Unpopular opinions that you have for Fire Emblem

[Jotari]

Shanam is a pure joke character but I find his antics pretty amusing. Mainly because it makes no goddamn sense. I mean, sure you'd like to be a famous pretty boy. But disguising yourself as one of the most wanted men on the continent is an awful idea.

Also I think the thing Awakening was missing was more plot relevant characters. Out of your entire army there's only like five or six that do stuff. It seems like a major step down from Radiant Dawn. Even in the GBA days they at least gave a lot of the characters a place in the world and a reason to be there. But in Awakening they're mostly just Chrom's friends or just show up for absolutely no reason. That's particularly bad with Henry. Gregor and Nowi showing up and being hunted by the Grimleal is also something that never feels like an actual plot thread. If the characters actually felt like they belonged in the world outside of being a video game character then their gimmicks would probably seem less forced .

Edited February 16, 2016 by Jotari

[Jedi]

well fe6's cast is boring bad and one dimensional but I don't know it feels like a different kind of one dimensional

like in fe13/14 a lot of the characters are super fleshed out... because they have a lot of dialogue. a lot of that dialogue is just them referencing their ridiculous gimmick

i'd say fe6 is definitely worse off, but I don't really feel like it's a valid comparison

Have you actually read the better of FE6's supports? Any of Noahs, any of Firs, Rutgers, Geese's, Bartre's, Karels, Niimes, Igrene and Ashtol (My god thats super tragic), any of Igrenes really too, some of Roy's, the Nomads, the Ilians, Sauls, Gonzales etc theres actually quite a number of good supports there, but you're not able to see it as much because the support system hampers you from actually seeing that, and thats the greatest fault of all the GBA fe's.

[Magical Glace]

Have you actually read the better of FE6's supports? Any of Noahs, any of Firs, Rutgers, Geese's, Bartre's, Karels, Niimes, Igrene and Ashtol (My god thats super tragic), any of Igrenes really too, some of Roy's, the Nomads, the Ilians, Sauls, Gonzales etc theres actually quite a number of good supports there, but you're not able to see it as much because the support system hampers you from actually seeing that, and thats the greatest fault of all the GBA fe's.

Relevant: Roy/Wolt is my favorite support chain in the series. I find their brotherly bond adorable and sweet.

Dunno if that's unpopular though.

[Jedi]

Relevant: Roy/Wolt is my favorite support chain in the series. I find their brotherly bond adorable and sweet.

Dunno if that's unpopular though.

Wolt has sweet supports in general, like his chain with Sue is pretty good too.

[Loki Laufeyson]

well fe6's cast is boring bad and one dimensional but I don't know it feels like a different kind of one dimensional

like in fe13/14 a lot of the characters are super fleshed out... because they have a lot of dialogue. a lot of that dialogue is just them referencing their ridiculous gimmick

i'd say fe6 is definitely worse off, but I don't really feel like it's a valid comparison

lute is definitely gimmicky (still love her) but again, I feel like it's done differently there

so I guess that's a case where, again, it's more due to them having a lot of lines outside of supports

i'm sure if she had more outside of her supports, they'd probably all be obnoxious things about how great she is

i never got any of serra's supports other than oswin oops

i guess part of it is more due to me not having finished fe6 and 8, but I still feel like it's a different case

there are still lots of one dimensional and bad characters, but I feel like they focus less on random gimmicks

maybe i'm just really wrong but i felt like, despite there being much more characterization in fe13/14, i feel like they did a better job making characters less bad in fe7-9

i do agree on the part about roy and eliwood though but i might just be biased because i like eliwood more

I really dont think its so much "done differently" as much as well...we just dont see as much of these characters as much as we do in Awakening. Because of random event tiles, we see the gimmick more. But if Lute stood on one of those if they existed in her universe, they would yield the same result.

[Axie]

Relevant: Roy/Wolt is my favorite support chain in the series. I find their brotherly bond adorable and sweet.

Dunno if that's unpopular though.

WELL IT SHOULD BE POPULAR

Roy/Wolt's A support is my relationship goal

Edited February 16, 2016 by Axie

[eclipse]

I also agree about Roy. I have no strong feelings about him either way, but wish Eliwood was the guy for the GBA reps.

I dunno. Lute was pretty gimmicky, even if she was charming af. I dont really recall any of her supports focusing on anything other than her aptitude for books and factoids. Serra's depth only really exists in her supports with Oswin. FE6's cast wasnt much to write home about when i really think about it. And then there was Lowen.

Bribe me enough, and I'll do an in-depth look at Lute.

Serra's true character isn't apparent at first read. Or second. Or third. It requires a lot of reading between the lines, because it's never stated outright. . .but it's pretty tragic, once the pieces fall into place. I think IS tried to do something like Serra via Cordelia (before anyone says "but what about Maribelle?" the only thing those two have in common are their initial choice of weapon), but failed miserably.

[Axie]

I mean, some characters are meant to be comedic and that's okay (even though they are even better if they have non-apparent depth like Serra and to a lesser extent Clarine), Lute is amazing because she's super funny even if her support with Artur is the deepest she seems to go.

We only have a problem if the entire cast is Lute (or if the entire cast is tragic - FE4 could have used some comic relief beyond Sylvia and Patty).

[Magical Glace]

Wolt has sweet supports in general, like his chain with Sue is pretty good too.

Yeah, Wolt's adorable and loyal and sweet and asdfjkl;

WELL IT SHOULD BE POPULAR

Roy/Wolt's A support is my relationship goal

I wish I could have a relationship with my sis like Roy's with Wolt's.

But this is off topic, so I will post a relevant thing.

I think the best possible support system would be one that combines GBA's with FE9's, maybe increasing the range units must be within each other from "next to" to a 3 tile radius or so, while still getting points from shared deployment. That way, supports can be gained faster if one wants to play that way but if someone doesn't want to grind they'll still get it eventually.

[Jotari]

I don't really see why so many people are against the whole C B A S support idea. It basically just means you have infinite B supports in Gameboy terms. And personally I found the fact that you could only have five supports, meaning on a single playthrough each unit is likely only going to support two others, was really limiting. The only thing the Awakening System needs to change is super romance leading to auto marriage at S. If S was simply the paired ending achieved like A supports in other games then it'd be fine. Plus having four supports gives a better sense of progression in gameplay and (theoretically should) allow more time for developing the mini plot lines.

[Jedi]

I don't really see why so many people are against the whole C B A S support idea. It basically just means you have infinite B supports in Gameboy terms. And personally I found the fact that you could only have five supports, meaning on a single playthrough each unit is likely only going to support two others, was really limiting. The only thing the Awakening System needs to change is super romance leading to auto marriage at S. If S was simply the paired ending achieved like A supports in other games then it'd be fine. Plus having four supports gives a better sense of progression in gameplay and (theoretically should) allow more time for developing the mini plot lines.

I'm against how they were implemented before fe9, I like them overall alot more than FE13's though

I'm all for the C, B, A system I just don't want them to be as slow as they used to be in that. I'd rather limited supports overall

[Jotari]

I'm against how they were implemented before fe9, I like them overall alot more than FE13's though

I'm all for the C, B, A system I just don't want them to be as slow as they used to be in that. I'd rather limited supports overall

But why would you be for an arbitrary limit that stops you getting to know the characters? Wouldn't the GBA/POR supports be better if you could get A support with one unit and a B support with all the others?

Edited February 16, 2016 by Jotari

[Jedi]

But why would you be for an arbitrary limit that stops you getting to know the characters? Wouldn't the GBA/POR supports be better if you could get A support with one unit and a B support with all the others?

Gameplay purposes, I don't want a leadership stars+ charisma situation where my entire army is supported with each other and giving each other insane stat bonuses in the same area.

And to Awakenings credit they didn't allow that, because you have to be in pair up to get full support benefits iirc.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Jedi

[Jotari]

I suppose that does make sense.

[kantoorfarina]

As for the pre-awakening FE characters being as gimmicky as the Awakening ones, I think that really depends on which character. Jill has more development in her finger than everyone in Awakening combined, while Ilyana is just as bad if not worse than most of the characters in Awakening. It probably comes from how there's a lot more supports in Awakening and the writers can't be bothered to make every one unique or good, which is why a lot of them are just characters repeating their gimmick, while in the pre-awakening games there's less supports and the writers are in a lot less of a rush to flesh out the characters. This is very apparent in almost every one of Kellam's supports.

Also I think the support limit was very much needed. Some support combinations are already pretty broken, supporting 5 people at once would be stupid overpowered.

[X-Naut]

Gameplay purposes, I don't want a leadership stars+ charisma situation where my entire army is supported with each other and giving each other insane stat bonuses in the same area.

And to Awakenings credit they didn't allow that, because you have to be in pair up to get full support benefits iirc.

Awakening also capped the number of support levels you could get bonuses from at once. I think that's a better system than arbitrarily limiting the player to two supports per playthrough (with one being incomplete).

I am, however, all for lowering the number of supports per character back down to say, high GBA level (as in average 6-7 per person).

Edited February 16, 2016 by X-Naut

[Anacybele]

Hey, I like the CBAS support thing! I just wish S support didn't always mean marriage. I mean, I like marriage, but the S support is still yet another conversation and that means more room for depth and development!

[MCProductions]

Awakening also capped the number of support levels you could get bonuses from at once. I think that's a better system than arbitrarily limiting the player to two supports per playthrough (with one being incomplete).

This, Awakening and Fates imo, have the best version of the support system mechanically speaking. Writing quality is obviously up to personal taste, but a large majority of my favorite supports in FE do come from Awakening so for me it works.

[Loki Laufeyson]

Bribe me enough, and I'll do an in-depth look at Lute.

Serra's true character isn't apparent at first read. Or second. Or third. It requires a lot of reading between the lines, because it's never stated outright. . .but it's pretty tragic, once the pieces fall into place. I think IS tried to do something like Serra via Cordelia (before anyone says "but what about Maribelle?" the only thing those two have in common are their initial choice of weapon), but failed miserably.

Oh i know. Ive seen just about all of Serra's supports. Its just she really comes off as very gimmicky and her supports are fuggen slow to build. So its likely no one is even gonna see them, let alone see the ones with depth.

As for the pre-awakening FE characters being as gimmicky as the Awakening ones, I think that really depends on which character. Jill has more development in her finger than everyone in Awakening combined, while Ilyana is just as bad if not worse than most of the characters in Awakening. It probably comes from how there's a lot more supports in Awakening and the writers can't be bothered to make every one unique or good, which is why a lot of them are just characters repeating their gimmick, while in the pre-awakening games there's less supports and the writers are in a lot less of a rush to flesh out the characters. This is very apparent in almost every one of Kellam's supports.

Also I think the support limit was very much needed. Some support combinations are already pretty broken, supporting 5 people at once would be stupid overpowered.

Honestly, i think its less that the writers didnt care, and more to do with the sheer amount of supports needing to be written. Not only that, but too many of them are not linked to the actual game world and plot, due to the number and because of romance. Support limit needs to return for the sake of the quality of support writing alone. Kellam has like, a couple of supports that were really well written. Maribelle, Donnel, and Stahl all support Kellam with something other than his disappearing act. These talk all about his life pre-Shepherds, and in Maribelle's case, talk about both of their goals. Its clear to me that these were likely the ones written first and then the writers decided to try to force compatibility with other characters. Hence why we need more limits. (omg the awkwardness of Lon'qu/Nowi makes me squirm)

This, Awakening and Fates imo, have the best version of the support system mechanically speaking. Writing quality is obviously up to personal taste, but a large majority of my favorite supports in FE do come from Awakening so for me it works.

It really is amazing in terms of gameplay. Its a shame it came at such a cost tbh. I do agree with people saying that the supports in Awakening (and some of the Fates ones ive read) are not really that great and extremely shallow. There ARE a handful of pretty great supports in both games though, so its not like its all a shit sandwich.

[Anacybele]

I agree, Florina, I feel like I'm the only person that says an FE support system should be a combination of PoR's and Awakening's. It should be like PoR's in that there's a limited number of supports per character (but more evenly spread out, I didn't like how Ike had like seven different supports while Elincia got a grand total of TWO. She needed to support with Lucia and Marcia. Lucia because Lucia and Marcia because it would explain how and why Elincia came to recruit her in the Royal Knights for RD!) and you don't have to keep characters sitting next to each other on every map. And the conversations are of awesome quality.

And it should be like Awakening's in that there are S supports, not necessarily leading to marriage (but paired endings instead).

Edited February 16, 2016 by Anacybele

[Dark Sage]

Gameplay purposes, I don't want a leadership stars+ charisma situation where my entire army is supported with each other and giving each other insane stat bonuses in the same area.

And to Awakenings credit they didn't allow that, because you have to be in pair up to get full support benefits iirc.

One solution is that instead of combining the bonuses of each affinity per rank, the unit only receives the bonuses from the affinity of the unit he's supporting, rounded up. So like for a BoydxBrom C support, Boyd receives the bonuses from Brom's Water affinity, but not from his own Fire affinity, and vice versa.

[Baldrick]

When writing supports, they should have done it like RD. It just had generic dialogue for most supports, and put the interesting character interaction/backstory into base conversations.

Actually, RD's support system is mechanically similar to Awakening. I think the only differences it lacks S supports, you can only support one unit at a time, and literally any two permanent units could support)

[Topaz Light]

Hey, I like the CBAS support thing! I just wish S support didn't always mean marriage. I mean, I like marriage, but the S support is still yet another conversation and that means more room for depth and development!

How about S for a romantic fourth Support conversation, and A+ for a platonic fourth? Fates already has the A+ Support rank, but sadly I'm pretty sure nobody has any conversations to go with it.

As for my own unpopular opinions...

• I don't know if this is as much an unpopular opinion as it is just an unpopular playstyle, but I still don't use Jagens even after acknowledging their usefulness. The reason is because I've gotten used to playing the games without using them, and have come to find it more fun to do so, since, even setting aside the whole low growth rates and "EXP thief" complaints, Jagens kinda feel a bit like Get Out of Jail Free cards, so it's just more fun for me to work my way through situations without resorting to using them. (And besides, it's not like you actually need them for most of the game + difficulty level combinations I generally play, anyway)
• While I dislike the costume design of the 3DS Fire Emblem games, I find Kozaki's art style itself to be pretty palatable and I honestly don't really mind it at all. Just, whoever's been doing the outfit designs needs to be replaced.
• I honestly think the idea of a Fire Emblem game with a higher level of technological development present in its setting could potentially be very cool if done right, although I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that Fire Emblem go the route of Final Fantasy and move itself as a whole towards more modern/futuristic settings. I just think it might be fun to explore how such a shift in setting would mix with the iconic Fire Emblem elements.
• I feel that Awakening's biggest assets were its presentation and user interface elements, as well as the general feel of the gameplay, and most everything else was mediocre at best. I do think some of the characters are decent enough and I even really like a few of them, but my main problem is that the extremely bare-bones worldbuilding gives them minimal context in which to exist in the grand scheme of their setting, and characters in a world are almost by default far more interesting than characters in a vacuum.
• I honestly don't even see the different routes in Fates as separate games, and as such, I'm going to be getting all three, since I wouldn't feel like I was getting the complete game if I didn't.
• I thought Fire Emblem 7's plot was decent enough. After playing through it again, it's not really stellar by any means, but it's certainly not as bad as that one person's rant from a while back accused it of being.
• Marth-era Archanea might actually be my favorite Fire Emblem continent. It's just a shame it never really got a good game in it that really fleshed out and gave depth to the cast in the game itself.
• I don't mind child characters as a mechanic at all, but I really think that they should only be used in games that actually give them plot significance. I'd love to see another game like Genealogy that's split into two parts, with the second half focusing on the second generation in such a way as that you're effectively forced to use them, but that's probably pretty unlikely.
• Thracia 776 doesn't really look that interesting to me. I mean, I'm still going to play the game at some point, probably, but it just doesn't really endear itself to me hardly at all. Maybe Project Naga will change that. Let's hope.
• I've heard a few people expressing that they want them removed, but I actually like the random elements to Fire Emblem, like growth rates, how hits/misses and critical hits are determined, etc. The amount of luck involved has never really felt egregious to me, personally, and I feel like randomly-determined stat growth based on different predispositions for each character is an interesting way to grant individuality to each playthrough without taking individuality away from the characters.
• I much prefer the way Skills worked in the Jugdral and Tellius games, being rarer and more unique to the characters that had them, rather than something that every party member has in abundance, like in Awakening. I think the former was a really interesting way to add more distinguishing features between units.
• I really don't get what's so great about the idea of a grimdark Game of Thrones-esque Fire Emblem game that so many people seem to want/try to make as ROM hacks... Maybe it's because I find it deterring when things are too dark, and (probably at least partially because of that) I've never really gotten into Game of Thrones, but I just don't see the appeal, frankly.
• I like the idea of reclassing as a mechanic, but I don't feel it's been done quite right yet. I'd like to either see it mostly go back to how it worked in FEDS, only with reclass sets determined by character like in the 3DS games, or have it change to something that's a commitment- maybe even entirely irreversible- and that can only be done sparingly.

Also...

I'm against how they were implemented before fe9, I like them overall alot more than FE13's though

I'm all for the C, B, A system I just don't want them to be as slow as they used to be in that. I'd rather limited supports overall

I don't want a leadership stars+ charisma situation where my entire army is supported with each other and giving each other insane stat bonuses in the same area.

Also I think the support limit was very much needed. Some support combinations are already pretty broken, supporting 5 people at once would be stupid overpowered.

I think Support point gain worked best in Awakening. In regards to bonuses, I had the idea that basically each parameter that Supports affect would only be able to be boosted by four Support ranks' worth at one time, no matter how many nearby Support partners had affinities that boosted that stat. That could still get pretty powerful, but at least you wouldn't be able to load up on same-stat-boosting Support partners and get, like, 120% innate Critical and 200%+ Avoid or anything.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Topaz Light

[Jotari]

I agree, Florina, I feel like I'm the only person that says an FE support system should be a combination of PoR's and Awakening's. It should be like PoR's in that there's a limited number of supports per character (but more evenly spread out, I didn't like how Ike had like seven different supports while Elincia got a grand total of TWO. She needed to support with Lucia and Marcia. Lucia because Lucia and Marcia because it would explain how and why Elincia came to recruit her in the Royal Knights for RD!) and you don't have to keep characters sitting next to each other on every map. And the conversations are of awesome quality.

And it should be like Awakening's in that there are S supports, not necessarily leading to marriage (but paired endings instead).

I don't think an uneven distribution among characters is a bad thing. Certain characters are naturally going to be compatible with less or more people. And particularly in the lord's case it makes sense for them to have more supports because, narratively speaking they're the character the audience is following and in universe they're typically the leader of the army so they'll no doubt be talking to more people on a regular basis. You're right though, Elincia should have got a few more supports. I think her late join time and the fact that it's done by number of maps might have contributed to them half assing it. Bastian is another character you'd imagine she can support with.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Jotari

[Anacybele]

Well, I didn't mean everyone had to have the same exact number of supports, I meant like 4-7 for each character.