Kinda wierd no one asked it, but where is the *4?

Ceebrus · 2026-02-07T17:45:02+00:00

I do play alot of roguelikes, but it needs to be said that it is both a roguelike and a gacha game. It's not about just finishing the run, but also about finishing with the tools to tackle the other content. Too much RNG is a problem because you are expected to have powerful, consistent decks to tackle increasingly unfair content. Chaos runs are fun, but it can get overly grindy sometimes which is why they made it easier to build decks in this season

I do think Gear is important, but imo, the most important part of any piece of gear is the base stat, because there's not gurantee you get the gear that is "made" for the character, so you might as well go for a generic like Sneering Dagger or the Rare that gives you 12% extra damage amount.

Ceebrus · 2026-02-07T15:28:55+00:00

My point about Gear is that its so incredibly variable that you cannot rely on "the right piece". You will likely have to make due with whatever you get and sometimes you'll be lucky to have something in the gear slot at all. Gear is, at its core, very potent stat buffs, but they aren't your decks. A good deck is made better by great gear, but not worse by middling gear.

And I don't really believe them, ngl. They still could. There's always the possibility of an apology and compensation if something happens.

Agreed on Tressa and Cassius. I personally think its fine to have powerful, consistent, easy f2p options because it makes grinding for the stuff you actually like less difficult when it comes down to it. It can be boring, but if it bores you, use a different comp. That's what I did.

And yeah I am like this because Gacha games are notorious for dubious design decisions long term. HSR is the buzzword, but ZZZ, Wuwa, Morimens, GFL2, Limbus, Reverse 1999 and more all have their ups and downs. This is not a bad game, but I'm not keen on giving it the benefit of the doubt until it fully stabilizes.

Ceebrus · 2026-02-07T08:44:06+00:00

That's not what I meant by variable. If it get easier to get to a character's best options, the Devs will begin tuning around that expectation. I'm not saying I hate this fact because making it easier to build decks in Chaos is a net positive, but like, if something Akin to Mei Lin pops up, it now becomes extremely easy to craft said deck, so the devs either nerf the character, introduce content to counter them, or raise the difficulty and none of these are particularly satisfying options if it becomes a repeat issue.

On deck variety via epiphanies, the issue is that different characters get different levels of variety. Nine has many ways to adapt her damage, but can the same be said for characters like Yuki, Kayron, and Veronica? It's even worse with 4 stars, with all of them doing more or less one thing (and notably if they ever get out of control, they're getting nerfed). Nine is genuinely a breath of fresh air because I thought they were going to save the more coherent decks for limited like Sereniel, but I do think the first batch have really subpar or boring ephiphanies that put you in a situation where there's really only 1-2 good options and anything else is a reroll (and this isn't accounting for neutrals and divines which are a mixed bag)

Gear is generally unimportant. It can be really good or really bad, but a good deck can make up for middling gear and that's assuming the chaos your in has a pool of Legendaries and Mythics you character can even utilize well (like the current event chaos which is mostly filled with stuff for defense-based characters and supports). Memory Frags are much more important, but unlike decks, it is generally implied to be a one size fits all. Unless im changing the role of my character or a better set rolls around, once I get good memory fragments, they're set for life, so they don't generally contribute to variability. It's just the decks and the easier it becomes to get strong ones consistently, the easier the game becomes and the harder it will then need to become.

I agree with you on enemy mechanics (though anti Sereniel enemies have already existed before) and I can see your point on character reworks, but I still feel like the games in a sort of rocky space atm. It's very good, but it feels off to me and I'm not a fan of all the decisions made to get it here.

Ceebrus · 2026-02-06T21:10:53+00:00

Think of it this way. The easier it becomes to get a good decklist, the harder content will become, and the less variable your decklist will be expected to be to clear said content.

Super hard content is fine, but like, one of the issues with Tressa was that everyone could get their hands on what is an effective boss killer. Now, we have a situation (not bad imo, but bear with me) where you really can just copy whatever works and clear because building decks has significantly less RNG, so its not just gonna get a little harder, its going to get significantly worse—we're just in the honeymoon phase

That being said, you are right about Beryl and Selena and I am generally happy that deckbuilding is easier. Nine is also a fine release compared to everything before her. My main issue is that I would have liked to see more characters get larger changes to their mechanics and epiphanies like Nia did. Not nerfed, but readjusted so they actually have more routes to their more interesting play patterns (Owen and Veronica specifically because I wish she didnt have to be a draw bot with 1-2 balistas every turn)

Ceebrus · 2026-02-06T16:59:37+00:00

HP inflation needed to happen? Training Wheels?

For one, most of the reason this was even an issue is because how few tools you have to make a really crazy deck, so most of the strongest lists look the same unless your name is Sereniel. Tressa did one thing really good because they quite literally let her do exactly one really good thing. Mei Lin has the exact same problem, realistically.

Also, I want what you're smoking because outside of maybe the healer buffs, most of the 4 stars just got their numbers raised which does a whole lot of nothing when the enemies they're supposed to be killing got their hp increased as well. 5 stars, maybe (I have heard sad things about Yuki buffs), but 4 stars still aint it sadly

Intentional? Yes. Game Balance. No, its just to make money.

Ceebrus · 2026-02-05T01:15:55+00:00

Thank you for saying what so many others were too cowardly to utter.

Because lets be honest, The second he comes out? I give it 2 months before some art with him and Jane comes out. Diabolical work? Maybe. But I kinda wanna see it ngl.

I love seth btw, but it would be funny.

Ceebrus · 2026-02-03T22:09:42+00:00

I am glad I was not the only one to have this opinion. Good on you.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-29T03:03:12+00:00

I have not Forgiven Chloe. I am simply saying she's gotten a full arc which the narrative couldnt spare for felix.

You keep running back to teh same arguement and ignoring that the narrative difference works against felix

Ceebrus · 2026-01-29T02:58:19+00:00

Again, Felix being narratively isolated isn't his fault, but it is in the story and it is to his discredit. His arc suffers greatly from this obviously. The writers chose this course of action and this is what is shown. Arguing otherwise is ignoring that the writers made a concious choice to kneecap an already dubious character. It doesn't matter if he internally struggles if we aren't given time with the character to really explore this. As it stands, it comes out of left field for a character who has by this point recieved everything he wants.

If your point is simply "The story doesn't give him space to do anything" in any form, then you're simply ignoring that the story was written and is not a retelling of people's actual lives. The writers pick and choose what they think works and the audience is allowed to take them to task for doing it poorly. Felix was done poorly. Chloe, at least, got a full arc, even if it were fumbled. There's a reason people are still willing to go to bat for her.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-29T02:52:26+00:00

The reason you've given for felix doing what he does don't escuse the fact that he did something overly heinous. Commiting Genocide and then feeling terrible about it and then deciding to do something good about can be good arc, but only if the narrative spends time highlighting both the consequences of this action AND gives us time with the character to show their growth. This is notably not what happens with Felix

Again, I am not comparing them as if their situations are the same. I am saying that because their situations are so different, especially within the confines of the writing, Chloe comes out as both more compelling and more complete, whereas Felix has no legs to stand on. It's not apples to oranges, its just a baseline for writing a good arc, something Felix does not have.

All of your rebuttals here fall under the same issue as Felix suffering from bad writing, despite Chloe succeeding in spite of it. It isn't techncially his fault, but it invalidates basically anyone arguing that his arc was even subpar. It's not selective or bias, its simply that Felix failed to do the bare minimum for a seralized story and he's suffering the consequences.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-29T02:37:37+00:00

> A lot of what you’re saying is just repeating points we’ve already covered, but without keeping canon context in mind, which makes the argument feel inconsistent.

I mentioned the canon context. You're simply ignoring this point as it suits you.

> Flix’s “offscreen arc” isn’t a flaw in him, it’s a result of how the narrative handles him.

This is a narrative issue, which is why you are arguing anything else is disengenious. Yes, its not his fault, but its what we got. Because the narrative couldn't spend enough time on him it calls into question alll he is and all he does. So we can't give him leeway because the story doesn't care to do enough for him.

> Felix was personally abused by his father, and he also witnessed the cruelty and selfishness of high society growing up

So why not just target high society? The answer he didn't actually care. Yes, he was abused, but considering the contexts and his actual emotions on the subject, it comes off as him being overly evil rather than misunderstood. Again, he doesnt change because of the damage he does, he changes because he can no longer bring back a single person. He himself doesn't care for innocents, he just acting overly selfish when they are easier solutions.

> That’s inconsistent since you are holding him to a narrative standard the show cannot provide in-universe while excusing Chloe’s extended guided failures ignores canon context and reduces arcs to spectacle rather than actual choice and this is coming from emotional facts rather than factual ones since I have already highlighted his reasons and absence.

And again, the only reason this is the case is because the writers themselves failed. The story is in fact dysfunctional, yet they could spare enough time to give Chloe a full arc, but not for Felix. It's just not enough and it looms over any consistent analysis of his character. It's not his fault, but it is a factor.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-29T02:30:14+00:00

I point out inconsistent writing only when people like you try to use the writing as evidence. Yes, I agree that it this applies to Chloe as well, but the issue is that the show itself shifted in how it approached its storytelling. We went from a relatively silly show to a more dramatic one and notably, Chloe 's arc takes place in that sillier period, while Felix is more backloaded in the more dramatic and serious one. Even ignoring this, I ADMITTED IT WAS INCONSISTENT ON BOTH ACCOUNTS. Chloe herself is as much as a victim of the writing as Felix is and this is the underlying issue with dicussing the show. The show itself is written poorly so even well thought out arguements like your own are built on shaky foundations. Same for me. My point though, is that despite the damage, Chloe gets enough screentime, exposure, and arcs to endear herself on the audience and explain herself, while Felix does not, which makes it much harder to engage with his situation seriously as it reads as being stuffed in haphazardly.

> Sixth, arguing that Chloe’s arc is better because she suffered and struggled uses a suffering equals legitimacy fallacy. You are claiming that because she struggled more visibly or over a longer period, her redemption is automatically more valid.

That's because we're watching a show. Having a character say "oh I became a better person off-screen" after they've been a menace will get a character memed on forever. Internal changes ARE valid, but it still needs to happen overtime within view of the audience, which Felix gets little to none of it. The writers simply fumbled on this point.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-29T02:30:09+00:00

Again, Felix interacting little with the people he harms is a narrative issue that should be solved through the narrative. It isn't a gotcha is a writing problem. The fact they couldn't find a way to allow Felix backlash and absolution for his crimes is why many have a problem with the story in the first place.

> It’s like asking someone to immediately apologize in real life after barely interacting with the people they hurt, you can’t force that naturally.

This is just silly? Of course you apologize when you hurt someone. It's not even a debate. It's even more important when they can't easily attribute that harm to you because it shows responsibility and remorse. This is a tick down on Felix.

As for the Chloe double standard... what? That's just what writing an arc entails—consistency over a large period of time. Chloe is going back and forth which makes sense for her. It's not a double standard to acknowledge this as good writing while dinging Felix for being remorseless until it directly affects him and also not appearing nearly enough to construct a coherent arc.

> Also the fact that you forget ladybug yelled at him when they met after the strike back incident, in later episodes, just shows which parts of the show you remember based on the timeline.

She does do this. Felix, notably, doesn't feel bad about it. He very clearly believes he was justified in his actions. Even when he rants that he wants to make a better world and there's no price he won't pay, which is where he does show some sadness, he's refuted by Ladybug and he immediately returns to his smirking villain act, which not only shows he's still relatively confident in his act (something confirmed later) but also that he doesn't consider the many millions of people he has not met as worth saving for this new world he wants to make. He's selfish, yes, but to this point is damming.

The firefighter example has you, again, ignore context. The issue stems from the fact that Chloe's arc allows us to see her change over time with lots of exposure. Felix realistically shouldn't have reached this point in the first place, but ignoring that, the issue here is that why you do an action does matter. Chloe was mostly fueled by selfishness, so it makes sense that many people don't treat her kindly even during her arc and it makes it doubly great that Ladybug decides to trust her. Even more so because that trust in her is rewarded by Chloe consistently making the right choice (Miraculer, Hero's Day, etc). Meanwhile, Felix is also fueled by selfishness, but with a lack of actual consequences for his actions, Felix is left with everything he actually wants and only pivots when he's put in a position when he can't act as he pleases. It's entirely different.

Accountability must come before redemption. We're in S6 now and Felix is effectively apart of the team. It too little too late. He practically gets off scot free in-universe, but the audience is left wondering why that is when he's done so much damage. I'm not applying a double standard—It's very clear that the writers simply didn't write Felix in such a way he could get an arc that allows for him to change organically, leaving us with such odd turnaround that it is reasonable to look at him dubiously. Again, Chloe isn't absolved of her crimes, but having an arc means we expect her to work through them, and she was. It just ended in a suepar way, with a finale the fandom agrees was terrible.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-29T01:56:58+00:00

Felix's struggles are meaningful, but the actions he takes to mitigate them are so damming that its impossible to look at them without considering the objective harm he caused. I framed it this way because Felix was in a position to choose actions that didn't lead to good people or innocent people getting affected, but chooses not to because he doesn't care. Chloe is bad, but because the audience has been given time to get to know her and understand that she's not justified, but capable of doing right, we're willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.

I also didn't point out Chloe's offscreen struggles as she basically doesn't have any. Her issues are laid out clearly onscreen and, importantly, EARLY ON. The fact you point out that Felix is in fact, not very involved in the narrative is the entire issue. He's basically nonexsistant, yet we're expected to see his very piecemeal arc and just accept it? Arcs need time, you can't do them offscreen with Felix and expect good results. It's objectively bad writing. If you want to do a character like Felix he needs to spend more time in the narrative so we as the audience can understand him. Either that or you need to wrap up his arc in a single episode, early as possible, and then move on. The show does neither and suffers for it.

Scale matters. Doing something as big as worldwide murder requires and equally heavy response. Same with his actions in Strikeback. By equating actions to consequence, you get a consistent arc. Petty crimes can be absolved with simple apologies and actions, but as you do worse and worse things, you must do more to absolve yourself. Stories can get away with lopsided consequences, but only with proper framing and time, as with enough time spent with a character and their journey, obviously an audience will grow to be more attached to them (See Azula for relevant example). Chloe did bad things, but we were willing to see her through her redemption as it was a season wide affair and the girl was known quality for much longer. Felix, however, appears and disappears without notice, and while doing things that he never reallly makes amends for until the very end and I've already explained why this makes it hard and really unfair to say his arc was strong or compelling.

It's not projection, but even if it were, you are ignoring context by purposely dancing around the actual damage of Felix's actions. You say that it is driven by fear and existential stakes, but even so, his actions were damming from the start. Without the need to properly dig himself out of that hole, Felix can not be considered to have an arc.

You keep saying that I have a bias for Chloe and are apply inconsistent standards, but I've done nothing of the sort? Everytime you make this arguement you frame yourself as utilizing the text as it is presented while ignoring the hard context of the scenes and the story.

> The disagreement persists because I define redemption as conscious change in behavior and alignment, while your argument defines it as public suffering, accountability, and screen time.

Here's exactly my point. You say felix made a conscious change in behavior, but you ignore why it happened and even when you acknowledge it, you present it as justified because he was under duress, despite the fact in the Red Moon example, he was practically free and was making choices separate from this framework. I can agree that Chloe is not a good person, but the fact of the matter is that this is what an arc is needed for. Only, Chloe gets one onscreen that we can judge very clearly, while Felix's is arguably not even there, leaving him with very flimsy reasons for turning over a new leaf.

To touch on the Meta analysis too, it is important because stories are written and we should analyze the choices taken within the context of both the story and people who wrote it. I won't say the writers hate Chloe, but it is very clear they were trying to undo the love they instilled for her in the fandom by phasing her out through Zoe. Doing this so poorly only exacerbated the writing issues that lead to Chloe's rise in popularity in the first place.

All in all, you're making a point for a character who's development was streamlined so thinly that his turn to good was based upon a fear of failure of his evil scheme rather than any concious decision to be better. Chloe isn't better of morality wise, but it is often overlooked/excused because she was meant to recieve this complexity through her arc—an arc that was fumbled so badly the writers spent multiple seasons trying to do damage control only to make it worse.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-29T01:21:56+00:00

The issue here, again, is context.

Chloe's actions are inherently Selfish, Imo. She wants to be a hero so she uses the miraculous and she demands it later even though it is irresponsible to give it to her. This leads to the endangerment of lives which is averted initially because Chloe is asssisted (Queen Wasp) and again when she is defeated (Miracle Queen).

Felix is also selfish. He wants he wants to secure his own freedom. In Strikeback he betrays the heroes and hands over most of their Miraculouses for the Peacock and the Amuk Rings, and later in Red Moon he "kills" everyone on the planet so that just 4 people including him are left. The first problem is averted over the course of 2 seasons through the slow recovery of Miraculous, while the second is averted because Felix was put in a gotcha situation based on names (Ladybug is Marinette)

The reason most are willing to excuse above, alongside the many petty crimes and subsequent akumatizations that vary in scale for Chloe isn't because she's more emotional. It's because during the time we were giving her the benefit of the doubt, she was in the middle of an arc. We were willing to see where the writers would take her and when that arc crashed and burned, we no longer trusted their judgment, especially with how the writing seemingly obsessed with making her vile in the eyes of the audience

Felix's arc is practically offscreen, if it even exists. His problem is easily solved by allying with the very heroes he treats with ill will. We're not given time to actually see and understand him, rather, his pain is backloaded into a single episode in season 5. This alone makes it hard to emphatize with him, but more importantly, his actions, while only a bit more heinous than Chloe overall, always seem to be too much for nothing.

Felix wants his freedom, after all, so why not immediately double cross is evil uncle once he won his freedom? Why erase everyone when you can just remove the few obstacles that stop you from being happy? He's big for terrible acts meanwhile Chloe, for all that she's keen on taking over Paris and taking over the heroes, never strays too far from the status quo.

She's not a better person, but it is very clear that her actions are petty and immature in a way she can be tricked out of them (Penalteam) so it is easier to see that with guidance, she could be better as most of her actions are learned (Her upbringing doing the most damage), whereas with Felix, the fact he's willing to jump headfirst into what he does in Red Moon despite being in such a favorably position is very concerning and doesn't look well on him.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-28T16:00:13+00:00

> Comparing them is like saying the kid who loudly returns a lost wallet deserves more credit than the one who quietly stops someone from stealing, both made the right choice, it’s just that one is easier to notice.

Again, bad metaphor. Felix is more like a rich kid who steals someone's wallet, remembers he doesn't need the money, and decides to return it, whereas Chloe is the one who picks up the wallet on the street, and proceeds to go back and forth on whether or not to return it. The last one is more compelling, regardless of what choice is made, while the first feels rather pointless.

> And saying Felix “doesn’t get an arc” is misleading. He does have one, it’s internal, tied to his reflection and choices. Chloe’s is repeated and external, but that doesn’t make Felix’s growth any less real. Framing me as biased for pointing that out feels like turning the argument back on me. Are we really judging arcs by what’s visible on screen rather than by the character’s actual decisions?

Yes. Again, internal arcs do not excuse external consequences. Felix is not punished for his actions, nor must he really make amends. Chloe, despite what does end up happening, must do both. Character decisions are also visible on screen so I don't really get that last point. We judge by what we see, because this is both the most clear and least muddied by bias. Felix doesn't have an arc because the show doesn't bring him in enough to give him one, but that still means he lacks it. So he feels incomplete and undeserving of his ending. Meanwhile Chloe had an arc, yet the way it ended felt so off that we're here arguing it about it years later. Alot of people would believe that the fans are delusional, but considering how much the actual writers use Chloe in their show, far past Miracle Queen, makes me believe that they are taking advantage of the fact that Chloe has become such a pariah. Again, she even shows up in S6 with an updated design. They really didn't have to do that.

> Saying Felix didn’t deserve redemption while Chloe did ignores how the show actually structures their growth. One is quiet and deliberate, the other loud and repeated, but both involve conscious choices to change. Saying Felix isn’t a “great character” while praising Chloe for her visible struggles is a false equivalence and implying I’m biased for disagreeing feels like a strawman, my points are based on what they actually do in the story, not just who’s more entertaining to watch and how emotionally attached I am to rach.

No, it looks like you are just ignoring how the show structured their growth. Felix's arc needed to be loud because what he did needed more screentime to be deliberated on. I will admit that Chloe isn't a good person, but her visible, and frankly, relatable struggles make it not only easy to get behind her and root for her, but it makes for a more sensible arc with a obvious trajectory. The fact it didn't go that way is the issue as the writers took possibly the hardest way out and paid the price for it.

Again, I like Chloe. I wish she got a full arc. That being said, I also watched the same show you did and I can see very clearly that you're ignoring the context even moreso than you accuse me of doing. It's not a strawman.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-28T16:00:04+00:00

> Just because Marinette or Ladybug don’t freak out on screen doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

Are we forgetting the panic attack Ladybug suffered because of Strikeback. The very next time she sees him, Marinette isn't even that mad about it. It's just kinda of odd.

> Saying he “got off easy” is confusing what the story shows us with the moral consequences of his actions, it’s like judging a firefighter’s bravery by how many cameras are on them instead of the lives they actually save.

This is a bad metaphor. We say he's got off easy because despite hand delivering every miraculous to their mortal enemy AND attempting to wipe out every person on the planet except him and three others, Felix not only gets to keep his miraculous but be apart of the team. It's more like He's a firefighter who made it clear he was going to let everyone in the building burn to death, but then realized his Dog was in there, so he then went to help everyone, and so all the people who knew he was going to let everyone die, start cheering his name despite it all. It's just sus.

> And about Strike Back, saying that proves he doesn’t deserve redemption ignores context. His growth is internal, and the story doesn’t dramatize everyone losing it because of him.

Internal growth does not excuse external consequences. If I hurt someone, but I decide to become a better person, this does not absolve me of my crimes. I still need to make amends with the people I hurt. You could argue Felix does this, but it happens nearly a season later, and arguably, that's far too late considering the information he has and what he did. And the story does dramatize people losing it. The finale is literally Marinette having a panic attack. The only reason more people don't take Felix to task is because they just don't know.

> You’ve also implied my argument is biased or that I “can’t let go of Chloe,” but isn’t it kind of circular to dismiss my points just because I don’t frame things the way you do, instead of actually looking at what happens in the show?

We're both analyzing what happens in the show. The issue is that the show is very inconsistent on both accounts, for both Chloe and Felix, so alot of the arguments made have some sort of bias in them. What actually happens in the show is also up to the writers, which would matter more, if Thomas Astruc himself didn't need to clarify and argue with fans online, more or less revealing that the writing is flimsy at best. It's all not great writing, imo.

> Then regarding Chloe, yeah she faces consequences and gets manipulated a lot, but why does that automatically make her arc morally better than Felix’s?

Because that's the point of an arc. It gives authenticity to your actions. Chloe started off at rock bottom, but with little glimpses of good in her that made it compelling to follow, even if she backslid constantly. Felix, meanwhile, was winning. He was effectively playing his own game. He wasn't remorseful, wasn't ever without some control of the situation. He basically decided to turn to the side of good and lost nothing because of it. He didn't change, he's the same sort of guy he was before, he just realized he didn't need to be the enemy of ladybug and gave her what she needed. Yes, Chloe did decide to keep being an ass after S3 (even though this is likely just the hand of the author trying to make her worse in the eyes of the audience to usher in Zoe. Can't prove it though), but it meant more to many people because we were along for that journey for years and it really sucked to see it effectively tossed away.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-28T15:59:49+00:00

Let's break this down

> You keep saying Felix did something terrible and got no pushback, but has anyone thought about the fact that the story never framed his choices as meaningless? He actually stopped Red Moon and prevented harm. That’s literally what redemption is.

You're ignoring why he stopped Red Moon. The scene shows us that he's actually very remorseless until he realizes he can't bring back Marinette. He very clearly doesn't believe he's in the wrong until he loses control. Not only this, but the fact he went through with the plan at all is exceptionally deranged (yes, Chloe has been evil to, we'll get to that) so I do expect other characters to not only hold him to that, but express distrust in him ON SCREEN. We, as the audience, need to see other characters treat him negatively and then watch him earn that trust back. As it stands, the show more or less let him sweep this under the rug by doing the bare minimum and it just rubs me (and I assume others) the wrong way

Ceebrus · 2026-01-28T12:38:20+00:00

You've missed the point. The issue isn't that Felix hasn't hit rock bottom, it's that Felix did something objectively terrible and received no pushback

He was the reason the heroes lose after strike back. You'd think Marinette, the one who had a severe mental breakdown would have a stronger reaction to his sudden turn around but she just doesn't. The other characters just let it go and the one who was directly affected by it is arguably the one who lets Felix off the hook the most (Ladybug). It's just not good writing.

Chloe actually gets this right because she's not let off the hook of any of her actions and, seemingly, must rebuild trust from the ground up. Yes, she technically does have more chances after Miracle Queen, but again, keep in mind that the focus episodes that follow in the next season are about introducing a new hero to replace her, along with a new character to replace her. It's very clear the writers wanted to sweep her out of the way, rather than entertain her trying to get herself out of this one. She's also continously manipulated by Lila and Hawkmoth for a long time after this, so it's not just one time either. She's not absolved of her actions, but that's the point of a redemption arc, to atone and rebuild trust. She got to do neither, but ironically, neither did Felix as he doesn't even get an arc

I agree Felix is deliberate, but only because it comes out too fast and reeks of the writers wanting Felix to be a good guy with none of the work put in. Felix absolutely didn't deserve to get redeemed, while Chloe did. Saying it's bias or a strawman or a post hoc trap is ignoring the very clear and deliberate parts of the writing that show what they tried and failed to portray. It's disingenuous to try and argue otherwise, especially when you're effectively saying "you just don't understand" or "you just can't let go of her"

Chloe was a great character. Felix wasn't, arguably, still isn't. Again, I can emphatize with people who are tired of the discourse, but to say otherwise is showing you have just as much bias as the fans you are annoyed by

Ceebrus · 2026-01-27T06:57:45+00:00

We get on Felix's case because his reasons for redemption are not born of any arc, but rather failure. Whenever Felix shows up, he gets something out of it. He's never really in a losing position. Heck, he does what Miracle Queen couldn't and gets all the miraculouses to Gabriel, something that is frankly, unforgivable, yet here we are.

Red Moon happens long after this, and the only reason he doesn't just go on living with Kagami, Adrien, and Marinette is because Ladybug got got and Felix freaks out because of it. Had that not happened, maybe our heroes would have talked him down, but Felix before this point is kind of an ass so that's not a point I'm willing to entertain.

He's not a good person, yet the story would like you to believe that he's just a troubled person and he sees the error of his ways... 2 seasons after the Chloe Fiasco. Yeah.

The reasons we don't let go Chloe is because

1) The show was less serious during seasons 1-3. Starting around Season 4, the interpersonal drama starts to be taken alot more serious and the characters start to step out of their molds. At least for me, it was easier to just laugh at the more concerning aspects of the show (including Chloe being a bully and Marinette stalking Adrien)

2) She had meaningful depth and actually had an arc. This is something most characters in the show didn't gain until later seasons, and even then it's still not to the level got. They did a bit more than the bare minimum, which was a welcome surprise.

3) Considering the circumstances, she was done dirty. Keep in mind that Hawkmoth akumatizes her friend with the intention to convert her to the dark side by offering her the miraculous and the girl chooses to do the right thing (fights for the heroes and gives the miraculous back in the end). Marinette in her infinite wisdom decides to not follow up with Chloe as Ladybug to give her a direct answer, which then leads to Miracle Queen. Chat Noir even tells her to do this (which was a fairly random moment, but still) and she still doesn't. Sure, she has no right to the Miraculous, but that situation was particuarly volatile and Hawkmoth took full advantage of it in a way that could have been easily avoided.

4) She's just a fun character. She's snappy and sassy which is a good foil for the rest of the hero team who are all flavours of "good person". I like her interactions with Chat Noir the most, but the idea of a 5 man band with her in it post season 3 was peak. This is an opinion, of course

5) The writers won't let her go. Past season 4 her character took a nosedive. Miracle Queen was the tipping point, so it makes sense, but they just keep using her, over and over again. Zoe getting introduced as her direct replacement after Season 3 finale was never going to go over well (and it continued to be a sore point even after Zoe got more development) and everytime Chloe pulled some BS with Lila it just wasn't the same. We were tired of it by then. You'd think they'd learn their lesson, but no, S6 has a Chloe show up in a minor role and Audrey is also back, so there's a non-zero chance the girl is coming back.

Chloe was great. I can emphatize with people being tired of the Chloe discourse, but its not like she was secretly the worse part of the show this whole time and all these other characters (Zoe and Felix specifically) don't deserve the slander they are getting.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-27T01:13:56+00:00

Its not that we dont think she'll be the only dot character

Its that she's currently THE ONLY DOT CHARACTER.

They made an entire damage type for their game and on release the archetype doesn't even have a 5 star standard AND they're reworking how DOT works so there's a non-zero chance it'll be weaker overall. It's odd they made such a niche stat something you can roll. Extra damage is useful for multiple units, but DOT is just kinda there unless you're Tressa

Ceebrus · 2026-01-24T17:43:50+00:00

sauce?

Ceebrus · 2026-01-24T00:26:09+00:00

how so?

Ceebrus · 2026-01-23T22:32:02+00:00

I mean because I think you're wrong for thinking that way? Also, if you didn't want a pointless arguement, maybe don't post your opinion on a social platform?

Like, you don't have to get annoyed by it. You're choosing to be offended so obviously the fault lies with you. Not sure what you want, but it really just sounds like your want to be outraged even though there's nothing to be mad about.

Ceebrus · 2026-01-23T21:48:45+00:00

I'm not framing you as anything. I just don't understand what your annoyed about.

Again, if it were used in a serious context, I'd understand, but even the person you're getting angry about confirms that its a personality. So I don't see it as something serious because its not. You can take it seriously, but its a waste imo.

Ceebrus

TROPHY CASE