Pokemon Thread IIXV: Pokemon Beyond The Moon (Page 1 NSF56K)

Romanian My Escutcheon · March 2011

Remind me, is there any argument against 6v6s beyond the amount of time required to set up teams?

Nerdgasmic · March 2011

it's really bizarre that they took that out

T4CT · March 2011

just so we're clear i'm voting best of 3 3v3 and make people use the fucking wonder launcher because that looks radtacular

garryyyyyyyyy i found you gary

undeinPirat · March 2011

wonder launcher

that sounds fabulous

unintentional · March 2011

k I'm going to pop this sucker in the daycare, run around til it gets an egg, grab the egg, get the emboar back and come right back to tradesville

Dichotomy · March 2011

mostly I'm just thinking that 90% of 3v3 battles will end with one dude predicting wrong and not possessing a viable counter to one of the other guy's killy sweepers and bam the game is over before it begins

T4CT · March 2011

k I'll just grab a shit poke for when you're done collecting my emboar's sperm samples

Romanian My Escutcheon · March 2011

Romanian My Escutcheon, Doxy wrote: »

Remind me, is there any argument against 6v6s beyond the amount of time required to set up teams?

I'm really curious about this.

3v3s just don't seem like they would be as much fun.

unintentional · March 2011

Dichotomy wrote: »

mostly I'm just thinking that 90% of 3v3 battles will end with one dude predicting wrong and not possessing a viable counter to one of the other guy's killy sweepers and bam the game is over before it begins

isn't 6v6 also usually decided by one or two pivotal decisions whose significance isn't immediately noticed

Dichotomy · March 2011

yeah but with six dudes you got a lot more wiggle room

unintentional · March 2011

Dichotomy wrote: »

yeah but with six dudes you got a lot more wiggle room

what else can we do to add wiggle room other than the best-of-three set-up

unintentional · March 2011

like, I completely agree with you, and I am also trying to figure out what we can do to have the most fun with this

Dichotomy · March 2011

I dunno I'm still in "game over man, game over" mode

Isoldae · March 2011

As long as I don't have to grind and dudes to anything higher than 60 I would be ok with whatever we end up doing.

No fucking way I would go to 100 though.

InvisibleInk · March 2011

Best of 3 is a good idea, 3v3 is usually very quick so it shouldn't take any longer than a 6v6 battle

Wonder Launcher? I don't know. Change is scary! Using items online? I just don't know

unintentional · March 2011

k T4CT get back in here

you have one horny pig monster

T4CT · March 2011

Dichotomy wrote: »

I dunno I'm still in "game over man, game over" mode

well let's get some test online battles in tonight so stuff can get figured out because you organized this so it's time to transition into "pick up your balls and make the best of the situation" mode

e: but the way wonder launcher makes you buy items is neato burrito

unintentional · March 2011

T4CT wrote: »

Dichotomy wrote: »

I dunno I'm still in "game over man, game over" mode

well let's get some test online battles in tonight so stuff can get figured out because you organized this so it's time to transition into "pick up your balls and make the best of the situation" mode

But like

I don't have a focus sash or a choice band or a life orb or a choice scarf or a lum berry or a...

Speed Racer · March 2011

Think about the problem like this

if you had only 1v1 pokemon matches, there would be almost no strategy whatsoever. Matches would essentially be decided before they even started, just based on which pokemon the players brought. If you brought a Slowbro and they brought a Blissey, they're gonna win. If you brought a Blissey and they brought a Machamp, they're gonna win. No two ways about it. There's no point in playing a 1v1 match, because excepting some bizarre fluke the outcome is decided at the outset.

so, the closer you get to 1v1, the closer you get to a game that there's no point in playing

3v3 is closer to 1v1 than 6v6 is.

Speed Racer · March 2011

the wonder launcher though is an idea I think is really cool and I'm curious to see if it makes battling more interesting, so I am 100% in favor of trying it out

unintentional · March 2011

Speed Racer wrote: »

Think about the problem like this

if you had only 1v1 pokemon matches, there would be almost no strategy whatsoever. Matches would essentially be decided before they even started, just based on which pokemon the players brought. If you brought a Slowbro and they brought a Blissey, they're gonna win. If you brought a Blissey and they brought a Machamp, they're gonna win. No two ways about it. There's no point in playing a 1v1 match, because excepting some bizarre fluke the outcome is decided at the outset.

so, the closer you get to 1v1, the closer you get to a game that there's no point in playing

3v3 is closer to 1v1 than 6v6 is.

Totally agree. Where do you think (6C3 V 6C3) * 3 fits on the spectrum

I have no idea, and I am hoping it's closer to 6v6 than 1v1

Isoldae · March 2011

If it is 6v6 was there a decided level that isn't completely retarded?

Speed Racer · March 2011

unintentional wrote: »

Speed Racer wrote: »

Think about the problem like this

if you had only 1v1 pokemon matches, there would be almost no strategy whatsoever. Matches would essentially be decided before they even started, just based on which pokemon the players brought. If you brought a Slowbro and they brought a Blissey, they're gonna win. If you brought a Blissey and they brought a Machamp, they're gonna win. No two ways about it. There's no point in playing a 1v1 match, because excepting some bizarre fluke the outcome is decided at the outset.

so, the closer you get to 1v1, the closer you get to a game that there's no point in playing

3v3 is closer to 1v1 than 6v6 is.

Totally agree. Where do you think (6C3 V 6C3) * 3 fits on the spectrum

I have no idea, and I am hoping it's closer to 6v6 than 1v1

I definitely think it's the best solution suggested so far

I don't think it's a very good solution

but it's definitely the best

unintentional · March 2011

Isoldae wrote: »

If it is 6v6 was there a decided level that isn't completely retarded?

no
some things learn moves in the 70s and having to level everything up past 70 is completely retarded

Speed Racer · March 2011

Maybe someone will discover an easily exploitable item dupe glitch

then free rare candies for everyone!

unintentional · March 2011

that would be fantastic

T4CT · March 2011

well I mean 6C3 alone is 120 possible combos out of just whatever your 6 pokemon going in are

multiply that times 3? 360 possible combos with only six pokemon is pretty damn good without getting into the math of possible pokemon choices per team

Isoldae · March 2011

That made me remember, I am at the 8th and I haven't seen a rare candy yet.

What is up with that?

Munkus Beaver · March 2011

The changes to wifi are objectively bad. I am pissed that I bought this game, basically under false pretenses. I already had a game that I was having fun with on the single player and I'm going to get DA2 soon. I never would have bought this game if I had known I would only get to enjoy the single player mode of it.

Romanian My Escutcheon · March 2011

I have to admit, I am really curious as to why Game Freak would do this, because there is very little logic behind this shift.

Dichotomy · March 2011

isn't the 3v3 flat battle how they do their tournaments?
so

undeinPirat · March 2011

Isoldae wrote: »

That made me remember, I am at the 8th and I haven't seen a rare candy yet.

What is up with that?

i've been getting some from having the itemfinder on a lot and i saw that you could buy them at the battle subway (although it is 48 bp so fuuuuuck that)

and im only at the amusement park place

Speed Racer · March 2011

Isoldae wrote: »

That made me remember, I am at the 8th and I haven't seen a rare candy yet.

What is up with that?

I'm only at the 5th and I have one

unintentional · March 2011

there was someone who just hands you three or four at one point

Speed Racer · March 2011

Dichotomy wrote: »

isn't the 3v3 flat battle how they do their tournaments?
so

I think official tournaments are 4v4 doubles matches

T4CT · March 2011

do people not understand what the word objective means or something

look it's not like i'm not upset, I had a team of 6 pokemon planned and ready to go for this damn game

and i bought it without doing any research as to how the online play worked

but this game has been out for a while, people in north america have had it a while, and they certainly knew how the online worked. If any of us had bothered to look, we would've known this long ago.

Romanian My Escutcheon · March 2011

Dichotomy wrote: »

isn't the 3v3 flat battle how they do their tournaments?
so

If that's the case, why not make that an option, along with the classic wi-fi settings and 6v6?

Dichotomy · March 2011

why are you asking me
why would any rational being take away a ruleset that demands no additional resources and is beloved by the community

unintentional · March 2011

it's absolutely a step backward in functionality
I still think we can have fun with this video game
that is for fun having

maybe it's not the fun we were expecting
maybe we won't have AS MUCH fun as we thought we would, or for as long
but it's still pokemon, the single player was already worth the price of admission in my opinion
whatever blood we squeeze from this stone is a gain

Munkus Beaver · March 2011

T4CT wrote: »

do people not understand what the word objective means or something

It's objective. If you disagree with it being a bad thing you are either stupid or ignorant.

Penny Arcade

Pokemon Thread IIXV: Pokemon Beyond The Moon (Page 1 NSF56K)

Posts