PDA

View Full Version : [B/W] More than 6 Pokémon in your party?


John Shephard
June 6th, 2010, 12:25 PM
While everyone is saying the number of gyms and badges and all that good stuff that could be incoporated into the game. I cant help but think about the # of pokemon in your party. in previous games they had 6 which normally isnt a bad thing but sometimes if i want a certain pokemon i find it annoying making room for them. also with hm slaves, have more then 6 slots can free up favorite pokemon who you dont want to be a hm slave.

thoughts? concerns? comments?

ps im going with the grass starter all the way

Shiny Shaymin
June 6th, 2010, 12:27 PM
I don't think that they would change the number of Pokémon able to be in your party so far in the series...

John Shephard
June 6th, 2010, 12:48 PM
maybe not but it would really change things up a bit, imagine your rival having 8 pokemon and you having 8 pokemon, and dont forget gym leaders and the elite 4 each having 8 pokemon (any more then 8 would be gay).

Shiny Shaymin
June 6th, 2010, 12:53 PM
I doubt it. But I admit it would be (kinda) cool.

MistahDude
June 6th, 2010, 01:47 PM
maybe not but it would really change things up a bit, imagine your rival having 8 pokemon and you having 8 pokemon, and dont forget gym leaders and the elite 4 each having 8 pokemon (any more then 8 would be gay).

it would be diabolical and evil.

Wifi battles would be even more painful.

Shiny Shaymin
June 6th, 2010, 01:57 PM
it would be diabolical and evil.

Wifi battles would be even more painful.

Quite agreed. It would be almost impossible.

dozo
June 6th, 2010, 02:40 PM
I'm pretty sure it'll always be to limit of 6 in one's party.

DarkSlayer1331
June 6th, 2010, 03:00 PM
1.) I think that six is enough to make a pretty balanced team.
2.) Since when was that a proper time to use the term "gay"? -__-

MrsNorrington
June 6th, 2010, 04:05 PM
While I'd LOVE to carry more Pokemon with me, it would seriously irk and irritate me, drive me to the point of insanity, and exhaust me when it comes to battling 8 on 8 throughout the game. It might come to point where its just too tiring and time consuming to play. It's not a good idea to carry more than 6.

But! I wish we could learn more than 4 moves per Pokemon. That would help a lot when it comes to HM slave Pokemon...

PiPVoda
June 6th, 2010, 05:48 PM
Usually I find it hard to train a party of 6..Having more could be nice since I wouldn't have to limit my pokemon that I can hold on me, but it would be horrible having to train them all. I'd prefer it if we could just get pokemon from the PC through the new poketch/pokenav-type thing that we will have in b&w. That way if I wanted to train multiple pokemon at once I could just send some to the PC, withdraw a few others and train them without having to even go back to the pokemon center.

dooxer
June 6th, 2010, 06:11 PM
since i only train 2-3 people anyway, and i only need a max of 3 hm slaves, i think 6 is perfect. as for competitive, it would kill it.

TheReal
June 6th, 2010, 07:28 PM
This doesn't make sense at all.. Pokémon B/W may have some news and improvements, but this goes totally agaisnt the tradictions of Pokémon! It will never happen, for sure.

Taichi
June 6th, 2010, 08:19 PM
I like having Six Pokemon. That way I have The Ace, The Lancer, The Big Guy, The Smart One, The Chick, and The Sixth Ranger.

Cherrim
June 7th, 2010, 04:33 AM
Changed the thread title slightly so that it doesn't look like the title of another thread. :p Hopefully it'll discourage people from reporting it as a duplicate when it's not.

And on-topic, I think any more than 6 Pokémon would be imbalanced... though I personally wouldn't mind at all since I wouldn't have to worry about running out of room for Pokémon I like on my team.

derozio
June 7th, 2010, 04:39 AM
I really doubt it, tbh. As some people above me said, it'd make it quite a pain for the competitive battlers. But yeah, tbh, I'm not bothered. I'm not a competitive player, after all. xD;

Okami Chi
June 7th, 2010, 04:40 AM
Six is fine. Most matches take a long time with six already. Eight is too much. Nuff' Said.

Hiroshi Sotomura
June 7th, 2010, 05:06 AM
Just like having four moves per Pokémon adds restriction yet still can promote making proper move decisions, having a team of six would be enough. Add more and the game becomes a little easier, given that you can then have more slots of strong Pokémon.

ZigZag80521
June 7th, 2010, 05:18 AM
More moves would be great, but eight pokemon is not needed since sometimes just not having the pokemon I need reminds me to go to the pokemon center. On my DSI i have a level 87 Empoleon, and its nearly indistructable so I forget to go to the pokemon center and restore its PP haha good thing I haven't fought the Elite Four and made that mistake :P

Masterge77
June 7th, 2010, 05:42 AM
Little known Fact: Did you know that in the development stages of Ruby and Saphire, they planned for there to be more than 6 party pokemon and more than 4 moves, they actually considered this idea, honestly!

Pokémon Ranger ✩ Moriarty
June 7th, 2010, 05:49 AM
I would really like for there to be eight Pokémon in my party. Because then I could use two HM slaves without having to dig into my six main Pokémon. -.-

███
June 7th, 2010, 06:04 AM
if they do this its gonna be like fighting that one guy with 6 magikarp but instead he's gonna have 8 of them :/

EmpoleonRider
June 7th, 2010, 06:15 AM
Eh I wouldnt mind it but 6 is good

Darkness98
June 7th, 2010, 06:37 AM
It would be nice but its not something we really need.Whenn im stuck in a postion like that I just get rid of my highest pokemon.Now that I say that We dont really need it.

~Gary~
June 7th, 2010, 06:53 AM
that'd be a wonderful idea cuz in six pokemon 2 hm-slaves and only 4 strong pokemon....
i wish it would be 7-9

Timbjerr
June 7th, 2010, 10:19 AM
Ugh...why does every complaint about the games trace back to HMs?! Am I the only one that doesn't mind having HM moves on my active team? Am I the only one that doesn't mind having ONE slave for the only two useless moves (Cut and Flash/Defog)?

Six party pokemon is enough. It's a mechanic that's too deeply established in the series' canon to be changed anytime soon. Besides, how would they explain away something like that in the anime (it's the only thing that the anime does to accurately mirror the games nowadays)?

DarkSlayer1331
June 7th, 2010, 10:43 AM
Ugh...why does every complaint about the games trace back to HMs?! Am I the only one that doesn't mind having HM moves on my active team? Am I the only one that doesn't mind having ONE slave for the only two useless moves (Cut and Flash/Defog)?

Six party pokemon is enough. It's a mechanic that's too deeply established in the series' canon to be changed anytime soon. Besides, how would they explain away something like that in the anime (it's the only thing that the anime does to accurately mirror the games nowadays)?

AGREE!!! I've never had a problem having my main team knowing HM moves. Cut isn't that bad of a Normal type move. Strength isn't either. And since it's pointless to have a Pokemon will all same type moves, having one of these isn't a bad thing. I find use for almost all of the HMs on my main team.

Doppelgänger
June 7th, 2010, 11:10 AM
Hmm. That'd be pretty weird because I would be so use to having only 6 in my party since it's been like that in all the games since the beginning. So I don't really like that idea.

JakeyBoy
June 7th, 2010, 11:13 AM
If one brings along 7 or 8 Pokemon, or even 20 to 30 Pokemon, that is just carrying them around. But in this case, it would be impossible to shower each Pokemon with the love and care they need. Only researchers like us look forward to collecting as many Pokemon as possible. Any trainer with 7 to 8 Pokemon is not well-liked. That's why even in the Pokemon League, there's the official rule that every trainer can only use 6 Pokemon. And this is exactly the number where a trainer can obtain the best balance.Just thought this belonged here. This is NOT my argument. My argument is that they wouldn't have chosen 6 in the first place if it wasn't perfectly perfect, and they wouldn't change something so trivial.

Porygon Z
June 7th, 2010, 11:19 AM
I'd like to have 6 Pokèmon as usual, plus 2 slots only for HM Slaves or Quest-Pokèmon involved (if there will be).

GlitchCity
June 7th, 2010, 01:09 PM
I dont mind HMs at all, but having more than 6 pokemon in your party.....thats breaking tradition in my eyes.

Latios Master
June 7th, 2010, 01:45 PM
I would not want to see the number of Pokemon in your party change.

shengar
June 7th, 2010, 02:30 PM
It's quite revolutionary, many people will opposed it. Maybe they can increase the pokemon party member in single player game, and limit it back to six when competitive play. Or perhaps six pokemon mode as a rule for competitive play

WiiMann
June 7th, 2010, 03:13 PM
Sorry bud...I just think it would be to weird, after playing the game for about 13 years i wouldn't by the game if they did that. It'd be weird to pick up one game play it and then go to my Black/White copy and be able to have 8 pokemon......just not feeling it.

Mclarenf1905
June 7th, 2010, 05:59 PM
a party of 6 is perfectly fine with me. no real reason to have more, though perhaps maybe a 7th slot as a dedicated hm slave, ie the Pokemon can not be used in battle but you can still use their moves outside of battle, or a spot dedicated specifically for an egg, and when the egg hatches it gets sent to the box if there are no open spots in your party..

metalflygon08
June 7th, 2010, 06:27 PM
I'd rather just stick wit the six (though HM items to replace weaker HM's would be good, or better types for some Cut-Bug, Strength-Fighting, Rock Climb-Rock)

Thunderpunch
June 7th, 2010, 06:33 PM
That's a terrible idea. Would you really want both sides to be able to bring a large army of pokemon into a battle? Where is the strategy there, not having to choose who to bring?

linkinpark187
June 8th, 2010, 02:00 AM
6 Pokemon is a pretty well-rounded number. If you increase that, you're going to upset a balance that's been in place for over a decade. Having eight would only increase a trainer's laziness, anyway. Someone else mentioned it, and I'll mention it again, but increasing the number of attacks you can have, even by only one, would be nice. But I'm still pretty happy with only 4.

SargeantMajorKururu
June 8th, 2010, 11:41 AM
There would be the normal 6 pokemon in your team, but there would be a new PC feature where you could put a pokemon on "Trigger Mode". With this, after your 6 pokemon are defeated, this one would come out of the PC and battle. It can't use items, so you can't revive any of your party pokemon, and when you win the pokemon battle you still "lose" the match, and go back to a Pokemon Center, you just wouldn't lose any money.

WiiMann
June 8th, 2010, 12:50 PM
I was totally against this but the egg slot is a pretty good idea, but to be able to have extra pokemon in your team just takes out parts of the strategics in building great team.

DEZTROY4
June 8th, 2010, 12:56 PM
6 is enough..

Stall teams would be torture to play against if it were any more.

Secretstunt24
June 8th, 2010, 11:08 PM
I think having 6 pokemon is part of the challenge of pokemon all together. And that's too big of a change I think. I think the number of pokemon in you party will always be the same. Too late to change it now. Though I do agree HM's can be rather annoying. Especially the various water HM's it's just impossible to have them all in you party, and a battle worthy team.

Ninja Caterpie
June 8th, 2010, 11:15 PM
Competitive battling as we know it would die if you were to add any more Pokemon.

As it is now: "Oh no, my team is <insert Pokemon here> weak! Better figure out how to counter it in my team!"
If this were to be true: "Oh no, my team is <insert Pokemon here> weak! Let's just add a counter in my team!"

no, just no.