Suggestion - Terrain/Biome combat bonuses


This suggestion is a conceptual idea based on the terrain disadvantage/advantages of Fire Emblem when a unit/character attacks from a forest or a mountain or in the sky, modifying the hit-rate and defense with negatives or/and positives. The suggestion would have three different ways it or would be applied based on what weapon type the characters involved are using, which person attacks whom with which type and from which terrain/biome the attacker is attacking from.

Before doing an example, there will need to be an explantation of these “bonuses” would work. Reminder that this is focused on character versus character than character versus animal or monster. Conceptual formulas may be included in for reference and/or as a general idea how it would work.

Though, the idea of fighting on a biome would be optional at best.

  • Attacking from a terrain/biome
  • I imagine how attacking a character from a biome would work. Let’s say that your character is attacking from a hill, the game would apply a luck factor based on one two different things, the weapon and the terrain/biome. The game would then apply a hit-rate bonus with a percentage of a 5-15% for a melee user while a ranged user would get a 5-25% bonus on a hill. The bonuses would be different because of the way the character is attacking.

    The one being attacked would have their dodge rate modified based on the weapon and terrain/biome they’re on, The dodge rate bonus for a melee character dodging on a hill would be a 5-10% while a ranged character would have a 5-15%. Unless that is weird then we could use the same percentages as attacking.

    (Regular formula)
    50 + (attribute used by attacker’s weapon x16) -(attribute used by defender’s weapon x 16)

    (Formula with terrain/biome bonuses)
    50 + (attribute used by attacker’s weapon x16) + (weapon/biome) - (attribute used by defender’s weapon x 16) + (weapon/biome)

    Example 1-A - Melee attacking ranged on a hill (Different attacking and defending bonuses):
    50 + (strength = 1 x16) + (Melee/hill = 5-15% = 5% ) - (dexterity = 1 x 16) + (Ranged/hill = 5-15% = 12%) = 43% chance to hit.

    Example 1-B - Melee attacking ranged on a hill (Attacking bonuses same for defense):
    50 + (strength = 1 x16) + (Melee/hill = 5-15% = 8% ) - (dexterity = 1 x 16) + (Ranged/hill = 5-25% = 22%) = 38% chance to hit.

    Example 2-A - Ranged attacking melee on a hill (Different attacking and defending bonuses):
    50 + (dexterity = 1 x16) + (Ranged/hill = 5-25% = 21% ) - (strength
    = 1 x 16) + (Melee/hill = 5-10% = 10%) = 61% chance to hit.

    Example 2-B - Ranged attacking melee on a hill (Attacking bonuses same for defense):
    50 + (dexterity = 1 x16) + (Ranged/hill = 5-25% = 21% ) - (strength
    = 1 x 16) + (Melee/hill = 5-15% = 15%) = 56% chance to hit.

    As you can see, the difference is very prominent for both melee and ranged characters. These formulas/examples are meant for a strategic point of view. Like deciding if you want to go up a hill with your fists to punch someone with a sling or having someone with the same weapon as them to attack.

    Note: Geez, that’s abit unfair… Didn’t mean to write it like that.

  • Attacking and defending on different biomes
  • What if the situation is abit different like a ranged character attacking from the hill but they're trying to attack a melee character in a forest or a grassland. Let's pretend that the forest gives the melee character a hit rate of 5-20% while the dodge rate could be 5-30% due to large amounts of trees that can be cover.

    Example 3-A - Ranged attacking melee on a hill while the melee is in a forest (Different attacking and defending bonuses):
    50 + (dexterity = 1 x16) + (Ranged/hill = 5-25% = 21% ) - (strength
    = 1 x 16) + (Melee/forest = 5-30% = 25%) = 46% chance to hit.

    Example 3-B - Ranged attacking melee on a hill while melee is in a forest (Attacking bonuses same for defense):
    50 + (dexterity = 1 x16) + (Ranged/hill = 5-25% = 21% ) - (strength
    = 1 x 16) + (Melee/forest = 5-20% = 20%) = 51% chance to hit.

    It’s like that, though I’m not sure how much sense is applied in a combat situation like the above. But here’s how it would work attacking and defending from a different terrain/biome.

The structure of this suggestion is abit unorderly, forgive me for just crunching in a bunch of numbers. It also feels like a combat overhaul than just applying modifiers. If any of you would like to have a go or a piece, you are more than welcome to do so.

I thank you all for reading this suggestion with feedback or not.


If the formula acts funny on a calculator, please crunch in the numbers for both attacking and defending separately. Didn’t write in same weapon type characters because they’d be on the same playing field aside from biomes.


Honestly, to me, this sounds like something that is famous in Cantr - overcomplicating mechanics where is no need for that.


Congratulations are in order, you are the first person to reply to one of these long-winded and possibly over and under explained conceptual ideas. From the deepest parts of my heart, I thank you.

First things first, I happen to agree that it may not be needed at all. The concept or mechanic itself is rather simplistic overall despite what the formulas would say. The only complicating part is the bonuses from each terrain/biome for each weapon type for attacking and defending.

My main reason for suggesting this conceptual idea was to make combat interesting and different over a possibility of characters having the same levels in combat related stats such as strength and dexterity.

The only thing this concept would add is either a small or a large modifier based on terrain/biome and which weapon is used on it by the attacker and defender. The examples and provided conceptual formulas show how much it would change a character versus character combat situation. Like, attack from a hill with a ranged weapon and a modifier between 5%-25% will be rolled and added in to up their chances to hit someone while someone defending themselves would get a modifier 5%-15% with a ranged and a 5%-10% with a melee would be rolled if on the same hill.


The main problem with this suggestion is not that it adds complication, but that it doesn’t really work with the system as set up right now. An “area” is an “area” which, less tautologically, means that there are only two states an area cares about: if you’re in it, or if you’re not.

There aren’t really sub-biomes to a given area, all people standing in an area can be anywhere at any point of time and interact with anything or anyone else in that area. Similarly, if you’re not in an area you can’t interact with people in another area (outside of specifically Watchtowers, and only if you count “notified that others have entered a nearby area” as any degree of interaction).

Which is the problem with trying to come up with various terrain bonuses, because it’s not really possible to subdivide people in a given area as being “in the forest” versus another group being “on the hills”. You’re simultaneously in the forest and on the hill as long as those are features of the terrain.

It’s not a bad idea per say, it’s just not one that works with the current system. You’d have to do a moderate overall of how areas work to make such positional details anything other than rp flavor.