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

To those who like the current IV system, what is your reasoning?

#31bd43Posted 9/26/2013 12:46:05 PM(edited)
It makes sense, provides stability to a metagame otherwise ruled by abilities, type, and BST, and can be fixed without junking it. Also gives breeding a larger purpose.

To expand, I'd love to see it make a point. That one pokemon breeding session will quickly make a superior pokemon. Maybe not by leagues, but even a minor bump helps. Sure, competitive pokemon will take it all the way, and sure, they deserve the shot, eventually, at it. But it's not a bad concept.
---
Thinking is overrated. Like Pants.
#32MogKnightAzurePosted 9/26/2013 12:44:20 PM
meiyuki posted...
ClassyOldHat posted...

Supporters of IVs are prone to straw-manning and employing the Slippery Slope argument ("what's next, do you want to remove crits?"), and down-playing influence and randomness of the system. We have within this very topic, supporters of the IV system claiming that the main reason they like it is because of the frustration of those who do not like it. Those are also signs of a weak position.

However, signs of a weak position are not guarantees of a weak position. I am trying to give both sides the benefit of the doubt. I will not lump you into a "straw-manning" group unless you give me reason to.

I kindly ask you do likewise, and stop sterotyping your opposition based on the actions of a few, and stop using the interrogation fallacy. You might as well be asking "have those who don't like IVs stopped beating their wives, yet?"


How much of the few is it though? I'm not saying I saw one person do it, I don't think I've ever personally seen an honest representation of the IV system from those who don't like it. For example is always referred to as pure randomness or pure luck, that is blatantly false. There's a poster in this very thread completely misrepresenting how easy it actually is to have good IVs on a pokemon without cheating.

You have other people saying ridiculous statements like "Not a single person likes it as a mechanic." There's not one person in this thread taking the anti-IV position that accurately represented the system. And then it only gets worse from there, does that not concern you in the slightest?


I'm more concerned that the people who want to keep IVs the way they are only want it to stay that way so competitive battlers can suffer. Beat around the bush all you want, this is primarily a casual vs competitive argument at its core and both sides have people who are in it just to screw with each other.

And was my solution not considered ideal? I don't understand why the current system cannot cater to both sides (IVs stay to keep uniqueness of pokemon, manipulation of IVs is made much easier for those wishing to competitively battle).
#33Kinneth123Posted 9/26/2013 12:47:26 PM
MogKnightAzure posted...
meiyuki posted...
ClassyOldHat posted...

Supporters of IVs are prone to straw-manning and employing the Slippery Slope argument ("what's next, do you want to remove crits?"), and down-playing influence and randomness of the system. We have within this very topic, supporters of the IV system claiming that the main reason they like it is because of the frustration of those who do not like it. Those are also signs of a weak position.

However, signs of a weak position are not guarantees of a weak position. I am trying to give both sides the benefit of the doubt. I will not lump you into a "straw-manning" group unless you give me reason to.

I kindly ask you do likewise, and stop sterotyping your opposition based on the actions of a few, and stop using the interrogation fallacy. You might as well be asking "have those who don't like IVs stopped beating their wives, yet?"


How much of the few is it though? I'm not saying I saw one person do it, I don't think I've ever personally seen an honest representation of the IV system from those who don't like it. For example is always referred to as pure randomness or pure luck, that is blatantly false. There's a poster in this very thread completely misrepresenting how easy it actually is to have good IVs on a pokemon without cheating.

You have other people saying ridiculous statements like "Not a single person likes it as a mechanic." There's not one person in this thread taking the anti-IV position that accurately represented the system. And then it only gets worse from there, does that not concern you in the slightest?


I'm more concerned that the people who want to keep IVs the way they are only want it to stay that way so competitive battlers can suffer. Beat around the bush all you want, this is primarily a casual vs competitive argument at its core and both sides have people who are in it just to screw with each other.

And was my solution not considered ideal? I don't understand why the current system cannot cater to both sides (IVs stay to keep uniqueness of pokemon, manipulation of IVs is made much easier for those wishing to competitively battle).


Is it really fair to assume everyone who wants IVs to stay just want people to suffer? I'm sorry if you suffer, I don't and if you actually put in effort you wouldn't either.
---
3DS FC: 1332-8189-4231
#34MogKnightAzurePosted 9/26/2013 12:49:19 PM
bd43 posted...
It makes sense, provides stability to a metagame otherwise ruled by abilities, type, and BST, and can be fixed without junking it. Also gives breeding a larger purpose.


Breeding doesn't need a larger purpose. Getting the nature you want with egg moves already takes about 20 or so eggs before you finally get that right nature. Is that not enough? Breeding for the IVs you want can add literal hundreds of hours for just one pokemon. This isn't an exaggeration and is the primary reason why people hack their pokemon instead. The current system requires far too much time to get where you want to be for competitive play.

It's nice that certain mechanics get tweaked or added to speed it up a BIT, like everstone-passing natures and such... but IVs have always been so convoluted.
#35SliceSabrePosted 9/26/2013 12:49:31 PM
I have a love hate relationship with them but overall I would say I like they because it adds another dimension to catching pokemon: engaging in eugenic selection to pick the strongest one.
---
@w@
Gamertag: SliceSabre
#36meiyukiPosted 9/26/2013 12:53:21 PM
MogKnightAzure posted...

I'm more concerned that the people who want to keep IVs the way they are only want it to stay that way so competitive battlers can suffer. Beat around the bush all you want, this is primarily a casual vs competitive argument at its core and both sides have people who are in it just to screw with each other.

And was my solution not considered ideal? I don't understand why the current system cannot cater to both sides (IVs stay to keep uniqueness of pokemon, manipulation of IVs is made much easier for those wishing to competitively battle).


I think IVs add to the fun of competitive battling and hacking ruins that so I'd love to see them using high level encryption to keep pokemon from being hacked. IVs are a system specifically designed to add randomness to pokemon battles. This has absolutely nothing to do with screwing with people and that shows that you just continue to use misrepresentation to support your case. I don't want to know exactly what my opponent has so I can reduce each battle to a perfect mathematical formula. I want the randomness in the competitive scene.

I'm not beating around the bush at all, I like the system, and I want them take measures to destroy hacking and enforces it's use in the way it was intended by the devs.

Breeding doesn't need a larger purpose. Getting the nature you want with egg moves already takes about 20 or so eggs before you finally get that right nature. Is that not enough? Breeding for the IVs you want can add literal hundreds of hours for just one pokemon. This isn't an exaggeration and is the primary reason why people hack their pokemon instead. The current system requires far too much time to get where you want to be for competitive play.


And here we have it again, total and complete lies and exaggeration. Once my breeding operation is set up within a game I can without hacking or exploiting in any way get any breedable pokemon with the nature I want and good IVs in 40 minutes to an hour. I have even gone so far as the completely legitimately breed for a specific hidden power and that only took 4 days, long yes but not even remotely close to what you suggest.
#37ClassyOldHat(Topic Creator)Posted 9/26/2013 12:54:55 PM
Kinneth123 posted...
For someone who's trying to be unbiased you seem awfully negative towards those who are fine with the system.


That quote was responding to a loaded question with another, making negative assumptions off the bat, to show that either side can load a question and find a minority with extreme opinions to characterize their opposition with.

meiyuki posted...
How much of the few is it though? I'm not saying I saw one person do it, I don't think I've ever personally seen an honest representation of the IV system from those who don't like it. For example is always referred to as pure randomness or pure luck, that is blatantly false. There's a poster in this very thread completely misrepresenting how easy it actually is to have good IVs on a pokemon without cheating.

You have other people saying ridiculous statements like "Not a single person likes it as a mechanic." There's not one person in this thread taking the anti-IV position that accurately represented the system. And then it only gets worse from there, does that not concern you in the slightest?


The question in the topic title is "To those who like the current IV system, what is your reasoning?" not "what is the moral character of both sides?" If you wish to call others characters into question, please make your own topic. Otherwise, feel free to explain why you like the system.
#38bd43Posted 9/26/2013 12:56:55 PM
MogKnightAzure posted...
bd43 posted...
It makes sense, provides stability to a metagame otherwise ruled by abilities, type, and BST, and can be fixed without junking it. Also gives breeding a larger purpose.


Breeding doesn't need a larger purpose. Getting the nature you want with egg moves already takes about 20 or so eggs before you finally get that right nature. Is that not enough? Breeding for the IVs you want can add literal hundreds of hours for just one pokemon. This isn't an exaggeration and is the primary reason why people hack their pokemon instead. The current system requires far too much time to get where you want to be for competitive play.

It's nice that certain mechanics get tweaked or added to speed it up a BIT, like everstone-passing natures and such... but IVs have always been so convoluted.


I'm all for perfect pokemon, but anyone who wants it in just one generation should just stop complaining and give up the argument.

It's not hard to fix. Certainly possible. And maybe nature breeding should get a focus too(item sets that limit the nature odds from 25 to 5 would be simple).
---
Thinking is overrated. Like Pants.
#39The_Undying_84Posted 9/26/2013 12:56:57 PM
I have yet to see anyone say they really like it as it is. They just say it's good enough, which is a position that makes no sense to me.

Just because something is "good enough" doesn't mean it can't be or shouldn't be improved.
---
PSN: TheUndying84
#40meiyukiPosted 9/26/2013 1:01:28 PM(edited)
ClassyOldHat posted...
Otherwise, feel free to explain why you like the system.


I already have, twice now. You keep implying I havn't, while trying to say you're unbiased. I answered the question in my first post. You instead keep going on the attack implying I didn't answer the question.

I have yet to see anyone say they really like it as it is. They just say it's good enough, which is a position that makes no sense to me.


So you didn't see me post in this thread? Of Tatakai-No-Kami? Or ShadowMario3? or others?