2009-04-23, 19:40 | Link #281 |
Wiggle Your Big Toe
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Milwaukee
Age: 33
|
Well if you like the anime then yes go and buy the game. I guess you'll have to decide which you want to see through to the ending first, the anime or game. Of course you could always play the game and watch the anime at the same time.
__________________
|
2009-04-25, 14:22 | Link #284 |
M9000
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SBC Gurokken
|
Considering that most maps and skirmishes (even on hard mode) can be done in one or two turns, you don't really have to save (especially when using fully decked out and max-levelled characters), but it does save time. On some missions, like Flower of the Battlefield, saving can save you a lot of time and frustration (lame pun intended) if you want A-rank.
Having said that, I usually only save excessively when aiming for A-rank on a difficult map or hard skirmish (and since I have them all now, it doesn't matter anymore). I never found this to spoil my fun or anything, so to each his own. Plus, my time is more precious to me, so I'd rather not waste it retracing my steps. For regular play I usually don't save, since the game is pretty easy normally - except for a few maps like the aforementioned Flower of the Battlefield or perhaps chapter 17, you'd have to try really hard to get your people killed or not get done in 20 turns. I know that feeling, wouldn't want to lose anyone either when I play. However, they do come back once you start a new game using your saved data, and at least two medals depend on getting characters killed. |
2009-04-26, 15:50 | Link #288 |
Doughy goodness. I think.
Join Date: Mar 2008
|
Theold was awesome. I had to choose Dallas, only cause she was conveniently next to the Lupus. Though, I've heard of people making worse sacrifices in missions, like sending away almost every great female unit in one go.
Spoiler for T-T:
__________________
|
2009-04-26, 15:57 | Link #289 |
Catholic = Cat addiction?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: MURICA!!
|
So I am curious. What is everyone's playing style, and what perks do you guys prefer?
Personally, my emphasis had always been placed on snipers. They are an integral part of my platoon, and I cannot live without them. - Tak
__________________
|
2009-04-26, 17:41 | Link #290 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
|
I tend to use snipers more as well, especially Marina after she got her "Ultimate Accuracy" potential. If only she had "Undodgeable shot" as well, alas. After them I focused on scouts, then lancers, and finally shocktroopers and engineers.
As for my play style, my normal strategy was to get as many one shot kills as I could with my snipers and then drive my scouts up followed by shocktroopers. The scouts would usually find cover somewhere and I'd use the grenade launcher to blow enemies out of cover to pick off with my snipers. Also, I always tried to work my lancers around behind tanks to hit the radiators (well, that is before I got Audrey and her "Ultimate anti-Armor"). The only other trick I used was not fully deploying at the beginning of the map so that I could call up reserves right after getting to bases. For potentials, I like all the "Ultimates" obviously. I also prefered perks that gave accuracy and defense boosts more than increased damage, since I was usually going for headshots anyway. |
2009-04-26, 17:58 | Link #291 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
For my first play through I tended towards using primarily scouts with sniper backup.
Then I realised how much more fun and efficient it was (after getting raped on EX-Hard) to move as an actual squad. Throw in the VB F 2(g) and my transition to utilising multiple shocktroopers with sniper, engineer, Alicia and Ultimate Anti-Tank lancer support was complete. I also found that Largo was much more useful with a mortar lance than a normal one simply due to the fact that you really do need lancers to kill tanks in 1 or 2 shots, and he always needs at least 3. |
2009-04-26, 20:15 | Link #293 |
from head to heel
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Age: 42
|
I use a mix of different units as well, but I use engineers the least. In most missions, I don't use them at all.
Snipers are also an integral part of my offense and usually my first move involves them. Snipers go first (usually, to take out enemy snipers if the chance arises), then the rest follows through. Of course, when enemy tanks are involved, the efficacy of snipers goes down a bit in favor of anti-tank lancers. Outside giving orders, Welkin usually makes the last action in a turn or I won't move him at all. |
2009-04-27, 18:22 | Link #297 |
Catholic = Cat addiction?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: MURICA!!
|
If they want to make competitive modes, SEGA can easily just shorten the CPs to 1/2 or even more, like 1/4 their original size and include maps specifically for competitive mode. That way, it could work.
Also a co-op mode would be nice. On the other hand, I have found that I use the tanks a lot less than I do infantry during the game. If WWII doctrine was to have infantry support assaulting tanks, I was clearly breaking that rule. . . . . . EDIT: *Sigh* Well this sucks, I just found out today that the Valkyria BEST edition now on sale in Japan comes with all the addons without additional purchase necessary. This news made me very unhappy. - Tak
__________________
Last edited by Tak; 2009-04-27 at 21:53. |
2009-04-27, 23:33 | Link #298 |
from head to heel
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Age: 42
|
I think it would be fun to have co-op DLCs.
Say for example, each player is given a small number of units for a squad while your friend is also playing as another commanding officer with his own. In one co-op mission, both players have to execute a joint operation where two squads have to work together in order to be successful. Of course, turns would probably have to be tweaked a bit, hence why I suggest having a small squad for each player. Perhaps the maximum number of units is limited to around half of the max in single player or something... and probably less than that would even be better. Another idea that could possibly work is that each player has his own mission objective(s), thereby keeping the turns flexible for each player. For example, player 1 has to cause a diversion by attacking the base in a completely different area while player 2 has to pull off a rescue attempt in another part of the map. I'm not sure how it'll all work under these mechanics, but it's a nice thing to think about at least. |
2009-04-28, 07:14 | Link #300 | |
Explodes when thrown
IT Support
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 37
|
Quote:
A siege might be a lot of fun (and action for four players if they surround the target city/location!), and introduces coop/competitive play. Like, the player who manages to break the enemy line and get in on his side first wins?
__________________
|
|
|
|