Jump to content

What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, YouSquiddinMe said:

Resetting is more conducive to learning from your mistakes than getting a free redo button for nothing.

If Fire Emblem wasn't RNG-based, i'd totally agree with you. But RNG dictates every playthrough of Fire Emblem. Reseting a map because you messed up is one thing. Reseting a map because the enemy got in a lucky crit is another thing. I don't want to reset a 20+ minute long map because of the latter. I actually don't want to reset for any reason really because, as Hawkwing said, Fire Emblem levels aren't short. Ch.17 in Conquest took me like an hour......and then i lost a unit right at the end. Do you know how frustrating it was having to do all of that just to lose an hour of progress. The Turnwheel could've spared me the frustration and the tedium of replaying that bullshit map for an hour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 9.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't get where people are claiming that FE6 has bad RNG. The RNG is actually doing things in your favour because its suppose to let enemies hit less often and let you dodge attacks or crit more often. That's exactly the main reason why swordmasters in this game are good because the RNG is in their favour because it is using the true hit system.

Its just sad that the game gives you too many bad units to make full use of its RNG. Even if growth units had good bases or just a tad higher growths, its not going to change the RNG that much since FE7 has the same RNG as FE6.

 

 

Edited by Harvey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Harvey said:

I don't get where people are claiming that FE6 has bad RNG. The RNG is actually doing things in your favour because its suppose to let enemies hit less often and let you dodge attacks or crit more often. That's exactly the main reason why swordmasters in this game are good because the RNG is in their favour because it is using the true hit system.

Its just sad that the game gives you too many bad units to make full use of its RNG. Even if growth units had good bases or just a tad higher growths, its not going to change the RNG that much since FE7 has the same RNG as FE6.

How is this unpopular?

Also I distinctly recall you claiming the RNG in FE6 is bad in the past and people correcting you on how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

How is this unpopular?

Also I distinctly recall you claiming the RNG in FE6 is bad in the past and people correcting you on how it works.

And how is it not unpopular? Almost every single one who bashes on FE6 just keeps saying that it has a bad RNG and I just say that I don't get that. Also, didn't I already tell you that I was referring to how the hit-rate for the weapons is lower than the other games, while the critical bonus for swordmasters and berserkers is much higher. 

And uh...where are you getting at this? I just said that the RNG in FE6 isn't the real problem with FE6 as it is fine for what it is? Are you asking me to say that it is a bad one at that?

 

Edited by Harvey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Harvey said:

And how is it not unpopular? Almost every single one who bashes on FE6 just keeps saying that it has a bad RNG and I just say that I don't get that. Also, didn't I already tell you that I was referring to how the hit-rate for the weapons is lower than the other games, while the critical bonus for swordmasters and berserkers is much higher. 

And uh...where are you getting at this? I just told you that the RNG in FE6 isn't the real problem with FE6 as it is fine for what it is? Are you asking me to say that it is a bad one at that?

I'm referring to this thread.

You basically held the exact opposite opinion of what you said in the post I quoted previously were corrected by multiple people in that thread, and are now claiming what you were corrected to is an "unpopular" opinion.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Harvey said:

I don't get where people are claiming that FE6 has bad RNG. The RNG is actually doing things in your favour because its suppose to let enemies hit less often and let you dodge attacks or crit more often. That's exactly the main reason why swordmasters in this game are good because the RNG is in their favour because it is using the true hit system.

for me it's less the RNG and more the Hitrates. Early game if you are not using Swords or Marcus Emblem, you have sub 70 Hitrates, even with WTA, which makes the game unbear- and unplayable

Just using Marcus and Rutger is not fun

Edited by Shrimperor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

I'm referring to this thread.

You basically held the exact opposite opinion of what you said in the post I quoted previously were corrected by multiple people in that thread, and are now claiming what you were corrected to is an "unpopular" opinion.  

Even if I was corrected, people still bash the game because if it's rng most of the time. So it pretty much is an unpopular opinion.

Anyways, again I said that I don't get where people are bashing at the game for it'd bad rng NOT ME! Almost every reviewer or topics elsewhere bash the game for it'd bad rng so my state for that is rather questionable.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Harvey said:

Even if I was corrected, people still bash the game because if it's rng most of the time. So it pretty much is an unpopular opinion.

Anyways, again I said that I don't get where people are bashing at the game for it'd bad rng NOT ME! Almost every reviewer or topics elsewhere bash the game for it'd bad rng so my state for that is rather questionable.

You were quite literally the only person in the thread I linked complaining about things like 90%'s missing.

Everyone else said "the hitrates are low," which is not a problem with the RNG itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Micaiah's actions in chapter 3-12 aren't unjustified IMO. Sanaki might be a 13 year-old girl but she's ranked higher than Begnion Senators who are obviously a valid military target. Also burning people with fire isn't unjustified in a war especially when there is no other option and the survival of an entire country depends on it. Sanaki's a hypocrite for suggesting fire is horrible when she specializes in fire magic and was excited to burn Lekain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imo, I feel the Prepromotes in FE6 besides Percival, Marcus, Yoder(because of the saint's staff) and Niime are not as useful as many claim it to be.

Juno maybe a good flyer but what's the point of her when she is outclassed by two other fliers who are better than she is? Even those fliers can hold on their own unlike Juno.

What's the point of Garret when he is stuck with a class that is axelocked in a game where axes and even lances aren't too kind to them? Geese or Gonzales are obviously going to be better than him in the long run so why bother?

What's the point of Cecilla when you can just promote Lillina and have her as a staffbot instead? Plus in desert areas, the latter is the better choice anyways?

What's the point of Zealot when you have Marcus till the western isles or even Percival to that matter?

As cool as Echinda is, she's not going to be a good replacement for Dieck and her skill isn't adequate to even hit axes that reliably either.

What's the point of Bartre and Douglas when they are stuck in the worst scenarios? Same goes for Klein and Igrene? 

Ok..maybe some like Klein and Igrene are ok but still..why bother with them?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Harvey said:

Juno maybe a good flyer but what's the point of her when she is outclassed by two other fliers who are better than she is? Even those fliers can hold on their own unlike Juno.

What's the point of Garret when he is stuck with a class that is axelocked in a game where even lances aren't too kind to them? Geese or Gonzales are obviously going to be better than him in the long run so why bother?

What's the point of Cecilla when you can just promote Lillina and have her as a staffbot instead? Plus in desert areas, the latter is the better choice anyways?

What's the point of Zealot when you have Marcus till the western isles or even Percival to that matter?

...

What's the point of Bartre and Douglas when they are stuck in the worst scenarios? Same goes for Klein and Igrene? 

Ok..maybe some like Klein and Igrene are ok but still..why bother with them?

Binding Blade's cast is designed in a way that still reflects Kaga's ideas that you shouldn't worry about keeping everyone alive to get the best ending.  If so-and-so dies, oh well, you let it go and move on to the next character in that class.

For example, if Clarine dies, you move on to Cecilia to fill her place as your mounted healer.  If Alen and Lance die, you move on to Noah and Trec.

Of course, the execution of this design philosophy still leaves something to be desired.

With Garret, for example, part of me thinks that the designers assumed the player would always want some axe user on their team, but didn't actually realize how bad axes actually were compared to other weapons.

Juno is probably only there to complete the Pegasus Sisters/Triangle Attack combo.  And I fully agree with you on the subject of Douglas and Bartre.  *groan*

As for Cecilia, Arcadia is the only desert map in the game (from what I remember), so that's literally the only map where her movement is hindered.  Another thing that bothers me: Why would you make Lilina a staffbot when Elen and Saul will have far superior staff Ranks?  Lilina was simply not designed with staff use in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harvey said:

What's the point of Zealot when you have Marcus till the western isles or even Percival to that matter?

Zealot has better bases than Marcus and easily take over Marcus's duties when he joins.  Sure, you'll eventually replace him with Percy, but that doesn't invalidate Zealot's use prior to Percy joining.

54 minutes ago, Harvey said:

What's the point of Cecilla when you can just promote Lillina and have her as a staffbot instead? Plus in desert areas, the latter is the better choice anyways?

There is one Desert Chapter in the entire game, and Lilina is in absolutely no way a better staffbot than Cecilia when she's starting with base E staves in a game where staff ranks are approximately as likely to win a race as a snail.  Clarine, if you trained her, is a better staffer, but Cecilia is a perfectly servicable filler staff/chip damage unit if Clarine is dead or untrained. 

 

In general, the difference here is resources.  The Prepromotes can help when they join for little investment, and are useful for that portion of the game.  Sure, growth units can surpass them, but that takes effort and a promotion item.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

Zealot has better bases than Marcus

Ok let's compare their bases...

Marcus

Hp: 32 Str: 9 Skl: 14 Spd: 11 Luck: 10 Def: 9 Res : 8 

Zealot

Hp: 35 Str: 10 Skl: 12 Spd: 13 Luck: 5 Def: 11 Res: 7

Zealot's bases are not going to be any better than Marcus because both their stats are good enough to make use of them till the western isles part after which, they will both be benched. Also, Marcus joins way earlier than Zealot so while they both have low growth rates, there is a good chance that Marcus can outclass Zealot once you get him if at all Marcus gets leveled up. Also...Marcus has better well rounded bases for the ones bolded...

There is really no reason to use Zealot at all because Marcus alone is sufficient enough to use till his time comes unless you need a filler unit in which case, you would mostly use either Noah or Treck as they are better in the long run. And further more, bonus wise, Marcus gives better bonuses than Zealot because of his ice affinity unlike Zealot whose bonuses don't benefit the ones he supports with at all...

I think what you meant is that if the player somehow gets Marcus killed, Zealot takes his place to which...I honestly don't know how that can even work out but whatever I guess...

10 hours ago, Von Ithipathachai said:

Why would you make Lilina a staffbot when Elen and Saul will have far superior staff Ranks?  Lilina was simply not designed with staff use in mind.

Thing is, even if she starts with a low staff rank, the fact that her mag growth is so damn good just makes her a better healer because using just a heal staff is enough to get a unit fully recovered...like there's almost no reason to use the other staves at all...

Anyways replaceable units were always there from the beginning of FE. Its just that they are not going to do any better than the ones you have. Some FE games like FE12 have this unbalanced as your earlier units are better than the ones you get from chapter 10 onwards. This is especially true in the case of FE7 where the prepromotes were made to make the game winnable regardless of how weak your growth units are. Also, because of the game's enemies being....nerfed, it is impossible for someone like Karla to not be unusable normally.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, you still don't really seem to have a grasp of how FE6 works. You're correct in that not every prepromote is that useful (in particular, Yuno's little more than a potential air taxi in ch.21, while Douglas doesn't really serve a purpose outside maybe some minor contributions in 16x), but you keep forgetting or ignoring points in favour of those prepromotes you've mentioned. To go through your list:

  • Garret is indeed a lower-tier unit, but compared to Gonzo and Geese, he can serve as a filler unit without requiring any effort in form of XP feeding and a promotional item. Axelock isn't that bad anymore at the time he joins because maps at that point of the game tend to be rather lance-heavy. Again, not a unit that will carry your team, but an OK-ish filler unit.
  • Cecilia starts with C staves, which allows her to almost completely negate Lilina's Mag lead by using Mend when needed and gives her Restore access, which is always nice. She also has a pony with all the advantages that come with one. Cecilia is the best second healer (not the second-best - Saul, Ellen, and Clarine are all overall better than her if trained - but she'll be better than the healers that you didn't promote) you have until Niime joins.
  • Jerrot has higher numbers in the most important stats - Spd, Str, and Def. His offense is less reliable than Marcus', but he's still an overall upgrade. More importantly, you can use both Marcus and Jerrot - their stats are still quite good during the western isles and there's no such thing as too many paladins in FE6.
  • Echidna doesn't need a Hero Crest, which is nice. And again, there's no law against using both Deke and Echidna. Her combat during the Isles is quite good, although (as most prepromotes in the game) she will fall behind some time before the endgame.
  • Bartre can provide some meaty chip damage, with a bow if an axe is too inaccurate. Good filler unit when he joins.
  • Klein can use Silver Bows at base. Igrene "only" has a B rank, but that's still Brave Bow access and her stats are quite good.

I'm pretty sure you've been told most of these things before, so I have to wonder why you keep insisting that there are no positive aspects about characters when those positive aspects have been repeatedly pointed out to you. To me, it looks like you desperately cling to your "ALL BALANCING IN FE6 IS BAD THERE IS NOTHING GOOD ABOUT IT" narrative, but the way you argue (i.e. not acknowledging any argument that goes against that narrative) is incredibly dishonest.

And before you go down that road again: Yes, you're allowed to criticize FE6, but it's disrespectful to the other posters if you keep ignoring their points. Yes, there are quite a few issues with FE6's unit balancing, namely the whole "X completely outclasses Y" thingy which is more promintent than in most other FE titles, but this only applies to very few of the prepromoted units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ping All I said in my opinion that they aren't as useful as others think. I didn't downright bash others arguments for that. Its just my opinion in this very case.

Anyways, to counter some arguments of yours.

1. Garret...ok he comes in the part where its lance heavy but again, besides having him as a filler, why use him unless using him as a filler is sensible when he's slow and the killer axe is all he has for him?

2. Cecilla...ok pretty serviceable but like I said..to me when using Lillina as a staff bot, she only needs a heal staff to like recover units..fully. At this point, why have another healer like Cecilla unless being a filler unit?

3.Marcus comes very early than him. Having another jaigen to me doesn't make sense because one jaigen alone is usually enough to make the early game easier. I don't get why another jaigen is needed in this case when instead you can use someone like Noah to do some chipping and killing unless its a 0% growth run.

4.Echinda is alright. But if the idea of her is to be used if at all players lose Dieck, then she's not a good replacement of him but rather just someone who is only for a certain point. 

5. Bartre..ok what's the point? If you go to Larum's route(which many would seem to pick because its the easier route), you can't get him and his low skill isn't great either. He's got huge offense though so I'll give you that.

6. I already said that Klein and Igrene are alright..though that's partly because you need some bow users in a..certain chapter.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filler units are very useful though. In chapter 13 (Milady's join chapter, just a random pick to prove my point), you can deploy 14 units (Roy + 13 free slots), but it's quite likely that you do not have that many permanent units in your team. So, assuming that you've promoted Allen or Lance - why would you field Noah and Treck instead of Jerrot and Marcus if they're all going to be benched later anyway? I'd much rather enjoy the higher movement, weapon ranks, and stats of the prepromoted Paladins.

Or, more specifically: It's quite advantageous to focus your effort on only one healer - Saul, Ellen, or Clarine - in order to raise their level and staff rank quicker. It's often nice to have a second staffer fielded in case you need the additional healing power, but I at least only promote on of the trio, and the secondary healer will fall behind as a result. When Cecilia joins, she's a great replacement for the second healer, not only because of her higher magic compared to the unpromoted unit, but because she can also deal some decent chip damage or help with rescue/drop strategies when she isn't needed as a healer. I did explain why Cecilia is miles ahead of Lilina in terms of staffbotting - the Mag lead only saves some very minor cash (definitely not enough to make up for the cost of the Guiding Ring), while Cecilia has her mobility and Restore usage (as in, remove status effects) in her favour. Not to mention that Lilina is not a unit that everybody uses in every playthrough. The investment to get her to promotion is quite high, especially on HM where she risks being one-shot very frequently.
TL;DR: Lilina does not invalidate Cecilia's usefulness in any way.

But the main point is still that Filler units in FE6 are good.

2 hours ago, Harvey said:

 All I said in my opinion that they aren't as useful as others think. I didn't downright bash others arguments for that. Its just my opinion in this very case.

But you completely ignore arguments that have been presented to you before. Most of your initial post goes "What's the point of X?" even though that question has been answered to you multiple times. And that is disrespectful in a discussion, because people have been making an effort to point out the positives of FE6, just for you to come out like once or twice a month with another portion of THIS IS BAD ABOUT FE6 without taking notice of the arguments in favour of THIS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ping said:

But you completely ignore arguments that have been presented to you before. Most of your initial post goes "What's the point of X?" even though that question has been answered to you multiple times. And that is disrespectful in a discussion, because people have been making an effort to point out the positives of FE6, just for you to come out like once or twice a month with another portion of THIS IS BAD ABOUT FE6 without taking notice of the arguments in favour of THIS.

There is a difference between ignoring arguments and just disagreeing with them. If at all I say that Roy is horrible, you want me to agree with someone who claims that he's not that bad to use? I say that Fir is pointless to use because you have Rutger who's better than her..you want me to change my opinion on that? My opinion with prepromotes in FE6 is besides what I listed, most of them aren't as useful as others say to ME and only in my opinion. 

If you want me to say the prepromotes are the most useful here, then fine but considering that this is a topic about unpopular opinions, opinions that are just blatant and not worth responding to most of the time, why is this such an issue?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not everything can just be hand-waved as a matter of opinion. "I do not like Roy" is an opinion, "Roy is a horrible unit" is a statement which is true or false and can be backed or refuted based on numbers (i.e. how are his hitrates, damage rolls, avoidance, physical/magical bulk over the course of the game). Of course, there is room for different metrics, for example how much of a impediment he becomes between the Etruria arc and his promotion, if arena abuse is taken into account, or how much weight different parts of the game should have on the overall evaluation (for example, I find strong earlygame performance more important in every FE game because you lack options). But ultimately, all discussions about gameplay performance of a unit can be boiled down to "X does this well in that part of the game", and these fundamental arguments can be backed by average stats, or by the probability of reaching certain stat benchmarks. Meanwhile, "I enjoy Lyon as a villain", "L'Arachel is very entertaining", or "Orson's betrayal is too obvious and comes too early" are all based on my personal preferences of what I expect of a villain and what I find funny, although there are certainly objective criteria of good and bad writing (which, I should admit, I'm not that familiar with).

Point is, "X is pointless" (and that is definitely the vibe I get from your repeated "what's the point of" questions) seems like a very definite statement to me. It's not "I don't like using them", or "people overvalue their potential contributions", it's "there is no reason to use them", and some of the arguments you use are just not true. To go through them - and I do apologize for slicing your initial post, I don't really like that kind of responses...

20 hours ago, Harvey said:

What's the point of Garret when he is stuck with a class that is axelocked in a game where axes and even lances aren't too kind to them? Geese or Gonzales are obviously going to be better than him in the long run so why bother?

Garret comes at a point of the game where lances become more and more prevalent, so axelock isn't that much of a detriment anymore. I've already covered why you might want to use Garret instead of Geese or Gonzo - no investment in form of kill-feeding and an promotional item, so if you don't want any of those three on your lategame team but see the use of a potentially peak- and waterwalking axe user, Garret is an option.

20 hours ago, Harvey said:

What's the point of Cecilla when you can just promote Lillina and have her as a staffbot instead? Plus in desert areas, the latter is the better choice anyways?

Why is "desert areas" in plural? There's exactly one desert map in the game, and Cecilia is free to use / force-deployed (depending on whether your glass is half full or half empty). The only other map on which Lilina might have a mobility advantage is the dense forest map on the Ilia route. I won't repeat why Cecilia outclasses Lilina in terms of staff utility, but I will stress that this is not an opinion of mine, but something that results from their stats and weapon ranks.

20 hours ago, Harvey said:

What's the point of Zealot when you have Marcus till the western isles or even Percival to that matter?

One: Jerrot is better than Marcus because not all stats are created equal. Two: Paladins are such a good class that it's not a bad thing to field more than two of them at once. Marcus (and whoever you promoted out of Allen and Lance) aren't the only baseline to judge Jerrot's usefulness - I highly doubt that there are more than 10 units that are more valuable to deploy than Jerrot by chapter 11.

Same argument for Echidna, really.

That's the thing: You're not just voicing an opinion, you're presenting a fact, that isn't, well, factual. And that is why people keep disagreeing with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok then If I say something like I hate Zephiel as a villain because he's a carbon copy of Hardin and didn't do anything right even for his kingdom, that's fine as an unpopular opinion?

 

Edited by Harvey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate Camilla and in my opinion is Caeldori a much better character than Cordelia.  There is one more thing: PoR is better than Radiant Dawn, I know Ike was in Radiant Dawn better written than in PoR, but all in all was the story the better one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Morswo said:

I hate Camilla and in my opinion is Caeldori a much better character than Cordelia.

Out of curiosity, what led to this opinion?

3 hours ago, Harvey said:

Ok then If I say something like I hate Zephiel as a villain because he's a carbon copy of Hardin and didn't do anything right even for his kingdom, that's fine as an unpopular opinion?

Sort of. The issue I see with your posts is the wording you use. You type in a very factual manner, which is good…when we're not on a thread about opinions. The reason for this is that people like Armagon and Glaceon Mage see you wording your opinion as though it were a fact, whether intentionally or unintentionally, and feel obligated to prove you wrong because, among other things, this IS the internet. You then respond by defending your opinion, but because you haven't clarified the wording it looks like you're defending a fact that they don't believe, they attempt to try again to prove you wrong, the cycle continues, and I get my entertainment for the week because watching other people go at it is something I find enjoyable for some reason.

You may be better off wording the above statement like so(I can't guarantee nobody will try and fight you, though - as I mentioned before, this IS the internet):
"I personally hate Zephiel as a villain because he's too much like Hardin for my tastes, and as far as I can see didn't manage to do anything that helped even his own kingdom, let alone any other."

…To address this opinion, I don't think Zephiel was actually trying to do anything right for anyone but the dragons, and looking at it from their perspective he was trying to do the right thing…it's just that we're not playing as the dragons, so he looks like an animal-rights protestor taken to the utmost extreme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SoulWeaver said:

Out of curiosity, what led to this opinion?

Sort of. The issue I see with your posts is the wording you use. You type in a very factual manner, which is good…when we're not on a thread about opinions. The reason for this is that people like Armagon and Glaceon Mage see you wording your opinion as though it were a fact, whether intentionally or unintentionally, and feel obligated to prove you wrong because, among other things, this IS the internet. You then respond by defending your opinion, but because you haven't clarified the wording it looks like you're defending a fact that they don't believe, they attempt to try again to prove you wrong, the cycle continues, and I get my entertainment for the week because watching other people go at it is something I find enjoyable for some reason.

You may be better off wording the above statement like so(I can't guarantee nobody will try and fight you, though - as I mentioned before, this IS the internet):
"I personally hate Zephiel as a villain because he's too much like Hardin for my tastes, and as far as I can see didn't manage to do anything that helped even his own kingdom, let alone any other."

…To address this opinion, I don't think Zephiel was actually trying to do anything right for anyone but the dragons, and looking at it from their perspective he was trying to do the right thing…it's just that we're not playing as the dragons, so he looks like an animal-rights protestor taken to the utmost extreme.

Why should my opinion be out of curiosity? It is true, Caeldori is based on Cordelia, but she do not have such a stupid crush. That is why I think that Caeldori is the better one. Camilla is just a kind of person which I do not like. She is just popular, because she has big breasts.

Edited by Morswo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Morswo said:

Why should my opinion be out of curiosity? It is true, Caeldori is based on Cordelia, but she do not have such a stupid crush. That is why I think that Caeldori is the better one. Camilla is just a kind of person which I do not like. She is just popular, because she has big breasts.

You misunderstood - I asked why you held that opinion because of my own curiosity.

I do like that Caeldori isn't tied up in the Chromlust issue too, as it gives her a chance to better develop her character, meaning she has more of a chance to actually be likable.

As for Camilla, I find what actual personality she had by the end of Fates decent enough, but you're right in that much of her popularity comes from the ridiculously fanservicey design she was given, and then there's the fact that they keep degenerating her in Heroes and Warriors to make her less of a character and more of a pinup. It makes it really difficult to say I like her without having to quickly clarify that it's her, not her design, that I like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2017 at 9:36 AM, YouSquiddinMe said:

Awakening is terrible, as someone who started with Awakening.

Congratulations on having the fourth most popular opinion in the fandom. Right behind Ike is great, Fates is Garbage, and FE4 is good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...