5th Gen More than 6 Pokémon in your party?

[EmpoleonRider]

Eh I wouldnt mind it but 6 is good

 

[Darkness98]

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~]

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]

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]

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.

 

[mikey]

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]

[QUOTE="Oak in Adventures]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.[/QUOTE]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]

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]

I dont mind HMs at all, but having more than 6 pokemon in your party.....thats breaking tradition in my eyes.

 

[Latios Master]

I would not want to see the number of Pokemon in your party change.

 

[shengar]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

I actually had an idea of 7 pokemon.

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]

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]

6 is enough..

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

 

[Secretstunt24]

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.