• To keep up with the hype driven by Sword and Shield's release, we are taking applications for new moderators in our Current Events: Sword and Shield as well as Anime and Manga sections.

    For more information, see this thread.We hope you all consider joining our team!
  • We hope you're enjoying Sword and Shield so far! So that everyone can enjoy it and not be spoiled, please keep the all story spoilers and any images from the games in the appropriate sections or in spoiler tags until January 3rd.

    Since spoiler tags are not allowed in signatures, please do not put images from the games in your signature either. You can list the names of new Pokémon if you want to list your team in your signature.

SPECULATION: Gen VIII battle system

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
3,364
Reaction score
9,554
I honestly don't find a limit to attacks very frustrating. Few games let you have access to every attack in your possible arsenal at once-the only example I can think of are games like Smash, Tekken, etc, where you have to learn button combinations, and that'd be quite different from our current turn-based system. (I'm not interested in scrolling through pages of moves to find the one that I want, either)

The only "downside" to a move limit is that you have to pick a few moves-and that's kind of the point.
 
Nuzlocke Lover
Joined
Oct 15, 2015
Messages
3,627
Reaction score
4,150
A move limit also adds to the strategy of Pokémon battling. Instead of having access to multiple strategies, you would have only access to one or two and it would make the battle tougher.

On the other side though, removing the move limit would give both battlers access to multiple strategies. So you would have to much more careful and plan even more detailed due to more variables in play in battle. So it would also make battles tougher.

So it can go both ways.
 
The one once known as Alphaphlare
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
606
The reason why I suggested upping the move limit is because I wanted to counterbalance the restrictions.

The reason why I suggested the restriction is to nerf both stall and offensive min maxing.

I don't like the idea of hyper optimal dump stats and I think that weaknesses are more important than strength. So how do you make having a miniscule offensive stat a weakness when another one is good? Forcing at least one moveslot to go to that stat was my answer.
 
Active Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2013
Messages
880
Reaction score
328
Just add 1 more move slot. Boom, simple, yet transformative gameplay.
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
3,966
Reaction score
620
Actually, the whole "only four moves" thing is fairly archaic and bothersome. That could stand to be removed altogether.
to much moves would cause chaos, and it should be strategy... plus I dont know how it would affect the coding and data limit.
 
Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
304
Reaction score
195
I hope the turn based battle system ends altogether. The reason it is still there is becuase gamefreak are not very good at making games. They just happen to own the rights to this IP. They are very behind the times. Though it could also be becuase of the hardware limitations since pokemon has always been handled only. But with the switch, it can be done. I would love a battle system that would be similar to how battles happen in the anime.
 
Flame Trainer
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
8,612
Reaction score
17,569
I'd prefer if the system remains turn-based. That's the essence of Pokemon. The anime-like battle system can be for a spin off.

I think the target for Pokemon should be open world with the turn based system.
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
3,364
Reaction score
9,554
The reason it is still there is becuase gamefreak are not very good at making games.
Right, and that's why they've got such a hugely popular franchise, isn't it?
They just happen to own the rights to this IP.
A) The staff of Game Freak work on designing Pokemon. It's not like they do nothing and profit because they have legal rights.
B) They own the right to Pokemon, not to turn-based battles. Many other games use this system.
They are very behind the times.
Just google "turn-based strategy games" and see what comes up. There's plenty others released in the past few years.

Being turn-based isn't being "behind the times" any more than a racing game is behind the times. You don't have to like the genre, but don't pretend being part of a certain genre is an inherent flaw in a game.
 
New Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2017
Messages
9
Reaction score
14
I don't think I'd like it if they abandoned turn based altogether. One thing I wouldn't mind would be if the speed stat manifested itself as a kind of ATB gauge á la final fantasy iv-ix. Maybe that would actually add a sense of urgency to in game battles. Although I don't know much about competitive battling, I assume a mechanic change like that would severely mess up the metagame, which would also have its amusement value
 
Apricorn Collector
Joined
Nov 29, 2016
Messages
391
Reaction score
273
One of the reason why I love Pokémon is because it's a turn based RPG. So, removing that would not make me happy at all.
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
3,966
Reaction score
620
Interesting would be to see some future moves and abilities that would hurt more the "awake" - not sleeping pokemon then those who sleep.
Or one ability or move that the status conditions like sleep or paralyze would help insted of hindering- like situation with Sucker Punch, a very powerfull pokemon that would not be abble to hit something that can't move or attack in the same turn.
If a pokemon sleeps it shouldbe protected from flinching or confussion? yes?
 
Top