This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Should Pokemon ever have 4 vs 4 battles?

#11Ki_cat_(Topic Creator)Posted 1/11/2013 8:39:49 PM
I should be more clear. I agree that 3 vs 3 *trainer* battles are a clustered mess but I meant a 2 vs 7 wild pokemon battle. Your starter and Golem vs 5 Golbats or something. Trainer battles should stay 1 vs 1 (2 at most).
---
People are afraid of what they don't understand.
#12DeathSnipe777Posted 1/11/2013 8:40:26 PM
Let's just go 6 vs 6 and let all hell break loose.
---
3DS FC: 3609-1047-7032
Steam / PSN / NNID: Marlouchu
#13EstheimasterPosted 1/11/2013 8:43:33 PM
1 v 1 Fine
2 v 2 Nice Twist
3 v 3 Pushing it, almost too chaotic.
Rotation ?
4 v 4 No

Imagine vsing a team of Aerodactyl Gliscor Landorous Lunatone (?)
All of them use Earthquake.
Any of your non-flying/Levitate Pokémon would be decimated and you're down to 2 Pokémon left at worst. Just no.

The only further I could see it going is if they had mob-style battle where they had 6 v 6, but it was gameplay almost like Mystery Dungeon and position changing would occur and only one/two Pokémon could a ttack a turn.
#14GoldenSun3DSPosted 1/11/2013 8:49:33 PM(edited)
1v1 and 2v2 for trainer battles with occasional 3v3

2v2-7 for wild battles

4v4, 5v5, and 6v6 for fun with other players.

Though for 6v6 with other players, there should be a party of 10.
---
Camelot asked for your support of Golden Sun 4!
http://ipetitions.com/petition/operation-sunrise/ | http://facebook.com/pages/Operation-Sunrise/371417546251291
#15Ki_cat_(Topic Creator)Posted 1/11/2013 8:49:25 PM
You all missed my post saying that the 6+ vs 4 or less system is reserved for wild Pokemon battles.
---
People are afraid of what they don't understand.