-The problem about this game is that if any one of ur members die is game over.
If a troll critical hit one member is game over.
-The autosave takes some time and if you die you need comeback half the battle again making the game boring and repetitive because you can't savegame.
This, a game design decision that I question. Strategy games are one genre in which losses are expected, even for the story-favored protagonist faction, but having a strong plot means having strong characters that aren't very disposable. Different games have taken different approaches to reconciling that point of contention. Some games, like fire emblem or the Banner Saga, give each character a face and a part of the story, but the core of the plot orbits around a single or handful of "lord" units that are the only indispensable ones. Other characters might be part of the story temporarily, or show up optionally in later parts, the game being written to anticipate both their absence or inclusion. Games like X-com, and alot of rtses insert
you or some other figure into the story as a kind of nebulous general entity, who doesn't risk his life on the battlefield personally, so that the characters on the battlefield can be generic and die or survive without consequence, at the cost of a flimsier story and fewer characters to form attachments with.
In Disgaea and other light-hearted strategy games, Brigandine included, death is not permanent unless dictated by the story, allowing characters to "die" without many repercussions, since as far as the game is concerned, they can just be re-spawned or such. Games run the spectrum between these points, and it feels like this Natural Doctrine goes far to one side of the spectrum, beyond fire emblem by making each and every life essential. In turn, I expect the story to involve these characters in a significant way.
