This game was much better than FFT. Fight me.

I agree. But you set the bar low because FFT was a horseshit, boring game.

This game didn't have as much strategic elements. Positioning became almost irrelevant, as archers and ranged attacks were always available to the opposing force, as they typically had the high ground, while being unavailable to your team. Other than that one complaint, it was good. I don't think as good as FFT, though. FFT was challenging, but you still had the opportunity to set up advantageous positions more frequently, even if not all the time. In Vandal Hearts I rarely got to use archers to do anything. Mages weren't terribly useful, either. You were lucky to get a spell or two off with them the entire battle. Still not a bad tactics type turn-based strategy game, though.

I love Vandal Hearts. My only gripe is that the Monk/Ninja and the Guardsman/Dragoon classes were pretty useless. I wish more games would implement units like the Hawknights/Airmen.

>>3118921
what? almost everything you said was wrong, mages and archers are the best units and the units you almost never get to use are tanks and fighters because of the way the game is organized around attack ranges

most of the maps are planned out in detail, and you can just sort of brute force it, but you won't get the most out of it and you'll have trouble beating any of the optional challenges and puzzles

Quality taste, though FFT is a borderline sandbox game. Vandal Hearts is short enough not to get spoiled and to become a fond memory.

Err... No. SRPGs on the PS1 are some of my favorite games, and Vandal Hearts was pretty piss easy and not a whole lot of customization. I was playing leisurely and beat it in 15-20 hours and I'm notorious for leaving my game on while doing other things, and never really ran into roadblocks while playing. The story wasn't anything really unique either.

FFT has insane replayability, and your first play through is always pretty good regardless as long as you don't blow dick at the genre and actually like SRPGs. It has some interesting characters, a diverse class system, tons of items which I enjoy in games, side quests, etc. it can be piss easy if you know what you're doing, but there's still a couple battles that can be hard despite that as long as you don't go straight OP teams.

Idk, just don't see how vandal hearts can be better

This was the first game that was able to detect my mod chip

>>3118912
>FFT was a horseshit, boring game.

The dankest meme.

>>3118903
I respect your opinion.

I recognize Vandal Hearts and other similar strategy RPGs as good games, but I hate it when SRPGs do the "player turn, then enemy turn" thing, as opposed to FFT that calculates turn order on a per-unit basis. And it's something that the majority of SRPGs do, which kinda makes me hate most SRPGs.

So yeah, I like Vandal Hearts from a distance, but I can't get around that one aspect of gameplay.

>>3118912
You guys are gay as fuck, gayer than /v/ even.

>>3118903
My favorite part of this game is how fucking hard it is to read the dialogue because instead of being smart and wiping the dialogue box they just write the text over the existing text.

>>3119581
Try Vandal Hearts 2

>>3119603
It's /v/ idiots who come in spouting idiot opinions like that

>>3118912
>Popular games are all shit hurrrr
If you don't like SRPGs that's fine but there's no reason to even post itt. If you somehow think it makes you seem more knowledgeable about a genre to immediately shit on the most successful examples then you should just GTFO. It could be argued that some SRPGs are better than FFT but FFT is definitely good.

The biggest problem with SRPG's is usually the "RPG" part.

Any kind of leveling usually completely breaks any semblance of balance, because instead of the games being hard because you have a hard situation and you need to use your skills to deal with it, you're instead put in a situation where "Enemy X can one shot me because I'm level 10 and he's level 20"

Fundamental problem. It makes me really prefer games like Advance Wars, but that's more of a grid based... turn based... RTS.

>>3119606
Anon you know it's like that because you didn't emulate it properly right

>>3119615
Steep level curves can moderate that problem. When the choice becomes "either git gud or grind for 5 hours" it's not much of a choice.

>>3119668
The problem with that is it usually breaks it in another way.

What game is it... Hoshigami on PS1? That game takes an absurd amount to level, but you basically -have- to grind a level or two every single battle.

>>3119674
In Hoshigami you can just coin it up and roflstomp the entire game, letting special characters get all the exp and never really have to grind much beyond the initial stages to get the runes or whatever you needed to enhance coins

Don't blame the game just for containing autistic timesinks in it when they aren't even mandatory and you're the one not playing it properly.

>>3119674
As a DM that reeks of inadequate story/boss awards.

>>3119615
This is what absolutely killed me in the LuCT remake on PSP. For some reason they made it so when you recruited a new unit, it started at level 1, even if it was like level 35 when you got it.

I wasn't even half way through the game but kept finding new units I wanted to experiment with. So I got a couple lizard men in one battle but then ended up having to grind for hours and hours and hours just to get them to back to where I could actually use them.

>>3119681
hindsight is 20/20.

>>3119689
I'm not sure there is a single tactics ogre game that is balanced properly, from the SNES LcCT where you end up equipping nothing but a short bow or crossbow and use nothing but archers and ninjas because it's literally the most effective unit in every possible situation, to the Knight of Lodis where all the classes and their stat distributions are meaningless because all differences between any strategy for character building or team balance are zero-sum, to the complete fucking mess that is the LuCT remake

>>3119681
I don't even know what you're talking about, I assume you're saying to just funnel everything to the best people.

I played ~60hours of the game trying to just play it out with a normal team, and it wasn't enjoyable. You literally have to grind it out or have a few OP people, the game absolutely forces it because when you're a few levels beneath you get destroyed and a few levels below you destroy them. It completely eliminates the strategy. Yeah you can perform the combos and get better gear and such from people in the towers, but still even then it's so level dependent that it makes it not fun. It railroads you to play one way.

>>3119713
Oh, you were talking about building/making the best coins/seals or whatever. Even still, the game can be annoyingly difficult with the level disparity. If you spammed all Mage force and nuked people it'd be easy but that's fucking lame.

>>3119709
Yup, it's pretty sad. FFT was the first of their games I played and it got me super excited to see the "real" Tactics Ogre games. But somehow none of them ended up actually being as good as FFT. And I don't even think that game is all that amazing.

KoL looked really interesting with all it's alignments and elements, and I was starting to get really into the strategy of what would work best in which situation. Then I did the math and realized it didn't ever matter. Nothing would ever be better than just using your native element.

>>3119725
>I don't want to use the main feature of the game I want to play it like fire emblem instead
>this game is too hard! why do I have to level up so much :(

Take one of those OP coins you refuse to use to the tower and level up your main character well beyond anything the story requires in literally less than 10 minutes

Don't blame the game just because you have autism

also: none of the normal generic soldiers are as strong as your special geniuses, they won't even ever be as strong as the ones you can simply recruit later. Their purpose is to be expendable and to fluff out your party so you can properly perform sessions, which, if you take the time to do instead of GRINDING EVERYTHING ALWAYS GRINDING WHY AM I NOT HAVING FUN, you'll get all the coins and other useful items that you really ever need

do the ridiculous byzantine puzzle challenges and you'll get a whole shit ton of OP items that power up your characters early on and enhance their level ups to make the game even easier

>>3119742
You completely missed the point of my statement. I've done that. I'm saying its fucking lame that you have essentially one way to play the game. There's no flexibility in the game play. You either rape or be raped.

And quit fucking throwing autism as an argumentative point you moron. I wasn't even being hostile, yet you act like a cunt and defend shitty game mechanics.

>>3119423
My gripe is that the animations were so damn slow. It took forever and a day for the enemy to resolve its turn

>>3119742
>>3119750
I haven't played the game, but that seems like a strange way to design a game and not very fun. So there's a separate tower where you can level up just certain characters? And the best way is to over level your mains and then use everyone else as cannon fodder? Am I missing something?

>>3119763
You don't have to go into the tower or grind except:

>You have to not be shit.
and
>Some of your precious little mercenary soldier recruits are likely gonna have to die.

Basically anon just REFUSES to play the game properly and is bitching about
>Why can't I just play the game the way I want
and doesn't understand that he can just play another fucking game if he doesn't like the design