Are optimal pairings that important?

[GuiltyLove]

I beat all three routes on Hard Classic with random pairings. Are optimal pairings more important in Lunatic?

They didn't seem that important to me in FE13 either because the kids, aside from Morgan and Lucina, were pretty useless in the main story without grinding (for me at least). For Apotheosis, I just used random pairings of parents and children with Limit Breaker and stacked rallies. Are optimal pairings mostly for overkill? Or is there more to them?

[Jakkun]

If you want to do online battles (and the eventual apotheosis-esque DLC that's bound to happen at some point), yes.

Otherwise, its just a way for the player to feel proud that they made the most out of their units.

I personally try to find a middle ground between pairs I like and pairs that are optimal. Luckily this tends to overlap for me, like Setsuna x Niles, or Azura x Kaze.

[Thor Odinson]

The only times you really need to optimize is pvp or something

I mean stat synergy is important in terms of pairup bonuses (so you probably don't wanna put like, idk, a sorc as a pairup to Xander) but you don't even need to use kids to win

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

In Conquest which is the only one i've played, majority of the good pairing is actually one that any sane optimizer won't touch

It really isn't important since you can beat the game without optimal pairing, but there are some nifty tricks you can do by planning your pairing.

[Loki Laufeyson]

Not really? In fact, kids are hardly necessary at all. So unless you are specifically team building to troll online, or something, go nuts with whatever.

[Tribute]

It depends.

Live battles are 5v5, My castle stuff is 10v10

So optimal pairings really entirely depends on what you're doing and if you just want specific units for teams or the overall optimal setup

As far as just in-game, they don't matter

Edited April 13, 2016 by Tribute

[Based Goomy]

I went with whatever looked good during my Casual run. During my Hard run though, I started pairing up royals with their retainers and pairing up whatever I had left. Lunatic I'm starting to optimize. Outlaw MU + Anna, standards to Bow Knight and Adventurer classes, mirrors to Troubadour, granting MU and Kana access to the Strategist and Butler/Maid classes. Bow Knight MU, Adventurer Anna, and Strategist Kana.

Optimization isn't always the way to go though, as long as you don't mind going out of your way a bit to win. i.e. Canon Shiro requires Ryoma and Kagero, but in Casual I went with Ryoma + Hana.

[GuiltyLove]

Optimizing for PvP makes sense! I'm not that interested in it though

I'm kinda wondering how people end up switching classes so much with optimized characters to get skills because the seals are expensive and there are only so many levels you can get unless you use an eternal seal. I rarely changed classes except to switch Camilla to Wyvern Lord :P

[Reki]

I just do what works well or at least its okay but not mix in Magic with Strength most of the time.

[joshcja]

For pvp, yes

For CQ lunatic... kinda? It's more about sharing class sets than it is about kids, though some eugenics strats are straight up game breaking.

For anything else lolnopenopenope.

Edited April 13, 2016 by joshcja

[shadowofchaos]

Not really. Pvp is optimal pairings after grinding if you want to compete in that (my personal opinion, an uninteresting and naturally unbalanced) area of the game.

[GuiltyLove]

Not really. Pvp is optimal pairings after grinding if you want to compete in that (my personal opinion, an uninteresting and naturally unbalanced) area of the game.

I haven't watched videos of PvP before. How is it unbalanced?

[Lady Sansa]

No.

"PVP" is not a thing because hackers fucking ruined it ages ago.

[shadowofchaos]

I haven't watched videos of PvP before. How is it unbalanced?

Fire Emblem multiplayer has always been crap IMHO. It's by design, a secondary feature, and always will be in Fire Emblem. Lest you damage the single player campaign.

It's moreso a casual way to play with close friends.

Random online might exist, but any competitive builds will always rely on:

A) A gimmick build that relies on stacking as many tanky advantages as possible on a single pair up. (That will have one glaring, but not immediately obvious weakness)

B) Super aggressive builds that rely on one turn kills on the first player phase using skills that stack damage and advantages on said player phase (Line of Death, Aggressor, Certain Blow) and high movement with supporting replicate users.

Focusing on PvP also encourages tearing down buildings in My Castle to spam statues to increase stats.

No.

"PVP" is not a thing because hackers fucking ruined it ages ago.

PvP even without hackers was never a viable competitive system in the first place.

Edited April 13, 2016 by shadowofchaos

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

pvp is basically falco knight rushdown 101

[Thor Odinson]

FE gameplay at its core has always been trying to outsmart AI that don't really have too much sense of self-preservation (at most they won't aggro or attack you if you take no damage from them, but traditionally they go for characters they think they can kill or do the most damage to, even if they die) that also likely outnumber you. It's very offense-oriented for the most part, where given roughly even stats and skills, whoever reaches the enemy first basically wins. This works for PvAI FE because there's a shitton of enemies and enemy position creates the challenge and the fun.

PvP is counterintuitive to that, since you both have the same number of units with likely similar statlines so it's basically just "whoever moves first/has warp orkos the shit out of the other team the end"

I feel that for a FE multiplayer to work, they should go for co-op.

Edited April 13, 2016 by Thor Odinson

[FluffyWarlock]

pvp is basically falco knight rushdown 101

BTW: is it possible to add einherjars to the mix?

[Jakkun]

I'd play PvP with a friend, or say, a user on here that has a fair ruleset in hand.

But yes, the game gives way too many aggressive options for regular PvP to be enjoyable. Warp/Witch was the nail in the coffin.

If anyone has ever played or seen Elsword PvP (I don't blame you if you haven't) its pretty close to that in terms of the competitive aspect.

1. Use skill to get in your enemy's face before 5 secs of the match starts

2. Spam high damage, unbreakable skills until the opponent dies

3. NEXT!

Edited April 13, 2016 by Jakkun

[Roflolxp54]

lol, I wouldn't be surprised to see some players running whole teams of Einherjar Kana clones (though support bonuses are a thing).

[FluffyWarlock]

lol, I wouldn't be surprised to see some players running whole teams of Einherjar Kana clones (though support bonuses are a thing).

Or Einherjar Takumi once Point Blank comes out. You know, blame Takumi and all that.

[Avalanche]

Considering we don't have an equivalent to Apotheosis, Optimal Pairings are only really needed for PVP online matches.

[Jakkun]

lol, I wouldn't be surprised to see some players running whole teams of Einherjar Kana clones (though support bonuses are a thing).

inb4 somebody beats a Kana team with Candace

[Dandy Druid]

I prefer reading interesting support conversations. I rather have characters with chemistry then optimize boring pairings. Children characters aren't a necessity, so it doesn't really matter except online battles and lunatic mode.