I just wish they balanced things here and there better. Real time aim shooting in a tactical RPG is great.
I feel like the setting needs a general reboot if they ever do a new game, but the gameplay should stick around.
The characters were okay, but after a certain point the story just wasn't doing it for me at all and instead felt like a tedious pre-mission requirement.
How are orders scumming if the game is designed around them?
YJK
What's his problem?
the infection in his leg spread to his brain
dicky madness
Actually the only sane and moral character in VC4, he realized both sides were horrendously evil and decided that the only thing he cared about was saving the lives of the innocent kids caught up in the crossfire between the nations.
>every "moral" character is a moronic hypocrite
>every immoral character is just a moronic cartoonish evil butthole
Scout rushing is baby shit. APC rushing is where it's at.
>I have such faith in you as a medic, I'm going to shoot myself in the leg now
wat fuk
avan is a complete psychopath. dude also risks his entire team to terrorize the same girl to disarm a bomb that would kill them all.
IM FRICKIN INVINCIBLE
What the absolute shit
What a chad
>The virgin scout rush
>Vs the Chad last stand suicide bomb
How do you respond without sounding mad?
i've heard of some of the degenerate strats you can perform with last stands, but combining that with enemy friendly fire is comical
RAZ DIED A VIRGIN
Thats so he can be pure for the 1000 virgins he is awarded in heaven, inshallah
VC4 fixed everything about orders and scout rushing, why complain about VC1 being imbalanced?
because some schizo really hates a 15 year old game
>It's a 15 year old game now
where have all the years gone...
>VC4
>grind your equipment or you literally cannot complete some missions, like sniper rifles not having enough range
yeah..
i never grinded until i beat the game
very cool story
All I need is the big happy family ending and I'm good
>claude went from "DUDE PEACE" to "BILLIONS MUST DIE" and back again in less than a minute
why?
Because BILLIONS MUST DIE to ensure DUDE PEACE for all
>they took away the japanese opening
>can't get it back
I will never forgive them.
>try scout rushing
>haha that's kinda funny
>game is now pathetic and not fun anymore
>go back to playing normally
And I bet there are people who would whine if they took measures against these bullshit cheese tactics.
I think they tried in VC4, but then also gave you even more bullshit to abuse.
Scouts were squishier in VC4 but then fricking Minerva has double movement and boosted defense out of sheer hatred for Claude
We didn't get a Valkyria unit to play with in VC4 but Minerva was close to one
The funny thing about VC4 is that it actually made non-scouts more viable by LEASHING MOVEMENT TO THE SCOUTS via the leadership mechanic (forget what it was called)
Hilarious shit.
No, because you could easily halt the cheese if you just made it more "kill XYZ" shit to clear.
>use scout cheese tactics
>have fun
If you are capable of enjoying repeating scout cheese for an entire playthrough you have some sort of mental illness.
>don't use scout cheese
>b rank
>b rank
>b rank
>b rank
haha at least I'm having fun...
Riela my beloved
My first and only waifu, in other games with character creation I still create a long haired redhead and name her Riela
Sega should stop being stupid for a few days and remake VC3 for pc and the consoles, using the same engine for VC4 even. I don't care if they recycle VC1/4 assets. In fact I encourage them to do it.
Did anyone actually go for the "true" ending in VC4? By the time I completed the main ending I was so beat I never returned to the game.
I think I did, it didn't seem very out of the way. Been a while so I probably forget though.
I want more games with VC's gameplay, I don't find other turn based tactics games as enjoyable.
Didn't Sega copyright it or something though? Maybe I'm thinking of another game.
A bit off topic, but Shining Blade just translated. It's machine translation so don't expect anything
https://cdromance.org/psp/shining-blade-jpn/
I thought this was a bleach game from the thumbnail
is VC4 good? Does it hold up to VC1?
I only played 1 and I absolutely loved it but the characters put me off so much that I never played more of 4 than a couple hours.
If you liked the gameplay then you'll like VC4. There are a lot of quality of life improvements to the formula, non-scout classes are more viable and vehicles only take one command point to use now. The plot is weird anime stuff, but it's endearing in a way. Also all your squadmates get small side stories you can complete to improve their traits and give them more character which is really cool. In VC1 all you got was just a blurb of text of their background but now you get to see them actually interact with each other. Also this might be a spicy take but I liked the main characters in VC4 more than 1.
>Also all your squadmates get small side stories you can complete to improve their traits and give them more character which is really cool. In VC1 all you got was just a blurb of text of their background but now you get to see them actually interact with each other.
Wow, that sounds great. Maybe I'll give it another try.
Thanks anon.
Also to mention for the fellow minor character enjoyer, later in the game you get to promote a few squadmates of your choosing to become leaders, meaning they cannot die and will provide a command point when deployed. So you are not forced to always max out the major characters in every battle just to not lose out on command points.
It's worse in nearly every single way. It's maybe slightly better in gameplay but if you've already play 1 it doesn't mean shit because it's so samey to 1 that you feel like you're just playing that again.
I'll put it like this:
If you loved VC1 you will hate VC4
If you liked VC1 you will like VC4.
Alicia is hotter than Selvaria
I never remember wich one is the other Valkyria Chronicles worth playing, 3 or 4?
Raita's Militaria for attention
Both are fine, but I liked 4 more. Everyone gets in hissy fits over 1 VS 4, but the only genuinely bad VC games are Revolution and 2.
>but the only genuinely bad VC games are Revolution and 2.
Tell me why 2 is bad without mentioning the highschool slice of life shit.
Certificates
That's all?
I admit it's a flaw but I didn't have much problem figuring it out and using the right units on the right missions to get them, never had to grind for them either.
Also just for the record, I'm not saying it's the best game in the series but I still find it silly how overhated it is.
> with her dlc in 4 and edy being edy, it's literally the story of an unreliable narrator maintaining the notion they were fighting simultaneously on two active fronts in different theaters of war
> just like cotton hill, she killed fiddy men
>Yes, I use lancers with the mortar lance only, how did you guess?
BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAP!!!!!!!!
>3 girls
>most boring one is the main heroine
Every time
I just finished VC1. Should I grab an emulator and play 2 or 3, or should I just skip to 4?
1 > 3 > 2 > 4
psp games suck but you can try them anyway
Play 3, ignore 2 and 4.
1 and 3 are the only games worth playing
Jump to 3; there's a fantranslation available. 2 and 4 are horrible anime slop that ruined the franchise.
As people already said, grab an emulator and either download an already patched ISO of 3 or patch the Japanese .iso yourself using this patch
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1D7sYKqA_bXad9MVYxut_memYc02CCLvn/view
Once you're done with 3 you can safely ignore the other two games and Revolution. If you're curious you can give 2 a try, which was the first attempt at 3's most innovative gameplay mechanics.
4 simply has nothing going on for it and can be skipped.
VC2 is a sequel, 2 years after the war.
It starts off with a highschool plot but at the end of the tutorial you do fight very real enemies in form of rebels during a civil war and also it has a completely new and powerful enemy unit exclusive to it.
VC3, just like VC4 takes place during the same war, on a different front, (VC3 is black ops behind enemy lines)
If you want to use more than scouts then go ahead, scout rushing just doesn't work in the PSP games.
They also somehow have more unit classes to use.
>there are people on this thread unironically defending the rating system shitshow from VC1
since the thread is dying. you're being had, 3 is fricking trash and just a slightly updated 2, much like how 4 is a slightly updated 1. frick off with your gay ass fake edge game. nice shitty sectioned off maps like 2, which are almost all recycled from that game. 2 and 4 are anime slop and 3 isn't? give me a break. bad guy is literally the pope who is a mustache twirler evilman like most villains in the series. homolust with the moronic former friend rival character. the final boss literally turns super saiyan, not because he has valk powers or whatever but because he has hecking anime fighting spirit and thinking about his dead wife thus he can tank bullets to the face. also cast is a penal squad even though literally none of them are actually criminals besides one guy you have to unlock. and the thing i hate the most about it is how 3's squad diminishes the accomplishments of the VC1 crew by being the *other* other band of misfits who won the war from the shadows. kurt's candy obsession is gay and the darcsen girl love interest's backstory is a plothole. frick 3 and frick whoever likes it. the fat scout and the aforementioned actual criminal guy were based though. pic unrelated, it's what the average 3 lover looks like probably.
No lies detected, 3gays are the most dishonest homosexuals in the fanbase
I'm still mad vc2 was on psp and not console. I lost interest in the series after that and unless they released 2 on pc then I'll never play it.
We're in an age of remasters and re-releases. It would be amazing if they remade VC2 for PC (and PS5 i guess)
>It would be amazing
Nah; you will shit on it, calling it Demake slop while claiming that the original has SOVL.
Remakes are always a waste of time and resources unless it's a big AAA franchise.
God please just give me Valkyria Chronicles: Modern Warfare already
Valkyria Chronicles but it's set in the Yugoslavian wars
alicia was worst girl.