Children were bad in Awakening, and they'll probably be bad here too.
Children were bad in Awakening, and they'll probably be bad here too.
Makes sense. I also have places on my face that I don't like to have touched. Those places are everywhere, by the way. Don't touch my face.Just like Pokemon-Amie, characters have certain parts of their face where they hate to be touched.
IDK. As characters, the children weren't bad IMO, it was just the whole backstory was boring as hell and probably kinda cliche.
True, they were literally just an extra reason to bother with supports. Also, because I'm bored:
Question: Which character did you think made the worst parent for Morgan in Awakening? Personally, I thought Henry was kind of awful, but...
I feel like a lot of first gen characters were just tacked on as well. Virion is the very first offender; joining the Shepards for no good reason. Then we've got Panne, who comes from an irrelevant tribe of beast warriors, and conveniently owes Ylisse a debt for no real reason. Nowi's entrance was rather random(well, for a manakete, at least). Henry joined simply because he felt like it. I could keep going on and on, but Awakening still could of done far better at introducing their characters in general.Well if we're being honest the cliche thing sort of applied to most of the characters in Awakening. The problem I had the the children characters from a plot perspective (aside from the time travel thing) was that they felt kinda tacked on when they could and should have felt more connected to the game. They had almost no plot relevance bar Lucina and it kinda made them feel like they were just there.
Guess i'm the only one who actually liked the marriage and kid system. Always made for interesting combos. Morgan was definitely a powerhouse with Robin+Lucina
Definitely some of the strongest units in the game when paired with certain parents. And yeah, Fire Emblem Awakening was my first Fire Emblem game. So yeah, probably why i'm not so against some of the stuff in it.I guess I'm not looking for a super deep story from Fire Emblem, so the kids to me are just the best units. I liked them.
Avatar is better than the majority of the children and some first Gen units are better than unoptimized children, there are also some children that are just 'bad' overall like Inigo getting his useability through other methods and being able to get an S rank with another child unit. Chrom likewise is better than the majority of children though in a limited scope require specific partners to reach his full potential which you'd then have to include on your team taking a 'loss' as any of the partners are not as good as children, but the resulting paired unit and the fact that Chrom is usually required means that it's worth it doubly so if you get a secondary child from him as you usually want some of the parent characters as back-ups for the child units if the child paired unit needs to separate for some reason and you have more units available to take than the total number of children.I guess I'm not looking for a super deep story from Fire Emblem, so the kids to me are just the best units. I liked them.
Awakening pairing was overpowered, the new game's pairing will be more balanced and allowing enemies to pair will help eliminate a total advantage in your units which are usually stronger than the enemy units as is through stats, skills, or combination of both. Basically those who thought Awakening is too hard tend to be against the scaling back of the pairing and those who thought Awakening was too easy will be for the reassessment in that particular regard which the new system of pairings is what I've seen the most complaints about personally. I support the pairing revamp, but I myself would have left it as is and then put an option for defensive pair-up or offensive pair-up instead of having different positioning choose whether the unit is in the offensive formation or defensive formation as offensive formation will tend to be better than the defensive formation as there is one target and you don't lose net power really with the defensive formation you can't hide a weaken unit and it increases their number of potential targets and the defensive strike won't be as strong since you don't get the support attack. Forcing the enemy to attack a single unit that can strike 4x as is the current system just removing the dual guard feature and possibly the stats doesn't solve the problem really and more or less just supports the use of higher defense/resistance forward units rather than two full attack classes.Definitely some of the strongest units in the game when paired with certain parents. And yeah, Fire Emblem Awakening was my first Fire Emblem game. So yeah, probably why i'm not so against some of the stuff in it.
Avatar is better than the majority of the children and some first Gen units are better than unoptimized children, there are also some children that are just 'bad' overall like Inigo getting his useability through other methods and being able to get an S rank with another child unit. Chrom likewise is better than the majority of children though in a limited scope require specific partners to reach his full potential which you'd then have to include on your team taking a 'loss' as any of the partners are not as good as children, but the resulting paired unit and the fact that Chrom is usually required means that it's worth it doubly so if you get a secondary child from him as you usually want some of the parent characters as back-ups for the child units if the child paired unit needs to separate for some reason and you have more units available to take than the total number of children.
Awakening pairing was overpowered, the new game's pairing will be more balanced and allowing enemies to pair will help eliminate a total advantage in your units which are usually stronger than the enemy units as is through stats, skills, or combination of both. Basically those who thought Awakening is too hard tend to be against the scaling back of the pairing and those who thought Awakening was too easy will be for the reassessment in that particular regard which the new system of pairings is what I've seen the most complaints about personally. I support the pairing revamp, but I myself would have left it as is and then put an option for defensive pair-up or offensive pair-up instead of having different positioning choose whether the unit is in the offensive formation or defensive formation as offensive formation will tend to be better than the defensive formation as there is one target and you don't lose net power really with the defensive formation you can't hide a weaken unit and it increases their number of potential targets and the defensive strike won't be as strong since you don't get the support attack. Forcing the enemy to attack a single unit that can strike 4x as is the current system just removing the dual guard feature and possibly the stats doesn't solve the problem really and more or less just supports the use of higher defense/resistance forward units rather than two full attack classes.
Bottom line new system lowers the effectiveness, but not enough to make a difference at least on paper based on the information available at this juncture.
That's good to hear, because i hated some of the optimal pairings for some of the children.