• 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!
  • Dawn, Gloria, Juliana, or Summer - which Pokémon protagonist is your favorite? Let us know by voting in our poll!
  • 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

Battle Royal

Jim Slesus said:
Why does the battle end once the first trainer is knocked out? If it's a 4-way free-for-all would it not make more sense for the winner to be the last man standing? What am I missing?
Click to expand...

Just how the battles work. It seemed to be early in Dev, so it may change a little. But it is probably so the loser see who wins, so they don't have to wait and so the battle doesn't drag on for a long time.

Mawa said:
This new Battle mechanic is pretty nice, I agree, but I am not too excited about that. I don't think I'll like it very much. I am afraid to see some people getting 2vs1 or something like that (if they know each other in real life or wathever).
Click to expand...

Yeah that could be a problem, but it is unlikely that you will be fighting someone in a free for all that you know. I would say the matches are totally random, so you aren't gonna be able to team up like that.
 
It's awesome that they're still coming up with new ways to battle, I didn't know this was something I wanted, but I do! I hope it does feature a little in the story, or at least in a specific facility like Inverse Battles or if there is a Battle Resort type area post-game. If you can choose who the other players are online it will be great for PC events!
 
It's a very fun idea. I just wish the battle didn't end as soon as one trainer lost their Pokemon. There should be an option to play till there's one trainer left standing.
 
It's unlikely to lead to that much tactics-wise, but it's there now. This kind of format might work in other games or 'sports' slightly better than Pokémon, because there it just involves doing the same thing and trying to remain secure amidst many other opponents, rather than having to focus on all of these. The luck factor might be a bit high, and hopefully these kinds of things don't become too common in the main plot as yet - and plot-wise battles where one trainer has to go down might be strange -, as they might require a different approach to things which shouldn't yet be the norm. Not that much of a stretch given horde encounters, etc., though.
 
Nice to see this finally be a real feature in-game, but as others have said I'm not sure how well it will work in practice. I get why they have to end it when one person loses all their Pokémon; no one wants to stay just watching others play while you can't do anything (think of why Monopoly is usually kind of tough to sit through once you go bankrupt). But at the same time, these kinds of battles are more exciting when you can see them through to the end, to see who makes it out on top against 3 others, not against 1 other. I can imagine a lot of these battles will end too early because one person's team inadvertently got bodied, which may lead to the battle style not seeing a whole lot of use.
 
This is a pretty cool concept. I love the way that they are still looking to change up battling so we aren't always getting the same old thang.
 
I have to agree that it should wait till at least two trainers go down, or at least let there be an option. I think it was extremely early in development, but they went ahead and showed it.

They tried to make it as clear as possible that the games were still in development and that they might still change some things.

If every uses multi target attacks, the 4th player is going to be extremely unlucky. They might still have counter measures so it isn't completely unfair.
 
IcyIce said:
Just how the battles work. It seemed to be early in Dev, so it may change a little. But it is probably so the loser see who wins, so they don't have to wait and so the battle doesn't drag on for a long time.
Click to expand...

Ok fair enough I guess. Don't get me wrong, Im excited for this and can't wait to try. It's just it doesn't seem right - it seems like the battle would be cut short. If I have beef with player 2, I want to be able to KO him. Not have to quit half-way through because player 3 gets all his Pokemon KO'd. Also, how is the game going to determine the winner of a half-finished battle? Just because you have less Pokemon than your opponent at any given time doesn't mean you lose the battle by any means, nor does it mean you can't win. If it's decided by the remaining number of Pokemon in your party, that's not accurate enough to determine a winner. I'm sure one Blastoise could beat two or three Growlithe (shit example, but I hope you get my point). The loser(s) could still see who wins... they might have to wait a little but that's one of the consequences of losing first in any game, ever.

I'm kind of getting carried away I guess, and like I said I'm excited to try it. Just wish the way the winner was chosen was different. We'll see though!
 
SolarSnivy said:
I think it's whichever trainer KO'd the most pokemon.
Click to expand...

Scoring is based on how many a trainer defeated and also based on how many pokemon they have left. Losing a pokemon may be a penalty during scoring. This much was confirmed during the stream. To get a point, you probably have to be the one to knock out the pokemon.
 
Gah, really? The most KOs? Is that really a viable way to determine the winner with three other players potentially attacking the same Pokemon you are? So really it would just come down to speed? And I guess if you're just barely holding on you can expect every other player to be coming at you, just to get that extra KO? I'm being really negative aren't I :s I guess it's not the worst but still...

You know what would make the most sense, in my opinion? Damage done. Literally the total amount of hit points you've managed to take away from other Pokemon. Clearly HP taken from status conditions you inflict would count towards your total. Yes, no?

EDIT: Actually I guess that would technically make it possible for you to lose all your Pokemon first and still win so scratch that.
 
Talon Flare said:
I wonder if there's going to be a gym that introduces you this new battle type.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it suck if every gym were set up like this? Four-way battle between you and the gym trainers, and then you can only face the gym leader if you win. Your post just made me think of how horrible that would be :(
 
Jim Slesus said:
Ok fair enough I guess. Don't get me wrong, Im excited for this and can't wait to try. It's just it doesn't seem right - it seems like the battle would be cut short. If I have beef with player 2, I want to be able to KO him. Not have to quit half-way through because player 3 gets all his Pokemon KO'd. Also, how is the game going to determine the winner of a half-finished battle? Just because you have less Pokemon than your opponent at any given time doesn't mean you lose the battle by any means, nor does it mean you can't win. If it's decided by the remaining number of Pokemon in your party, that's not accurate enough to determine a winner. I'm sure one Blastoise could beat two or three Growlithe (**** example, but I hope you get my point). The loser(s) could still see who wins... they might have to wait a little but that's one of the consequences of losing first in any game, ever.

I'm kind of getting carried away I guess, and like I said I'm excited to try it. Just wish the way the winner was chosen was different. We'll see though!
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you on this one. I really like the idea of the Battle Royale, but I think it needs to go to the last man/woman/pokemon standing. That is what a Battle Royale is and has always been. Can you imagine two combatants battle through up to 10 different Pokemon, and find themselves with a winner take all battle at the end? I know it could get long, but it would be epic. I am sure it would be insanely popular on Twitch.

Here's hoping that this is something that they expand on as each new game comes out. It has a ton of potential.
 
colours said:
I mean, thinking about it, I guess it's not that bad, if only for the reasoning to prevent long-ass stall battles....really, just imagine all four players running stall-y ass 3-Pokemon teams (if that's even possible) trying to out-stall one other...that's crazy. @_@
Click to expand...

Yeah but that's part of the nature of the game. Same thing happens when you all choose paper in rock, paper, scissors; you stall. I just don't agree with dumbing down the mechanics in order to basically subtract from the game.

But yeah I don't think it's gonna be SO bad... just something to get used to.
 
colours said:
I mean, thinking about it, I guess it's not that bad, if only for the reasoning to prevent long-ass stall battles....really, just imagine all four players running stall-y ass 3-Pokemon teams (if that's even possible) trying to out-stall one other...that's crazy. @_@
Click to expand...

I can definitely where you're going here, because if competitive battling involves a lot of players trying to stall I could imagine how much it'll drag on here. The time limit implementation could be a way to counteract this if it's what I believe.
 
countryemo said:
I think it should be last one standing, not ends when one person gets out... that was a odd choice.
Click to expand...

I agree, the format they went with (ending when one player is out of Pokemon like you said) feels messed up and that's the major flaw I am seeing with this mechanic so far.

Jim Slesus said:
Wouldn't it suck if every gym were set up like this? Four-way battle between you and the gym trainers, and then you can only face the gym leader if you win. Your post just made me think of how horrible that would be
[PokeCommunity.com] Battle Royal
Click to expand...

Yeah it would suck. It would be like a test that proves too hard to you if you don't have the right team, and while we had a Gym Leader use Double Battles in their debut generation (Tate & Liza) we never had a Gym specialize in Triple or Rotation Battles for BW, or any Gyms using Sky or Inverse Battles in XY, just the standard Singles format. So basically, we'll just get the Singles format in the Gyms again and no Battle Royal-themed Gym.
 
Last edited:
I wasnt really hyped about this..but after analyzing the idea..it seems great, looks really fun and most important..its new. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top