Do You Like The Kids? / Your Thoughts on Them

[sylveonzoroark]

I like some of the kids' designs(eg velour, kinu, foleo, ophelia, midoriko, gurei), but most of them are pretty bland to me.

[Jedi]

I think the way they are implemented gameplay wise is very convenient.

I rarely grind in FE (Heck I rarely use the DLC if at all), and I like trying to see what skills and such I can get without doing side maps or things usually, I see Paralogues being like Gaidens in the older FE's key to unlock for more Exp if you so wish. So I don't see those as side missions more as... Bonuses for S ranks. (And heck this is how Conquest is kinda played anyways).

The fact that the kids scale, is a godsend, and the fact that its still fun to mess with whos hair color or something a kid gets, just pleases me enough.

I do miss the whole Holy Blood/Inheritance system though.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Jedi

[ckc22]

I do apologize for being rant and being emotionally blinded, but your initial statements almost sounded like mine as well. The very first thing you mentioned is "other people complaining about their ships".

They're basically nonexistent and you sounded like you were mocking the system for petty reasons.

Now that you actually explained yourself properly, your stance sounds much more reasonable.

And yet, min-maxing itself sounds very petty when you're complaining about the system not being deep enough when a feature was designed so that people's who found min-maxing boring, didn't have to go through it. It's a middleground because the system still has skills from inheritance, but those who don't want to go through that can skip it.

The game isn't designed with min-maxers in mind.

Saying the system isn't deep or complex enough because of a rule set of "using all resources" sounds wrong. For most people, the complexity is still there. Which is why it sounds like you're the only one complaining here that they "dumbed it down". And arguably... they have... in your context. But for the typical person who thinks about the eugenics, my castle is not a "nerf".

It sounds... kind of backwards to me.

Because you're putting it on the context of online skill trading, not individual isolated playthroughs like Awakening is.

Remember that to some people, min-maxing grinding is boring. You still have the option to min-max the way you did in Awakening. Except this time people also have the choice to skip all of that.

tl;dr You disagree with the design, but saying the system was "dumbed down" isn't accurate.

Except you say as much - for people who don't like min/maxing they eliminated the need to do any planning or effort so they could just buy skills... that = dumbed down.

To be clear that doesn't even bother me so much. If they made it so you could only buy skills for which the character had the class available I would have almost no issue with them reducing grinding.

Edited March 17, 2016 by ckc22

[shadowofchaos]

Yes... for people who don't want to min max and want to use the my castle feature.

The complex system of inheritance is still there.

And for those that want to theory craft, it's still there.

Edited March 17, 2016 by shadowofchaos

[ckc22]

Yes... for people who don't want to min max and want to use the my castle feature.

The complex system of inheritance is still there.

No. Because you can completely undermine it by buying (virtually) every skill on every character regardless to whether the character has class access or not... and that's what ruins theorycrafting.

[shadowofchaos]

So... what is getting undermined, exactly?

The playthrough? What is the end result that you are so dissatisfied about?

What is the end goal of your min maxing?

Edited March 17, 2016 by shadowofchaos

[ckc22]

So... what is getting undermined, exactly?

The playthrough? What is the end result that you are so dissatisfied about?

What is the end goal of your min maxing?

I've explained my thoughts extensively over the course of multiple posts. I don't have more to add. If it doesn't bother you good for you. It knocks the game down a peg for me and many other people who enjoyed designing teams in awakening.

[shadowofchaos]

If you enjoyed designing teams in Awakening, isolated in your own game, you should enjoy designing teams the same way with the context of being isolated from My Castle as well.

I still think it's because it's natural for people to want to be praised for thinking about the game in a deep level. And yet someone can just buy the skillset you worked hard on.

But it feels like that's exactly what you're complaining about.

If you min maxed without buying skills from my castle... and the end of the game, what do you have? The exact same thing you would have had in Awakening. With all the effort and grinding. Exactly the same thing.

I just feel like you or the other people just lost motivation because others have the same achievement you can get buy buying skills. Discussion isn't nerfed for those that enjoy the journey.

[ckc22]

If you enjoyed designing teams in Awakening, isolated in your own game, you should enjoy designing teams the same way with the context of being isolated from My Castle as well.

I still think it's because it's natural for people to want to be praised for thinking about the game in a deep level. And yet someone can just buy the skillset you worked hard on.

But it feels like that's exactly what you're complaining about.

If you min maxed without buying skills from my castle... and the end of the game, what do you have? The exact same thing you would have had in Awakening. With all the effort and grinding. Exactly the same thing.

I just feel like you or the other people just lost motivation because others have the same achievement you can get buy buying skills. Discussion isn't nerfed for those that enjoy the journey.

It's not the same though. You're describing a challenge run scenario essentially. I've pointed out my reasoning in depth multiple times yet you keep accusing me of being an elitist and that being the reason I don't like the change.

Buying the skills isn't the problem. Buying any skill at all when you have no natural access is my problem.

Sure I could do a challenge run on my own - but the community is never going to have the same depth, the same conversation around min/maxing, meta, theorycrafting. If it pops up the answer is "skills don't matter buy what you want" because that's the truth. The discussion IS nerfed.

Edited March 17, 2016 by ckc22

[Camilla]

I like Selkie a lot and I guess Velouria is decent

I don't really like any of the other children. I especially don't like Ophelia or the Awakening characters as children.

I don't like how children are handled in this game, though.

Really young females like Elise can get pregnant, and nine months just somehow magically goes by in a flash. Then somehow the children instantly grow to maturity in the Deeprealms. It's ridiculous.

[semolinaro]

Super, super mixed.

I think that in general, I like the idea of having kids. It makes it feel like the army is evolving as time passes. It was handled well in Awakening because they were part of the story and it worked, albeit with a few little plot blips but you know... time travel stories can be like that. I don't like it in Fates at all because they only brought the children back because it was popular in Awakening. I found a lot of the child characters to be much more forgettable as well this time around (except for you Velouria, you're the best). The children were also completely shoehorned in; the Deeprealm thing with how time passes much faster and forcing them to grow up to adults is just so painfully forced. It annoyed me so much that I didn't bother with too many of the child units, I only recruited them so I could strengthen my team with extra maps.

I say if you're gonna add children, make them relevant. I enjoyed them immensely in Awakening because they were part of the story and their characterization was more fleshed out, because they had been working together to try to reach a common goal and save their parents. In Fates, it's just so random and unnecessary that I would have been totally fine without having children at all. The cast is so big anyway, especially in Revelation, that it wouldn't even be the end of the world if the children weren't included.

Edited March 17, 2016 by semolinaro

[Thane]

One aspect I found weird in both Awakening and Fates is the lack of cross-generation supports. They don't even have to be romantic, but it's just strange to me that they're completely separated in that way (aside from Nah and Tiki and any avatar supports, obviously); I want to see Foleo and Oboro bond over clothes, dammit. Might as well do something new with the kids if they're going to be implemented in such a poor manner.

[warchiefwilliams]

Time to jump back into the recurring shit-show that is child units in Fates....

Do I like them as characters? Certain individuals yes, but as a whole not really. Many of the child units lack the same depth of personality that their parents had. While I wouldn't call most of the 1st gen walking stereotypes there are a few amongst the 2nd gen which would count as such. It really feels like they were an afterthought, included because it was a popular mechanic in Awakening, not because there is a good plot justification for their appearance. Personally, I like Ophelia, Solei, Shiro, Sigbert and Eponine/Nina (why'd ya have to change that Treehouse?). They proved to be both entertaining characters and powerful units while the rest so far have just been... meh at best (except for the furies, they are adorable (inner commissar rages at those words)). Even though it has been talked about to death already, I still must mention the absurdity that is the Hyperbolic-Time-Chambers-Outrealms whatever they are called these days. Am I just creating more disposable bodies for my army, or is my player avatar actually having a daughter with his spouse? Those damn chambers really lessen the emotional impact that any child unit has. Can't we just have a Fire Emblem where the alternate dimensional shenanigans are kept to a minimum?

If they want to include a 2nd gen again, IS really needs to pull a Genealogy. Let there be a time skip, let the first gen fall and let us play as the characters we effectively created to replace them. It would make for both interesting gameplay and a good twist from a narrative perspective.

I could rant about this for a while longer, but I got things to do today still. Mechanically speaking, IS has shown us twice now that they are capable of programming a good (or at least decent) eugenics system into Fire Emblem. The trick now is that they need a good story to utilize it, and they haven't found a good story yet.

As a little side note about children, and Nina in particular, something isn't quite right here, and why do I get a sense of deja vu regarding another artistic goof up looking at this still ?

Edited March 17, 2016 by warchiefwilliams

[Dark Holy Elf]

One aspect I found weird in both Awakening and Fates is the lack of cross-generation supports. They don't even have to be romantic, but it's just strange to me that they're completely separated in that way (aside from Nah and Tiki and any avatar supports, obviously); I want to see Foleo and Oboro bond over clothes, dammit. Might as well do something new with the kids if they're going to be implemented in such a poor manner.

Definitely agreed.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but one thing that keeps me from feeling emotionally attached to the kids in both Fates and Awakening (with the exception of Lucina) is that it sometimes feels like they exist in a separate continuity. They don't exist in the main plot, joining in a scattershot of optional maps which can occur at any time. They don't interact with the vast majority of other characters in the main plot: just their parents (and one of those is in the form of a generic support), the avatar, and in Awakening's case, Lucina. (Exceptions also noted for Tiki/Nah, for instance, yeah.) I really don't like this effect, and it really keeps any of the kids from feeling like fully three-dimensional characters, even the ones with relatively better writing.

Of course I think IntSys generally needs to revamp how they give out supports, instead of obsessing with everyone from group X supporting group Y for various X and Y. I want more cross-gen supports, more same-sex supports, and far more supports for characters like Say'ri or Scarlet who randomly get shafted, and less supports between two characters the writers couldn't think of anything good for but were obligated to write because of a checklist.

[Jave]

One aspect I found weird in both Awakening and Fates is the lack of cross-generation supports. They don't even have to be romantic, but it's just strange to me that they're completely separated in that way (aside from Nah and Tiki and any avatar supports, obviously); I want to see Foleo and Oboro bond over clothes, dammit. Might as well do something new with the kids if they're going to be implemented in such a poor manner.

THIS I agree with.

Heck, the Forrest Paralogue hints at an adorable relationship with him and his aunt Elise. Imagine my disappointment when I saw there was no Support.

[Locke087]

THIS I agree with.

Heck, the Forrest Paralogue hints at an adorable relationship with him and his aunt Elise. Imagine my disappointment when I saw there was no Support.

I agree fully with this cross generation support are needed and people need to support less people so people like Scarlet and Flora have more supports.

The Forrest thing seriously annoyed me why the ever loving crap does the game say this when he has NO supports with Elise!

Edited March 18, 2016 by Locke087

[Reachfan2]

I agree fully with this cross generation support are needed and people need to support less people so people like Scarlet and Flora have more supports.

The Forrest thing seriously annoyed me why the ever loving crap does the game say this when he has NO supports with Elise!

Maybe they'll add extra supports in upcoming DLC. I, for one, like the kids. I like their personalities (probably spelled that wrong), their paralogues look fun, and their supports are adorable... except the platonic ones which annoy the living crap out of me. My favorite support in the JP version, which was Caeldori/MKana, was translated into a "let's be BFFs" support which I call BS on. Besides that, I'm perfectly content with the children and I'm looking forward to the supports once I get Revelations.

[Reachfan2]

Also, I have an idea that will hopefully happen eventually about how kids will come in a future game or two.

First, have the original generation of characters bond, marry and have children over the course of at most 1/3 of the game.

Second, when the 1/3 of the game is done, set the timeline like 15-18 years later where the children have all grown up and (optionally) they can take over their parent's roles. However, you can still keep the original generation with the new generation if you want.

Thirdly, have the children (or at this time, young adults) bond and marry like their parents did but with no children, since it'd be better if the children change depending on the pairing you made of the new generation in an epilogue.

Finally, give the children/young adults more personality. Like I said in my previous post, I like the personalities of the children of FE14, but make their supports and relationships with other characters more realistic unlike the last two games.

Would that be a better idea than time travel and alternate dimensions? What do you guys think?

Edited March 18, 2016 by Reachfan2

[jankmaster98]

I just wish that the support conversations between un-fixed parents was unique instead of just minor changes between each one, though that would be a lot of writing. I would think it would work better if not everyone could support with everyone.

[Loki Laufeyson]

One aspect I found weird in both Awakening and Fates is the lack of cross-generation supports. They don't even have to be romantic, but it's just strange to me that they're completely separated in that way (aside from Nah and Tiki and any avatar supports, obviously); I want to see Foleo and Oboro bond over clothes, dammit. Might as well do something new with the kids if they're going to be implemented in such a poor manner.

Ja. Having Forrest not support with Elise due to his recruitment chapter, was the worst. Why wouldnt Soleil have a hilarious convo with Niles? Why couldnt Ophelia call Laslow, "Uncie Laz" or some shit? man....

[Vitezen]

As I said in another thread, a huge problem coming with the quality of support conversations is definitely tied to the need for characters to all be able to marry each other, which is related to creating kids.

IS has demonstrated that you have two choices, quality or quantity. When you go with kids, you choose quantity, because everyone has to have the option to marry everyone, no matter how ridiculous or unjustified the choice. I want the old quality supports back, not necessarily as limited as they were, but that seems to be a necessity for quality writing. I remember choosing the marriages I wanted in Awakening based on the quality of supports between the spouses, and how easy it was, because 99% of supports were garbage. That shouldn't happen.

A system where each potential spouse only has a few partners could be interesting, but I don't know how that would interact with the number of supports allowed as a whole. I would also love a return for the importance of platonic supports, but again, I don't think that would be an option with the current marriage system. You'd be doubling the amount of supports if everyone can support everyone, and heaven only knows what the end result of that would be for quality.

Edited March 19, 2016 by Vitezen

[ckc22]

As I said in another thread, a huge problem coming with the quality of support conversations is definitely tied to the need for characters to all be able to marry each other, which is related to creating kids.

IS has demonstrated that you have two choices, quality or quantity. When you go with kids, you choose quantity, because everyone has to have the option to marry everyone, no matter how ridiculous or unjustified the choice. I want the old quality supports back, not necessarily as limited as they were, but that seems to be a necessity for quality writing. I remember choosing the marriages I wanted in Awakening based on the quality of supports between the spouses, and how easy it was, because 99% of supports were garbage. That shouldn't happen.

A system where each potential spouse only has a few partners could be interesting, but I don't know how that would interact with the number of supports allowed as a whole. I would also love a return for the importance of platonic supports, but again, I don't think that would be an option with the current marriage system. You'd be doubling the amount of supports if everyone can support everyone, and heaven only knows what the end result of that would be for quality.

My ideal for next FE would be no children & that S rank no longer implies romantic connection but rather just a deep relationship - rivals, siblings, romantic (hetero and homo), friends, family, teacher/student, etc. To keep some of the fun of customization have S rank pass like a class and/or some skills/stat bonus between partners. Give each character 3-4 S rank options.

[jankmaster98]

My ideal for next FE would be no children & that S rank no longer implies romantic connection but rather just a deep relationship - rivals, siblings, romantic (hetero and homo), friends, family, teacher/student, etc. To keep some of the fun of customization have S rank pass like a class and/or some skills/stat bonus between partners. Give each character 3-4 S rank options.

I feel that that's the job of A support. In pervious games A support used to be a level that could imply even romantic relationships depending on the game. I say let S support be set aside for romantic interests, but build upon A support as an end in itself rather than a means to an end.

[Dark Holy Elf]

IS has demonstrated that you have two choices, quality or quantity. When you go with kids, you choose quantity, because everyone has to have the option to marry everyone, no matter how ridiculous or unjustified the choice. I want the old quality supports back, not necessarily as limited as they were, but that seems to be a necessity for quality writing. I remember choosing the marriages I wanted in Awakening based on the quality of supports between the spouses, and how easy it was, because 99% of supports were garbage. That shouldn't happen.

I agree with your post, but the thing is... the bolded part doesn't have to be the case!

They already proved this, with Chrom and Sumia in Awakening. Each only had five (IIRC?) potential romantic partners. There's no reason this couldn't be extended to everyone, plus or minus a few for each character. This would naturally and inevitably lead to fewer supports being garbage, and to make up for it we could get more supports that don't fit this exact model.

The only disadvantage this has is it would become possible to lock yourself out of a kid (as you could lock yourself out of Cynthia if you married off Chrom, Robin, Henry, Gaius, and Frederick to non-Sumia people). But this isn't a problem at all, because players who plan out their pairings could still get everyone, and those of us who don't wouldn't notice the difference.

[Augestein]

Honestly, locking yourself from a kid might not exactly be a bad thing though. As the kids are going to remain as they are, I'd rather they be bonuses instead so we aren't having 1/3 of our characters be children. Also, with less children, we could have better supports too for the children too instead of copy and pasting everywhere. It's really irritating that say... Virion being the father of Inigo has the same style of supports that someone like Chrom being Inigo's father when Virion and Chrom are nothing alike.

Edited March 20, 2016 by Augestein