Discussion YMMV / UnicornOverlord

That is so overexplained, I almost feel like this should have its own page. Hard agree.

I think the main issue is that a lot of the entries had kinda "fluff" text that wasn't really necessary. It should detail why it counts but it should mostly try to be to the point as far as my understanding it. I don't know if a page is needed at the moment though because it only seems like 3 classes are consistently seen as not that good.

As the person who wrote it, the current expansion is pretty glaring yeah. And I admit I sometimes have diarrhea of the word processor. I could give a go at trimming it down, but considering it's my fault in the first place I don't mind someone else taking a crack at it instead.

Tried to shorten it to a bare minimum:

Usually, all the classes have some kind of consistently designed tactical answer that at least justifies consideration for putting them on any team. There's one damning exception to that rule: Gladiators. Their HP is astronomical, they have a self-heal, and their physickal attack is also very good... and that's pretty much where all their positives end, as their everything else is utterly terrible. Their attacks may hit entire rows, but they are so inaccurate that even glasses can't fully salvage their hit rates against anything short of a Hoplite or another Gladiator. They are intended to be high-health heal-tanks, but as enemies get stronger and enemy squads more numerous, their health simply can't keep up with enemy damage output, and their mediocre actual defense and terrible Initiative become huge liabilities as it always means in other units getting the first shot.

@Spectral Time: I am guilty of that too, so no worries about it. It just looked like it had gotten a bit too large to follow what the reason it qualified was.

@Tendou Man: I think the opening bit (Usually, all the classes have some kind of consistently designed tactical answer that at least justifies consideration for putting them on any team. There's one damning exception to that rule: Gladiators) could probably be adjusted to staring with listing Gladiators instead. Otherwise that looks clearer and easier to read.

I still feel like I managed in a fraction of the wordcount what the present overblown entry takes up most of a page to say.

And I added the werewolves in part because the class pages here take several shots at them; that as much as my own experiences with their being weak was the driving factor behind my adding them as a second entry.

I thibk the new entry is good!

Im not sure about werewolves personally. I found them annoying to fight but not helpful when I used them.

Well, I still think it's back to being way too long, but if the consensus is that it's fine...

Oh jeez I see what you mean now. Last I looked it was smaller but now its really big again. Not sure why considering we had pulled it to discussions so going to make note of that.

I did some digging in the edit history and Lord Twibill seems to be both responsible for the expansion as well as bringing back the old, longer version. I think editing it back and/or messaging him our reasoning and inviting him to this discussion could be just enough to resolve this debacle.

It sounded like he might’ve been willing to let my version lie if not for my inclusion of the werewolf thing… So I feel a little responsible.

I will try to message him when I am no longer on my phone.

Let's get this figured out. Hiding the entry because we feel it is too long isn't acceptable and is probably not even within the rules for the situation.

Gladiator, Fighter, and Werewolf are all perfectly valid examples. Not everyone needs to agree, as this is a YMMV page, but I've seen each of those classes knocked enough in other fan communities like Reddit to qualify. Let's agree on a write up and leave it be.

Below is my proposal. A few things to keep in mind:

• This is YMMV. Not everyone has to agree. But these are classes I've seen listed as worse here and in other communities. Yes, there are strategies to make them useful. That doesn't matter as, for less effort, you can use two dozen other classes instead.
• It's still a bit long, and that's ok. I don't believe any of the remaining details are extraneous and breaking each class into its own bullet helps with readability.
• Hiding the entire entry is not an acceptable way to handle this sort of thing in the future. If we have to take it a forum thread, that's fine. But don't hide it again.

• Low-Tier Letdown: Most of the game's classes are designed to provide some sort of utility to justify their inclusion in teams throughout the game. Many are hard-counters to another unit type and can be invaluable when facing that unit in quanity. However, certain classes simply fail to pull their weight in comparison to others, which coupled with the game's limited unit space, cause them to be left behind by most players. Do note, placement here does not indicate that a class is completely unviable, as the right set-ups can allow these classes to contribute, but it requires significantly more effort to achieve than the majority of other classes. Some of the most prominent examples include:
  • The Fighter is a defensive-oriented armored infantry class good at shielding their allies. In the early game, many players struggle to find a proper niche for them, not helped by being introduced before their natural counter - the Archer classes. Being able to nullify their ranged attacks makes the Fighters natural wingmen to any airborne class, like the Feathersword or the Gryphon Knight, covering up their main weakness. However, by that point, they are outclassed by other defensively-oriented classes like the Lord or Hoplite who are less Cripplingly Overspecialized in terms of the range of defenses they can provide to allies and are a Master of None compared to the plethora of other harder-hitting classes available.
  • The Gladiator is a high-health, hard-hitting class with a self-heal ability from the very start of the game. In every other quality, they are surpassed by just about every other class in the game. Their attacks may hit entire rows, but they are so inaccurate that even accurancy enhancing items can't fully salvage their hit rates against anything short of low-Evasion units like Hoplites or other Gladiators. They are intended to be high-health heal-tanks, but as enemies get stronger and enemy squads get larger, their health simply can't keep up with enemy damage output, and their mediocre actual defense and terrible Initiative become huge liabilities as it always means in other units getting the first shot. As axe-users, they fall behind Dark Knights (tanks who deal more damage the less health they have), Gryphon Knights (row sweepers who, as fliers, are more evasive, can hit the back row directly, and their own self-heal ability), and Berengaria (a Lightning Bruiser murder machine) all of whom do much of what Gladiators do but better.
  • Werewolves have great accuracy and a plethora of attacks meant for finishing off weakened foes... and that's it. They have poor defenses, are less evasive that similar fragile melee classes, and don't pack much of a punch offensively. They don't really have a gimmick that sets them apart from the other Bestral units that share their nighttime stat boost (Werefoxes in particular outclass them in the follow-up attack game), and their team support (Nightwalk) is severely outclassed by other mobility increasing skills. Their one niche that still allows for some use is their Valor skill "Hide", which allows for a surprisingly large degree of Cheese Strategies of hiding units to quickly take maps, but they're still a liability on the unit itself in battle.

I can post the version I had up at one point:

• Low-Tier Letdown: Unicorn Overlord is a very difficult game to be outright useless in; even weaker units and classes can excel under the right circumstances and with the right team comps or setups. But with that said...
  • Gladiators/Berserkers have good damage and high hitpoints, but between their very low accuracy and initiative, weak defense, and not really having a unit type they really excel against, they trade poorly against most of their competitors. Enemy Gladiator and Berserker units are frequently less dangerous than other enemies, even into the late game.
  • On the opposite end of the stat spectrum, werewolves have very good accuracy and little else. They're light on defense, have a lot less evasion than other Fragile Speedster classes, and their damage output is mediocre. They don't really have a gimmick that sets them apart from the other Bestral units that share their nighttime stat boost (werefoxes in particular have a better follow-up-attack game), and their team support is weak and doesn't stack with itself. Like Berserkers, even later-game enemy werewolves are easier to handle than most other classes.

If I were going to do one for Fighters too...

• Fighters are incredibly good at protecting their units from ranged or flying attackers, and struggle to find much of a niche outside of that. Their offensive and defensive skills are middling at best, and as Armored units they slow down the movement of any unit they're attached to.

I could add a modification to the werewolf one too, acknowledging they have a cornercase use via Hide, although the person who reverted my edit seemed to think having that cornercase use disqualified them outright.

Mine includes some other details about why other units of similar types are inherently better, which I believe is a factor when discussing this.

Hide should not disqualify Werewolves as they're otherwise a bad unit. Exploitative practices aren't used by all players and I was part of a big discussion on that years ago for Pokemon where that conclusion was reached. Including Cheese Strategy in there (which is something inherently frowned upon by non-exploitative players) should cover that.

Finally, yes, it should include Fighters. They get hit with this the most of any class as far as I've seen elsewhere (fair or unfair). It's a major discussion in the community...as are ways to make them less awful...but they remain. Again, the point of "placement here does not indicate that a class is completely unviable...but it requires significantly more effort to achieve" comes into play.

In fairness, I've fought teams where the fighters were a formidable obstacle, including Gerald's, albeit largely because they made it really difficult to blitz down the other units. I would definitely make sure to include the fact that they count as Armored though.

I prefer my newer version simply because I feel my old work gets a little too bogged down in the granularity of the thing, but I guess I understand wanting more detail than just "trades poorly against their competitors." I do think the opening doesn't need to say thrice what it could say once and be done with it though.

Apologies for the delayed response. I hid the entry and then went to bed, and work was hectic so I didn't have a chance to follow-up. I've let Lord Twibill know about this discussion. Apologies for hiding it as well.

I think at the moment Gladiator and Fighter fell into LTL, they don't provide enough advantages that others can use. Werewolves are the only one I am not sure on, mostly because I never really used them. I think they have issues for sure, but I don't know if that is enough to make them LTL.

As was mentioned earlier, this IS a YMMV page, so we can put werewolves in. If someone agrees about Fighters, then others can about Werewolves and vice versa. No need to be too uptight about it.

^ This is really the crux of it. There doesn't need to be 100% agreement or disagreement on a YMMV trope. Each has the detractors throughout the fandom and have come up here as well.

I offered my take above, as did Spectral Time. In either case, breaking each class out on sub-bullets with help with readability as well. If there are no objections in the next day or so, I'll see if I can combine the aspects of each of those write-ups to create a final product.

I've no issues with the suggestions, I just am not as familiar with Werewolves as a unit personally.

I don't have any objections.

Would prefer to wait for Twibill to respond, but I'm fine with that outcome.

I tried to combine the best aspects of each of the previous two suggestions (plus a few other details I looked up in game discussions elsewhere). I'll post it in a few hours, giving time for any additional comments:

• Low-Tier Letdown: Most of the game's classes are designed to provide some sort of utility to justify their inclusion in teams throughout the game, and most of them do. However, certain classes simply fail to pull their weight in comparison to others, which coupled with the game's limited unit space, cause them to be left behind by most players. Do note, placement here does not indicate that a class is completely unviable, as the right set-ups can allow these classes to contribute, but it requires significantly more effort to achieve than the majority of other classes. Some of the most prominent examples include:
  • The Fighter/Vanguard are defensive-oriented armored infantry classes incredibly good at protecting their units from ranged or flying attackers... but not much else. Their offensive and defensive skills are middling at best, and as Armored units they slow down the movement of any unit they're attached to. They are outclassed by other defensively-oriented classes like the Lord or Hoplite who are less specialized in how they shield allies. As enemies they're more annoying than threatening, not posing much of a threat but bogging down battles with their Draw Aggro ability.
  • Gladiators/Berserkers are high-health damage-dealers with a self-heal ability but between their very low accuracy, initiative, and defense, plus lacking a unit type they really excel against, they trade poorly against most of their "sweeping" competitors (Dark Knights, Gryphon Knights, etc.) whose classes give them additional advantages. As enemies get stronger and enemy squads get larger, their health simply can't keep up with enemy damage output while, as enemies, they are frequently less dangerous than other classes, even into the late game.
  • Werewolves have great accuracy and a plethora of attacks meant for finishing off weakened foes... and that's it. They have poor defenses, are less evasive that similar Fragile Speedster melee classes, and don't pack much of a punch offensively. They don't really have a gimmick that sets them apart from the other Bestral units that share their nighttime stat boost (Werefoxes in particular outclass them in the "follow-up attack" niche), and their team support (Nightwalk) doesn't stack. Their one niche that still allows for some use is their Valor skill "Hide", which allows for an exploitative Cheese Strategy of hiding units to quickly take maps, but they're still a liability on the unit itself in battle.

I have a couple suggestions for minor changes, but nothing I couldn't easily just edit into the entry itself when it's posted.

Added it as discussed. Going away for the weekend, so let's please not let it become a mess again ;)

Fire Emblem fans do seem to think highly of this game, from what I saw.

Just from a quick visit to their subreddit to beg for help with the Classes page, I think Ogre Battle fans like it too.

Woolseyism, from my time on this site, is supposed to be about the changes to some kind of script or story done from one language to another, and either talking about making things clearer for one language, or being about the positive parts of the entry. I don't think it should reference anything negative based on what I've seen, and if anything Broken Base can maybe serve to discuss it better, but I don't think there is enough of a divide to say the localization is that controversial.

It comes across as a vocal minority.

Which is why my original example was largely positive. He appears to be taking issue with a characterization change? I guess that didn’t come up when I was doing research for the demo.

I misread your initial post, sorry about that!

I think the removal was someone being overzealous instead of discussing it first. I think sharing what you wanted to adjust the entry with here first should be fine since it avoids it appearing like an Edit War.

I can't really comment on the idea someone changed the script to "fit their vision" since it is a very out there statement without a source. I think right now their removal wasn't warranted anyway.

Edit: Also the person who originally changed it being unnecessarily rude about it isn't okay either.

He deleted it again. I brought it back, but cut out some bits to make it more neutral. A direct message to the troper may also be in order.

If the Scarlett thing is true, I'm open to admitting it was changed in a way I worry the entry does not... although, again, I thought it would've come out while I was doing some research for the demo.

The problem with doing research into this is that all the people claiming things were changed are doing with a very biased agenda, and are mostly confined to social media sites that they use to spread that info. On top of that, I've seen almost no discussion post release of it either, so it feels like a vocal minority of players.

Also, if they are insistent about "changing the script to suit their views", they should be linking or providing statements to show that is the case. Just saying it was done without evidence (and I would argue a reliable translator too), isn't helpful.

The onus to provide evidence is on the person who wants the section deleted.

I'm just concerned the "evidence" is going to be a link to one particular person on Twitter whom I will refrain from naming, though I suspect Keyblade knows who I'm talking about.

Btw thanks for fixing the typo, Keyblade.

I more or less know who was being referenced yeah.

I'm not sure what typo I fixed, but if I did then no problem!

Since Calm has been suspended, that part of the issue has been resolved at least.

And I admit, seeing that he vandalized it and then deleted it weirdly makes me feel better, since it shows he wasn’t exactly a paragon of literacy himself.

Of course, now I feel the need to look over his other past edits, since now that he’s shown himself to be a potentially untrustworthy culture warrior it’s all a little suspect isn’t it? Maybe most of them are just benign, but the investigation has to be made…

Supposedly, getting Norbelle's entry isn't required for any achievements, so I'd say this falls under Last Lousy Point instead.

Isn't it a bit premature to call the Fighter class bad? We really don't know anything about how well they scale or how relevant their matchup against Hunters will be as the game goes on.

Yeah, that's why I started this discussion - it didn't sit down well with me, but I couldn't think of something better. But I've seen plenty of reactions to the demo and quite often, the Fighter class would be the one lambasted the most. So it shouldn't be ignored.

However, someone already changed it to Low-Tier Letdown, which also isn't proper, but it does work much better than The Scrappy. Maybe Magikarp Power would work better?