8 vs 8

[Boondocker]

As you look around stark you see threads talking about 1vs1 and 2vs2 style pokemon games. But they dont really intrest me much. You cannot possibly prepare for everything using only 1,2, or even 6 pokemon on a team. So why not make an 8vs8 metagame? I feel like it would add more skill to the game and allow for more strategies to be used. Teams might be able to use rain dance or sunny day. They might be able to fit that dugtrio or spiritomb on their teams. Stall might be able to prepare for the dreaded cm clefable and offense might be able to fit an extra wallbreaker or 2 on their teams. So why not do this? I can only think of 2 reasons, both of witch im about to address.

1) We wont know what metagames we will create. Surely we cant have 8,9,10,11,12...infintiy different metagames so we would have to come up with a system to decide what metagames will exist and witch wont. There must be a system that already exists since we havent and probably wont split our player base into 6 (1vs1, 2vs2...6vs6). So this wont be much of a problem. Personally i only want an 8vs8 metagame. Anything higher will probably be chaos.

2) This isnt possible in the games (it might be i dont play the games much). But then again neither are random battles. 8vs8 can be a fun alternative just like random battles are. Personally i dont care if im playing "pokemon" or not. All that matters is that i and a number of other people support this and find it fun. It shouldnt even be hard to program.

This will probably get locked but it was worth a shot. And im talking about 8vs8 with only 1 pokemon out at a time.

RIGHT NOW WE ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THIS IS POSSIBLE WITHIN GAME MECHANICS. ANY HELP ON THAT WOULD BE APRECIATED.

Actually it might be possible someway, like with 2 ds or something. Just start out with 6vs6 and everytime you want to pick one of the remaining 2 pokes recreate the previous battle condition exactly except with pokemon 7 in your party instead of 1/2/3/4/5/6. Possible, but it would be a pain in the ass.

 

[Athenodoros]

The main reason it isn't done is because we do want to try to stick with the games and the franchise as much as possible, for reason outlined in the policy review thread. And also, the challenge cup is essentially the same as the games.

Also, were you thinking of all 8 on the field at one time? Or a team of 8, but handled normally?

 

[Boondocker]

The main reason it isn't done is because we do want to try to stick with the games and the franchise as much as possible, for reason outlined in the policy review thread. And also, the challenge cup is essentially the same as the games.

Also, were you thinking of all 8 on the field at one time? Or a team of 8, but handled normally?

The ladder should mirror the game im not arguing that. But if someone wants to play 8vs8 for fun with a friend i think it should be possible. Also it is impossible to play with random teams in the game. Unless you draw all 493 pokemon out of a hat, then draw from the moves they know, then draw from all possible eves. And even thats not completely random.

I was talking about a team of 8 handled normally

 

[Athenodoros]

If people want to play 8v8 with a friend, then that obviously is fine. The only trouble I can see is that the games would take forever, and that it would be a lot of bother to implement on a server for something that very few people would play. Also, imagine a stall team of 8 Pokemon. With that many, it could never be beaten and Stall would start to dominate, leading to ridiculously long battles all the time.

And the idea is that random battles still follow the game mechanics, as if two people were randomly assigned teams, and went off and built them. 8v8 could never happen. I think another problem is that 6v6 is so ingrained in the people who have known Pokemon since it came out, that it never occurs to anyone, except for 1v1. It would be like if suddenly, Pokemon could attack twice in a row or something, completely changing the game.

 

[Boondocker]

If people want to play 8v8 with a friend, then that obviously is fine. The only trouble I can see is that the games would take forever, and that it would be a lot of bother to implement on a server for something that very few people would play. Also, imagine a stall team of 8 Pokemon. With that many, it could never be beaten and Stall would start to dominate, leading to ridiculously long battles all the time.

And the idea is that random battles still follow the game mechanics, as if two people were randomly assigned teams, and went off and built them. 8v8 could never happen. I think another problem is that 6v6 is so ingrained in the people who have known Pokemon since it came out, that it never occurs to anyone, except for 1v1. It would be like if suddenly, Pokemon could attack twice in a row or something, completely changing the game.

Its not fine since i dont think its possible without the help of the people who create simulators. Actually it might be possible someway, like with 2 ds or something. Just start out with 6vs6 and everytime you want to pick one of the remaining 2 pokes recreate the previous battle condition exactly except with pokemon 7 in your party instead of 1/2/3/4/5/6. Possible, but it would be a pain in the ass. How do you know few people would play it? And i dont think it would be alot of trouble at all. Hopefully someone can confirm that. Just make it possible to pick how many pokes you want on a team and how many to send out at a time in unranked matches. Imagine a team of 6 wall breakers. They would destroy said stall team. Like i said in the op teams might be able to afford to run stuff like dugtrio to beat up on certian walls. No one knows til they try it. And i wish people would get out of the mindset that long=/=fun.

Well my point is that random battles require something not programed into the game (a random team distributor) just like 8vs8 does. Using a random team distributor is just as much cheating as using a gameshark is. And I dont care how ingrained it is. Times change. And like you said people play 1vs1 and 2vs2 all the time. 8 pokes on a team was actually predicted to happen before bw came out, and is a very real possibility in the future.

 

[Athenodoros]

I assumed most people would not play it because most people like to stick completely to game mechanics. And I'm sure that if there were enough demand, a simulator could be made, but until then I think just damage calculators could be a way (think Locopoke's warstory in Trou). Bu you've probably heard enough of my 'voice'. I wonder what other people think.

 

[cosmicexplorer]

It sounds like a fun idea, if someone can be bothered to program it. The lack of motivation is probably going to be the biggest obstacle to implementing this kind of alternate metagame. If you can get a suitable number of followers, then someone might be more inclined to write it. However, I don't know how easy or difficult this might be to create, so it might not even be that much work to make, or it might require a rewrite of a large part of a simulator to create. Once a ladder for this is created, then this kind of metagame might be more easy to jump into and is more likely to attract followers. The main obstacle is probably just getting it to work in the beginning.

 

[Boondocker]

Maybe post some logs showing strategies that would work in 8 vs 8 but not in 6 vs 6? Maybe you could invent some new strategies to get people on your side.

I might do that eventually. It would be pretty hard though since i have no idea what the metagame would be like. But first i want to come to a conclusion on whether or not this is possible within game mechanics. Any comment on my idea about using 2 ds?

Actually it might be possible somehow, like with 2 ds or something. Just start out with 6vs6 and everytime you want to pick one of the remaining 2 pokes recreate the previous battle condition exactly except with pokemon 7 in your party instead of 1/2/3/4/5/6.

 

[Lamppost]

i dont like the idea all that much
i would probably play it anyway but i wouldnt want it :P

 

[eden]

this is a strange idea tbh. you may as well start playing magic with a side deck and everything :/

 

[fuck you all]

It kinda makes sense, just to be able to fit more roles onto your team, like a having all of a lead, defensive wall, special wall, mixed attacker (wallbreaker), revenge killer/trapper, physical sweeper, special sweeper, and a support mon, while not just having to pick 6 and be more un-balanced. just my thoughts.

 

[T-Dogg]

Well if enough people want it, why not?

Having said that, I disagree with it. 8 is just too many. The games would take far too long. I feel 6 is just the right number.

 

[Aerodactyl Legend]

Definately an interesting, niche game, but as said before, eight is too much. It will be just a super-offense or (a more likely to happen) super-stall "metgame." With that many slots, you'll have an answer for just about every situation. Stall and support Pokes would endlessly keep each other alive. Doesn't mean I woudn't like to try it just to see what it would be like though.

 

[Boondocker]

Can a mod move this to 5th gen so it can get some more attention?

 

[WaterBomb]

It kinda makes sense, just to be able to fit more roles onto your team, like a having all of a lead, defensive wall, special wall, mixed attacker (wallbreaker), revenge killer/trapper, physical sweeper, special sweeper, and a support mon, while not just having to pick 6 and be more un-balanced. just my thoughts.

But see, that 6 pokemon limitation forces the teambuilder to do more strategizing. Synergy would become less important because you wouldn't have to choose between, say, a revenge killer and a wallbreaker, or what have you. I like the 6 limit because it forces players to be more creative and skilled.