Nintendo 3DS Forums
Go Back   Nintendo 3DS Forums > Gaming > Nintendo 3DS Games > Pok?mon 3DS Games General

Pok?mon 3DS Games General Discuss Pok?mon X and Y as well as other 3DS Pok?mon games.

Pokemon Game Mechanics Discussion
Old 12-24-2013, 05:36 AM
Scizor's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,314
Default Pokemon Game Mechanics Discussion

What are your most disliked game mechanics in Pokemon? How would you fix them? Should battle simulators make their own changes to inherent game mechanics?

Some of mine include:
  • Frozen status - With only a 20% chance of unthawing there's a high likelihood that a Pokemon will be unable to attack for at least four moves. Of course that can easily go on for longer. The chance of freezing is only 10% for most Ice-type moves so it's not worth taking that chance into account when deciding your next move.

    If it was something like 30% then at least Ice-type Pokemon would be used more to absorb Ice attacks. The frozen status should either work like sleep does or have a higher chance of unthawing.

  • Critical Hits - I hate getting critical hits. I don't want to just win a battle, I want to deserve the win, and critical hits detract from that feeling. Like the frozen status, the critical hit chance is low enough that it isn't normally expected or prepared for. Gamefreak tried to balance critical hits this gen by reducing the damage boost but increasing the chance, which is actually worse in my opinion.

    Moves with a base critical hit chance should have no chance at all while moves like Stone Edge should retain their high chance. These moves get critical hits enough that it's beneficial to expect a critical hit when making your next move.

Despite my opinions on some of the more "haxy" mechanics in Pokemon, I don't think battle simulators should change any of them. In the end I think most people prefer playing in the actual game so simulators should reflect that.
Old 12-24-2013, 05:43 AM
SRT's Avatar
SRT SRT is offline
Always looking for his package
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,523
Default

Not sure how valid arguments are against critical hits are when so many factors are elements of chance. Much like all other chance based mechanics, it serves to add an element of unpredictability and the belief that no matter how dire the situation, there's still a possibility of coming out on top thanks to a miraculous crit.
Old 12-24-2013, 05:58 AM
Cosmic Fuzz's Avatar
Master of None
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Astoria, NY
Posts: 621
Default

I'd have to say being Frozen is a rather game changing dislike in Pokemon. At least with a burn/paralysis/sleep you can use it to your advantage with certain moves but when frozen you're pretty much down a pokemon.
__________________
Don't practice until you get it right. Practice until you can't get it wrong.
Old 12-24-2013, 06:09 AM
Scizor's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,314
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SRT View Post
Not sure how valid arguments are against critical hits are when so many factors are elements of chance. Much like all other chance based mechanics, it serves to add an element of unpredictability and the belief that no matter how dire the situation, there's still a possibility of coming out on top thanks to a miraculous crit.
Chance is good when it involves risk and reward. You can choose the guaranteed Ice Beam or go for the more powerful but less accurate Blizzard. You can choose to increase unpredictability by using Thunder Wave and possibly waste a turn if the opponent is never paralyzed, or play offensively and attack. Crits however, are always a possibility and there's no risk to them. It's just not very competitive.
Old 12-24-2013, 06:55 AM
Lumy's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,486
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SRT View Post
Not sure how valid arguments are against critical hits are when so many factors are elements of chance. Much like all other chance based mechanics, it serves to add an element of unpredictability and the belief that no matter how dire the situation, there's still a possibility of coming out on top thanks to a miraculous crit.
The arguments against Critical Hits all generally have merit. Removal of the mechanic or even nerfing of it has observed extreme disapproval from competitive and casual fans alike though.

Personally, I feel Mega Stones should also be subject to removal as any other item after Thief or Knock Off
Old 12-24-2013, 07:15 AM
Jex's Avatar
Jex Jex is offline
Master Transmutter
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,735
Default

I personally dont mess with IVs, but I think they should be taken away. EVs should be enough.

Um, I don't like the idea of egg moves. They should just be part of leveling up or received from a move tutor.

(not very serious, but now that they moved into 3d on handheld, it'd be cool to see the hold item on the pokemon. i know it's part of the strategy and guessing game that the opponent doesnt see your item, but maybe like if you could only see your item.)
Old 12-24-2013, 07:27 AM
Alfnerd's Avatar
of Rivea
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pancake
Posts: 792
Default

I honestly think they should remove pokemon riding, at least until its like that skiddo ranch, but anywhere and with any pokemon you could feasably ride. Right now it just feels for the most part like a merry go round.
__________________
If you want to get a hold of me, add my steam (Alfnerd) or Discord (Hunter K#7103)!
Old 12-24-2013, 02:41 PM
Scizor's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,314
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pimmis View Post
Personally, I feel Mega Stones should also be subject to removal as any other item after Thief or Knock Off
That's another one I agree with. You should always be able to knock off a mega stone, but if it happens after mega evolution then that Pokemon should stay mega evolved. This would punish switch-ins and give Knock Off the boost it usually gets when it removes an item. There's really no explanation anywhere why Knock Off doesn't work on mega stones anyway.

Added after 14 minutes:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pimmis View Post
The arguments against Critical Hits all generally have merit. Removal of the mechanic or even nerfing of it has observed extreme disapproval from competitive and casual fans alike though.
Where did they try that, and how would casual fans even know about it? Do you mean they just disapprove of the idea?

Last edited by Scizor; 12-24-2013 at 02:41 PM.
Old 12-24-2013, 09:22 PM
Kinvara's Avatar
Aquatic Admin
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Inkopolis
Posts: 10,562
Default

Well, this might be outside what you're going for I wish hidden machines were removed.

Just make it so that certain pokemon can smash rocks, surf, etc. independent of a particular move.
Old 12-24-2013, 10:03 PM
Lumy's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,486
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scizor View Post
Where did they try that, and how would casual fans even know about it? Do you mean they just disapprove of the idea?
A few threads on Smogon have discussed Critical Hits, and they've tried bringing up the idea of removing them from simulators. Along with the threads came were usually polls which reflected the general community's terms with the idea, and "no" was usually the most voted option.

Other less competitive Pokemon forums also discussed this and observed the same results.

The big idea is that everyone feels changing Critical Hits is too drastic, or that the game is no longer "Pokemon" if changed.
Old 12-24-2013, 10:52 PM
SRT's Avatar
SRT SRT is offline
Always looking for his package
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scizor View Post
Chance is good when it involves risk and reward. You can choose the guaranteed Ice Beam or go for the more powerful but less accurate Blizzard. You can choose to increase unpredictability by using Thunder Wave and possibly waste a turn if the opponent is never paralyzed, or play offensively and attack. Crits however, are always a possibility and there's no risk to them. It's just not very competitive.
I understand that there's reason for variance in the odds of certain moves, I think that speaks for itself. My understanding of the inclusion of critical hits, in addition to the underlying foundation of luck, is to create gameplay in which there is never a situation in which any player can be entirely "sure" of their position. It's taking the "excitement" of the odds involved with a low-accuracy move and turning it into a catch-all mechanic that can spread this sort of "excitement" across the entire board.

My impression is that Game Freak wants one of the key underlying elements of battles to be "unpredictability", and critical hits are simply one means of facilitating that. I don't really feel as though it's particularly at odds in purpose with other mechanics in the game. I think that the amount of impact they have on the flow of battle is something that deserves being looked into under further scrutiny, though.
Old 12-25-2013, 03:41 AM
Scizor's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,314
Default

I guess the competitive aspect of Pokemon will never be Game Freak's main focus, which is a shame.

Do you guys agree with Rough Skin/Iron Barbs/Rocky Helmet damaging the opponent's Pokemon before your own Pokemon faints? For example a weakened Talonflame fainted first after fainting my Ferrothorn and taking contact damage. Just seems odd that I would win when I'm clearly in the losing position. I kind of think matches should always result in a tie whenever both Pokemon faint in the last turn. It's like two countries nuking each other; it doesn't matter who shot first because both countries end up destroyed.