This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
XBL GT: A Bit Of Charm, 3DS FC: 3668-7321-0017
Games Currently awaiting: Darksouls 2, Pokemon X/Y, Super smash bros WiiU
It's just one small aspect of your Pokemon's stats you can't (completely) control. If anything, GameFreak should work on making it harder or impossible to abuse RNG. It was a darn good feeling when I bred an Eevee with flawless special attack and speed, and the right nature for a Jolteon. EVs are twice as important, anyway.
I'm sure I felt better than you did when I hatched the Eevee who is now my competitive Jolteon.
Grinding that way isn't fun by any means, but it's not luck at that point.
Given these games are designed and purchased for the intention of having fun, doesn't it make sense that parts of the game that are not fun, or are simply padding should be minimized?
Suppose lottery tickets were free to you, for some reason, and you could have as many as you could take. You'd win the lottery, right? Would you complain about having to scratch off the tickets, one at a time, with your *bare hands*? Once again, if you want to play without IVs being part of the experience, there are plenty of copyright-infringing-could-be-taken-down-at-any-moment simulators for you.
Actually, no. That's a poor analogy, because with the lottery, the machine is required to generate at least one winning ticket; there is no pattern of IVs the game is required to generate. If the tickets were printed truly randomly, even if you were an immortal with no need to eat or sleep, scratching tickets until the Sun became a black hole, you could still never win the lottery if luck wasn't with you.
As for playing on simulators; why do IV supporters think having the Actual game be balanced is such a horrible thing?
What on Earth? Crits and accuracy do way more to screw with outcomes than a small handful of IV points. It's not hard to get Pokemon with IVs that are all in the high 20s or above, and those Pokemon are perfectly viable in competitive play.
First, running some damage calcs, a Pokemon with a high attack stat IV versus a Pokemon with Pokemon with a low defense and HP IV with a 100% accurate move like Surf can actually do more damage in most circumstances than a move like Hydro Pump would do if all IVs were 31, particularly if they had high base attack and low base defense.
Second, these bits of luck happen in a single match. If ONLY a crit messes up one battle, no future battles will be affected, and a rematch will likely play out in your favor. If you lose ONLY because your opponent had objectively better stats than you, no amount of rematches will change your loss.
Third, it's also "not hard" to flip an unbiased coin and have it land heads 100 times in a row. Luck is not a source of legitimate challenge in games, and you should never say a luck-based mission is "Hard" or "Easy," if you don't want to be wrong automatically.
2) Your version of checkers is insane in part because that's not how checkers was created.
I'm sorry I didn't take the time to invent whole new game with purposefully imbalanced rules for the sole purpose of demonstrating a point. Now, if you can, picture a world where my version of Checkers is the only one which exists (and now both sides get the number of pieces decided by dice), and that version is the way it was meant to be played. Do you think nobody would complain about how sometimes you can tell you will lose right from the beginning due to having significantly fewer pieces than your opponent? Do you think no-one would complain how pointless this aspect of luck is? Do you think no one would ask why we can't just have all players have equal pieces, and want these "house rules" to be official?
3) The multiplayer is balanced if no one cheats or abuses RNG, with benefits going to players who know the mechanics and spend time breeding.
"Hey, even though both our teams have the same Pokemon, moves, natures, EVs and abilities, and were all bred with the same parents for the same amount of time, all of my Pokemon have at least 10 more points in every stat that matters than yours (except for the controlled IV). I win." This is a situation that can and does actually happen in-game right now. Not balanced.
Because it is a system that is pointless and too luck based. What if you could lose your Queen in chess just by a coin flip? And what if you rolled an 8 sided die to determine how many pawns you get in one game? Or flip a coin to see if you lose your outfielders in baseball. And let's roll a die to
determine how many players on your team (including the goalie) are on the field at a time. Wynaut implement rules like this? Because it's very unfair.
A GameFAQs user from August 1, 2010 to March 27, 2012.
Known as Megaleg back then.
IVs are the main reason I use an AR. I don't mind investing EVs. But relying on luck is something I refuse to do. It shouldn't be like that. It's just an unnecessary part of breeding.
"It's called Xbox One because it took 359 steps backwards!"
I like the challenge of IV's. And the power items really helps. I like not being able to control every little aspect of the Pokemon. It's a little more realistic in a breeding sense. Plus you don't HAVE to have 31's in everything, just what you really need them in imo; I's stisfying when you get that IV spread you want without cheating. I hope they have someone like that subway guy that lets you know which EV's you maxed, he helped a lot using the subway auto level feature also helped too.
Black: 0003 2733 6504
SS: 1677 7369 7003
One fix to IV's could be the one I presented here
One fix to IV's could be the one I presented here
That's a fairly good idea, and one that would fit in with IV's intended purposes while keeping balance in multiplayer. The only problem I'd have with it is when transferring, the current IVs would probably have to be randomized for the new system. Other than that, I see no problem. It makes it a fair trade-off, and you won't get Perfect Pokemon ruining everyone's day by being objectively better in all circumstances.
I like the challenge of IV's. And the power items really helps.
I've said it before and I'll say it again; in a video game, "challenges" are not what so many seem to think they are.
The Blood-Stained Sanctuary in Cave Story
The Puzzle Master's House in the Professor Layton series
Fighting players of roughly equal, or slightly better skill in multiplayer games of all stripes
The mere existence of Super Hexagon
These are all examples of tests of a players reflexes, precision, knowledge of game rules, and strategy. they are relatively fair, balanced, and satisfying to finish, even if you struggle with them (arguably even moreso if you struggle).
Compare this to something like Ocarina of Time's Water temple. A lot of people said it was too hard, in spite of the fact that it did very little to test any of the above. Why was this? Because correcting a mistake was a very tedious process due to hampered underwater movement, the user-unfriendliness of the Iron boots, and other slowdowns.
When the 3DS remake addressed these issues the "challenge" vanished, even though everything challenge should come from (bosses, puzzles, enemy layouts, etc.) remained the same. Why was this? Because the tedium, padding, and everything that didn't actually challenge, but instead frustrated, the player was removed.
Ask yourself, the next time you're riding back and forth on your bike; what skill, knowledge, or strategy is being tested of me, by walking back and forth? The answer, pretty clearly, is "none of the above," the only things being "challenged" are you luck and your patience. IV breeding is not fun, it is not a challenge, in fact, the luck based aspect makes it so it's not even a grind, because for something to be a grind, there has to a least be some sort of progression. It is padding. Pure and simple.
I like not being able to control every little aspect of the Pokemon. It's a little more realistic in a breeding sense.
You know, maybe you're right. Having a game be realistic is WAY better than having a game be balanced! In fact, I can think of ways to make it even better!
Let's give every Pokemon the Defeatist ability; hey, I'd like to see you hit as hard at full health as you would when you're about to die, comebacks from the brink of defeat are nonsense. Let's make it so every time a Pokemon wakes up from sleep, they get the effects of Slow Start. Let's remove most of the non-food items, their effects aren't realistic. Also, the medicines, berries and leftovers should only heal 5 hours after they're used. Let's make it so most non-legends refuse to breed in captivity. Let's make it so you can hunt wild Pokemon to extinction! Let's make it so only one cartridge in the entire world has a legendary in it; they should be one-of-a-kind, after all! Let's make it so you have to use the 3DS camera at the start, and depending on your race and gender, some racist/sexist gym leaders will refuse to battle you so you can never reach the Pokemon League. Let's make it so rich players can pay off judges to ignore their cheating and drum up charges on the little men!
What, these are all terrible ideas for a balanced game? But they're so realistic! They CAN'T be bad ideas!
Having a game be realistic is WAY better than having a game be balanced! In fact, I can think of ways to make it even better!
Oh I see the error of my ways now. Nothing should be realistic at all; it's all about balance. Each type should have three weaknesses, three resistances, three types they hit for 2x damage, and three types they hit for .5 damage. Even that might not go far enough, because Pokemon get two types! Hey, how come only Bug and Electric have moves that let the user attack and switch out on the same turn? Clearly, every move should be replicated for every type. Every Pokemon should have roughly the same base stat total, and more equitable move pools. There are 650+ Pokemon and only 64 are viable in competitive play--that's far too realistic! Accuracy and misses should be done away with entirely, same with crits. Speed ties should be replaced by a pre-determined priority of attack types. Protect should always fail on the second consecutive try. No one should ever get lucky in any way, shape or form.
Conduit 2: RonJohn 3868-8419-8160 [D-S]Jolt 4986-1435-0700
The Conduit: RonJohn 3309-2472-4741
IVs are too important especially speed to not be controllable. It also makes it harder for beginners to get into competitive battling.
If you were able to pass along more than 3 stats in a breeding session, that would be one thing. Two perfect parents still only pass along 3 max-IV stats - leaving the other 3 to the RNG (1 in 32^3 of getting a perfect child from 2 perfect parents).
If you are starting from scratch (i.e. two parents with 0 max IVs), say goodbye to AT LEAST a week JUST in breeding - with the potential to still only get a 4-IV child.
Skyrim is the girl who keeps breaking my heart, yet is so hot I still keep coming back on the chance I may get to sleep with her again. - Spurner
Add user to Ignore List after reporting