• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

5th Gen 3 on 3 BATTLES!!!!

I think 3 V 3 is way to much to be happening on the screen. Theres gonna be so much surf spam its gonna be ridiculous. I seriously hope there aren't too many triple battles in the game and certainly hope they don't make a colloseum game with triple battles only.
 
I see earthquake, surf, explosion, and other similar moves spammed in the near future.
I think this might help to get through battles faster, but it would be a very difficult to cover each pokes weakness.
 
Guys, remember, surf and EQ's damage will decrease though.
2 on 2 advice said:
There are certain attacks that, when used in a Double Battle, target multiple Pokémon. These can generally be divided into two types: Two-Target Attacks and Spread Attacks. Two-Target Attacks hit both opponents, while Spread Attacks hit both opponents and the user's partner. In Diamond and Pearl, whenever a move targets multiple Pokémon, its power is reduced to 75% of its normal strength. The disadvantage is that you won't hit either opponent with the full strength of the move. The advantage is that, resistances and weaknesses aside, you'll be dealing more damage overall.
Click to expand...
So they might not be used oh so much if they're not going to do a lot against three.
 
Purely speculation, but I think triple battles will be 50% power for those moves. Which, as I said above, would really weaken Explosion. Since the self KO certainly doesn't go 50%.
 
Three on three's sound like fun.
At least the game's are catching up to the anemie.
The shows done this since gen 1 for crying out loud.
Ash, Misty, Brock vs Team Rocket.
 
I did't care for the Double Battles, so I can already see my not caring for the Triple Battles. You can say I'm 'blinded by nostalgia' or whatever, but I like 1 on 1.

tvoza2 said:
Three on three's sound like fun.
At least the game's are catching up to the anemie.
The shows done this since gen 1 for crying out loud.
Ash, Misty, Brock vs Team Rocket.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I've always felt the Game should be kept out of the Anime's universe... that crazy world where a Pikachu can take down an Onix with electric attacks...
 
Last edited:
Patchisou Yutohru said:
One thing I can see affecting this, though, is the radius when trainers can actually spot you and battle you. I remember there being three trainers all within a radius that would all spot you if you walked in the middle of them, but one trainer's radius was different to prevent the three from battling you at the same time, since that feature wasn't included in past games. So that's kind of interesting.
Click to expand...

Perhaps that was some type of interesting foreshadowing intentionally put there. o.O And I also see it as improbable;what are the chances of running into three different trainers at the same time? It'd be neat if this feature was implemented in busy areas, because that would make more sense than randomly running into three different people simultaneously in a forest or something.

Besides that, I'm not sure how to approach this new feature. Maybe it's a little too much...they started with 1v1 battles which were fun, and then 2v2 to spice things up a little, but 3v3...What's next? All your Pokemon out at the same time? =x
 
Last edited:
I expect much lag with the fact all 6 pokemon battling will be moving aroung (that was one of the old released details) I still wonder if any will be in game.
 
3-3 would be so annoying and time consuming. this better be fake, going overboard
 
Jerme said:
3-3 would be so annoying and time consuming. this better be fake, going overboard
Click to expand...

It's not fake.

I think it's a pretty nice idea. I mean, DP threw us into the physical/special split and we've learned to cope. Of course, some of our favourites got severely dented in the process, but along came many advantageous boosts. We shouldn't be so quick on the draw and shoot bullets at blurry targets. First, we should probably learn how it's going to play out. For all you know, there could be a whole different system when it comes to 3-3 battles. I mean, all we have to judge upon right now is a sole trailer/image. We haven't even seen it in action, people.

I think that the whining (or, 'opinions,' if you prefer, but if you do, they are rather prejudiced) should be minimized because we don't even know how this will play out. With double battles came new moves such as Helping Hand, and with triple battle will arise moves based on triples.

Nonetheless, I've always favoured battles featuring more than two pokemon at a time, as it causes the battlers to focus more on strategy than raw stats and movepools, which is why I've always wondered why single battles were so focused on. And of course, adding more pokemon into the fray will only increase the strategy play, which I see as beneficial. Also, yes the screen will be a bit more cluttered, but I foresee the health bars going horizontally, as stacked would just cover up the opponent.

Maybe you all don't like certain things happening (such as an earthquake nullification, as said earlier, I believe) but there will obviously be new features to compensate for losses.

Game Freak may be risky, but not stupid, after all.
 
Wow. 3v3 is like insane. :D

I'm having mixed feelings over the subject. It can be fun to have 6 players battling at once (each sending out one Pokemon) and that could be fun to do a 3v3 player match.

But this may also have something to do with the shooter feature as well. It wasn't included in the regular 1v1 or 2v2 battles, so it may be for special 3v3 battles.
 
The idea was a bit weird to do triple battles, 2vs2 was enough. 3vs3 is half your team, and what about the screen? I don't like the idea, competitive play a definite nono but in gameplay it'd be fine with me.
 
Air Pichu said:
The idea was a bit weird to do triple battles, 2vs2 was enough. 3vs3 is half your team, and what about the screen? I don't like the idea, competitive play a definite nono but in gameplay it'd be fine with me.
Click to expand...

Why not? I can understand your opinion of not liking it in general, but how would it be bad for strategic play? It would lead to better strategies with nicer combinations and team variation. In a single uber battle, a parasect for example would be pretty useless. But once you throw in two other pokemon that are there to help it? Then you have a beast.

It'll definitely bring out old pokemon from the past and thrust them into the future, that's for sure. Whether this whole idea folds or not, we will definitely see re-arranged tiers.
 
I'm sure the battles will be interesting for sure, but I barely adapted to 2 on 2 battles and three on three seems more like a move to make the battles more intense. No offense GameFreak, I already had a bad habit of throwing my Gameboy at the wall when I lost to the Elite 4, I have a feeling these battles will be the same... :/
 
One of the things that I thought with this update was that it reminded me a heck of a lot of 'Telefang', especially with the 3 on 3 battles (Telefang being the 'fake Pokemon Diamond/Jade' games...if you don't know of them google away!). And for all the flaws Telefang had (cough) three on three battles in it was pretty fun enough.... and the system was much simpler too (for instance no hit-all-enemies attacks like Surf, leastways in the 1st one). IMO 3 on 3 with Pokemon could work out to be a pretty fun situation with a bunch of options to use - hard to judge though without trying it out though but I feel it has potential. And as mentioned many other games go beyond 3 on 3 battles as well with even more complexity than Pokemon does.

As for when it is used... we do not yet know how often 3 on 3 is used - maybe it'd be only a few times in the game? (Certainly you fight what'd likely be the rival in a 3 on 3 battle, or in a wifi battle alternatively). As for those who asked about what point 3 on 3 had... probably the same as 2 on 2 battles had point-wise. =p They're enjoyable IMO, and for many others too, so 3 on 3 may have its lure for lots of people as well - simply adds another aspect to playing the game I suppose.

Too early to properly judge imo, and even if it's bad I do have my doubts that it'd be used often either.
 
sirboulevard said:
I'm sure the battles will be interesting for sure, but I barely adapted to 2 on 2 battles and three on three seems more like a move to make the battles more intense. No offense GameFreak, I already had a bad habit of throwing my Gameboy at the wall when I lost to the Elite 4, I have a feeling these battles will be the same... :/
Click to expand...
:shocked: don't throw it! it doesn't feel anything, only you!!!
 
Okay the main thing is earthquake, surf, and other group attacks are now going to be EVEN WORSE!
nothing upsets me more than my empoleon using surf and doing half the damage it should to each of the pokemon!
Crowdedness not only with the sprites but also with the health bars!
I don't think most people realize how much room those things take up haha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top