• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Our weekly protagonist poll is now up! Vote for your favorite Trading Card Game 2 protagonist in the poll by clicking here.
  • 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 Affinity

BleuVII

    • 426
    Posts
    15
    Years
    I know it's a little late for speculation on gameplay mechanics, but I had an idea that I wanted to share and get peoples' opinions on. I got the idea while driving to another city and back this past weekend.

    Basically, the mechanic is called Affinity - a number representing the relationships have with one another. Pokemon with high affinity are affected by one another, whereas pokemon with low affinity do not affect each other much. I see it playing out in a few different ways:

    1) Catching pokemon. When you encounter a wild pokemon, and the pokemon you have at the front of your party has a high affinity for the wild pokemon, the catch rate for the wild pokemon would go up. So, let's take two pokemon with a high affinity for an example: Plusle and Minun. If you are trying to catch a wild Minun, and Plusle is at the front of your party, you will have a much higher chance of catching it than if you had, say, a Pidgey at the front.

    2) Battling pokemon. I'm not yet decided on this, but if two pokemon have a high affinity for one another, they would do more damage to one another. I'm thinking of pokemon like Seviper and Zangoose when I say that. The thing I'm not decided on is if "enemies" like Seviper and Zangoose would have a high or low affinity with one another.

    3) Double/ Triple battles. Pokemon with high affinity boost each others' stats in double/triple battles. Take Plusle and Minun again for example. They have a prototype of what I'm talking about with their "plus" and "minus" abilities. But also, pokemon like Electabuzz and Magmar will have high affinity for each other, and will boost each other. Same thing with Slowbro and Shellder, the starters, Clamperl and Spoink, Rhyperior and Geodude, etc.

    I'm thinking that affinity would be a hidden stat, much like IVs and EVs, and each pokemon would have a hidden compatibility chart on a scale of 1-5 with all of the other pokemon. Pokemon of the same type/egg group would be higher in affinity. I have toyed with the idea of making affinity trainable, so pokemon that often do double battles together will become more compatible, but I think that would get really complicated.

    What are your thoughts?
     
    BleuVII said:
    I know it's a little late for speculation on gameplay mechanics, but I had an idea that I wanted to share and get peoples' opinions on. I got the idea while driving to another city and back this past weekend.

    Basically, the mechanic is called Affinity - a number representing the relationships have with one another. Pokemon with high affinity are affected by one another, whereas pokemon with low affinity do not affect each other much. I see it playing out in a few different ways:

    1) Catching pokemon. When you encounter a wild pokemon, and the pokemon you have at the front of your party has a high affinity for the wild pokemon, the catch rate for the wild pokemon would go up. So, let's take two pokemon with a high affinity for an example: Plusle and Minun. If you are trying to catch a wild Minun, and Plusle is at the front of your party, you will have a much higher chance of catching it than if you had, say, a Pidgey at the front.

    2) Battling pokemon. I'm not yet decided on this, but if two pokemon have a high affinity for one another, they would do more damage to one another. I'm thinking of pokemon like Seviper and Zangoose when I say that. The thing I'm not decided on is if "enemies" like Seviper and Zangoose would have a high or low affinity with one another.

    3) Double/ Triple battles. Pokemon with high affinity boost each others' stats in double/triple battles. Take Plusle and Minun again for example. They have a prototype of what I'm talking about with their "plus" and "minus" abilities. But also, pokemon like Electabuzz and Magmar will have high affinity for each other, and will boost each other. Same thing with Slowbro and Shellder, the starters, Clamperl and Spoink, Rhyperior and Geodude, etc.

    I'm thinking that affinity would be a hidden stat, much like IVs and EVs, and each pokemon would have a hidden compatibility chart on a scale of 1-5 with all of the other pokemon. Pokemon of the same type/egg group would be higher in affinity. I have toyed with the idea of making affinity trainable, so pokemon that often do double battles together will become more compatible, but I think that would get really complicated.

    What are your thoughts?
    Click to expand...

    It's a bad idea really.

    1. Use different balls, what Pokémon you have out should not make a difference as the Pokémon is not doing the catching.

    2. It would be confusing to pair Pokémon up, would every one have a pair? What if one has a typing advantage making it even more unfair? Would my Plusle be useless against fighting a minun or will it be doing lots of damage :S.

    3. Plus/Minus, Helping Hand, I'm sure there's a few more examples (and probably new abilities and moves with the introduction of triple battles).

    Basically no, it's too confusing really. Especially for a game aimed at 10 year olds and young teens.
     
    SwiftSign said:
    It's a bad idea really.

    1. Use different balls, what Pokémon you have out should not make a difference as the Pokémon is not doing the catching.

    2. It would be confusing to pair Pokémon up, would every one have a pair? What if one has a typing advantage making it even more unfair? Would my Plusle be useless against fighting a minun or will it be doing lots of damage :S.

    3. Plus/Minus, Helping Hand, I'm sure there's a few more examples (and probably new abilities and moves with the introduction of triple battles).

    Basically no, it's too confusing really. Especially for a game aimed at 10 year olds and young teens.
    Click to expand...

    Yes, every one would have a pair. I envisioned it on a scale of 1-4, where every pokemon has a relationship with every other one. It would not be complex, like a scale of 1-255. It would work like a pyramid, where there are a few that fit into the 4 category, a few more that fit into 3, quite a few that fit into 2, and the rest which fit into 1.

    As for the affinity affecting battle, I'm still unsure on that one. It would be the first part of the idea to go. However, I am sticking with the mechanic affecting catching pokemon and double-battling. I'm sorry, but there is WAY too much chance and luck involved with catching pokemon. When I can chuck 20 ultra balls at a hard-to-catch pokemon that has 1 HP and a status effect and still have to pray that it will work, it's getting too much to be a game of chance.

    It would be a mechanic that would make putting together teams even more strategic.
     
    Brilliant idea. You are a genius. 10/10. :)
     
    I like all the ideas, aside from number 2, that's going a bit too far. I'd like to add to your idea. How about affinity can be developed between Pokemon as they stay in the same party? Naturally, those Pokemon would start to get used each other, and it would only make sense that they would start to work better together.
     
    If you're a Fire Emblem veteran like me, think of this as a support system of sorts. If you have a pair of pokemon in your party for so long, they gain a higher affinity for eachother, those in the same egg group, and those that are described as being symbiotic in pokedex descriptions like OP mentioned get a higher base affinity but something like say...a Torchic and a Gastly would have a base affinity of 1.

    I'm imagining a scale like this:
    0 pt. - pokemon that are described as rivals base affinity
    1 pt. - standard base affinity for pokemon with no intrinsic relation
    2 pt. - base affinity for two pokemon in the same egg group
    3 pt. - base affinity for a pair of pokemon described as being symbiotic

    Every 50 battles or so that the pair of pokemon are in the party (even if neither of them battle), their affinity will level up, with 5 pt. being the cap.

    I'm putting way too much thought into something so speculative. XP
     
    Affinity is nice idea but it's to much to work with I would rather have a difficulty setting to make so that the NPC(Trainers) could have a tougher skill set for older players so they can have a challenge but the younger players still have a chance to have it on an easier time compared to 15+ years of age players.
     
    I like this idea very much. I know it probably won't happen this generation but who's to say it won't eventually?

    Good explanations too Bleu.

    shininglatios217 said:
    Questio: Steel and Dark types were some of the first things they revealed for Gen 2?
    Click to expand...

    Question: Is this on topic?
     
    Timbjerr said:
    If you're a Fire Emblem veteran like me, think of this as a support system of sorts. If you have a pair of pokemon in your party for so long, they gain a higher affinity for eachother, those in the same egg group, and those that are described as being symbiotic in pokedex descriptions like OP mentioned get a higher base affinity but something like say...a Torchic and a Gastly would have a base affinity of 1.

    I'm imagining a scale like this:
    0 pt. - pokemon that are described as rivals base affinity
    1 pt. - standard base affinity for pokemon with no intrinsic relation
    2 pt. - base affinity for two pokemon in the same egg group
    3 pt. - base affinity for a pair of pokemon described as being symbiotic

    Every 50 battles or so that the pair of pokemon are in the party (even if neither of them battle), their affinity will level up, with 5 pt. being the cap.

    I'm putting way too much thought into something so speculative. XP
    Click to expand...

    Yes. This. The only changes I would make are the following:
    * The 3 pt base would work for Pokemon that are parallels of one another (example - Seedot and Lotad, Growlithe and Vulpix) or of the same evolutionary line. So a Piplup would have 3 affinity with an Empoleon. Same with a Piplup and another Piplup.
    * Nintendo never lets you do anything quickly. It'd probably be really hard to raise affinity. I'd say a minimum of 100 battles, but probably closer to 200.
     
    I like the Afinity idea but i dont think it should be trainable. srsly ^100 battles? just to train it? If your making a team that means 600 battles!
     
    This would be interesting to work out. It would be even better to work it out and work back into a hack.
    Here's looking at you, Emulation. It would be tough, but how awesome would this be?

    The feature may have to use a slightly larger chart, to allow for "comrade" sort of relationships. Pokemon that battle often together, battle well together.

    0-"enemies"
    1- No relation
    2- "Equivalent" Pokemon- Rattata/Sentret/Zigzagoon/Bidoof or Magmar/Electabuzz
    3- Egg Group
    4- Same evolution line
    5- Related in the Pokedex
    6- Only reached once they're comfortable with each other
    7- Only reached after they're very comfortable with each other

    Triple Battle mechanics would be tough. Maybe something like add the Affinity points all up and divide by something, and that's the total Affinity for the entire team? So a Pokemon who works well with the other two can inspire them to cooperate, but a Pokemon who despises the others will bring them down. Here's an unacclimatized Seviper/Seviper/Zangoose with my system.

    S1-S2 = 5
    S1-Z = 0
    S2-Z = 0
    divided by 3, that's 1 and 2/3rds.

    Seviper, Zangoose, and a Pikachu acclimatized to 5 with both other Pokemon:

    S-Z = 0
    S-P = 5
    Z-P = 5
    Same system, naturally twice the other result, so 3 and a third.

    Zeros are killer. Even if you relegate this feature to being a side calculation, it can still make an impact. I'm not even sure if I got the concept right. It sure would be nice to see, though.

    @EJ.- Answer: Yeah, actually it kinda of is.
     
    I don't really like it. There's already a lot to work with in the games, especially in competitive play.
     
    I like the idea of it being trainable, but in order for that to happen, they'd have to completely overhaul the data structure of pokemon. Right now, each pokemon is "branded" with the owner's ID and Secret ID. In order to train them with each other, each pokemon would have to have a unique ID, and every time a pokemon was put in your party, it would create 5 new lines of code. The only way I could see it working is for each pokemon to gain affinity with a species type, not a specific comrade.

    Anyway, I was thinking that base affinity and learned affinity could operate like IVs and EVs. Maybe you can learn up to 4-5 affinity points which are added onto the base. So Zangoose and Seviper would have a max affinity of 4 or 5, but Plusle and Minun have a max affinity of 7 or 8.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top