• 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?".
  • Staff applications for our PokéCommunity Daily and Social Media team are now open! Interested in joining staff? Then click here for more info!
  • 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 Styles

Hikamaru

    • 50,218
    Posts
    13
    Years
    In the games, we have many different battle styles as of the latest generation.

    Everything started out with the usual single battles, which is still the most used format out there although we have gotten new formats as the generations went on, starting with the introduction of double battles in 3rd Gen, triple and rotation battles in 5th Gen, and now inverse battles in 6th Gen which completely turns everything on its head.

    Which battle style is your fave and why? Do you ever have strategies in mind for different formats? Would you like to see more new battle styles introduced in future games?
     
    I am with eros on this one. I love double battles. They can be quite the challenge, and it's cool to see all the unique strategies you can make for them. Likewise, I hate rotation battles. They're just rather annoying, what with the whole shifting around Pokémon and stuff. Usually I don't even bother, and just let my first Pokémon handle it all.

    The thing about all the battle types is that the core games just don't have them as much! Double battles were a new thing in Ruby/Sapphire, but I can't really think of more than a few battles besides Tate & Liza! At least there are more in Emerald. Same thing for Triple Battles in BW, which there are like none of!
     
    Yeah, I'd agree with the two here and say I love double battles the most, just because I like that challenge and strategy you can use to win them. It's always fun. Inverse battles are hilarious because they let you do moves and strategies that you would never do whilst in a normal battle.
     
    Drinking the Kool-Aid here by saying Doubles. I've been doing so on Battle Spot lately and have just fallen head over heels for the strategies you're able to pull off with two Pokemon at a time on the field. I feel like we have enough battle styles, however, and would hope they chill out on it.
     
    I've come to really enjoy Triple Battles, since it's neat having three Pokémon out at once. I never get tired of having three on three battles at the PWT, and in general you find yourself trying to take care of your opponents quickly before they can gang up on you. Even if they were only really prominent in B2W2, they were still neat. I'm not really sure what other battle styles I could think of to consider, but i'd welcome any new ones.
     
    I'm with most of the people said, I love Double Battles.They are so unique and help us to become a good Pokemon Trainer.I hate Triple battles, they are so hard and annoying and i can't handle many Pokemons which end up in losing battles.Rotation battles are also not good for me, shifting Pokemons now and ever will makes me difficult to win the battle though.
     
    It depends, when I want to battle with others, single battles all the way. But if I'm playing story double battles! Not alone, but with someone, like Steven in Emerald, Lance in HG/SS and Barry in D/P/Pl. I loved teaming up with them!

    But if I'm playing online, singles battle yeah. Unless I'm playing with 4 friends, then double battles would be the best option.

    Rotation battles really suck for me I don't think it was all that necessary.
     
    Single and Double battles are really interesting. Although, one complaint I have, is, while the official battle format is Doubles, there are only like a handful Double battles. I feel like if GF put a little bit more emphasis on that format, there could be a lot more things to make the games more challenging, while also providing the people with actual experience in those battles, making it easier for them, to pick up the (official) competitive part of the games.
     
    R.F. said:
    Single and Double battles are really interesting. Although, one complaint I have, is, while the official battle format is Doubles, there are only like a handful Double battles. I feel like if GF put a little bit more emphasis on that format, there could be a lot more things to make the games more challenging, while also providing the people with actual experience in those battles, making it easier for them, to pick up the (official) competitive part of the games.
    Click to expand...

    I totally agree! There aren't enough double battles (and triple battles!) in the games at all. Maybe Game Freak wants them to be "special" or something, but it doesn't come off that way. Adding more special battles would go a long way toward making the game more challenging.
     
    Lost Heart said:
    I totally agree! There aren't enough double battles (and triple battles!) in the games at all. Maybe Game Freak wants them to be "special" or something, but it doesn't come off that way. Adding more special battles would go a long way toward making the game more challenging.
    Click to expand...
    Double Battles being special isn't even the problem. Go to any official Pokemon tournament and you'll see that they are playing Doubles. It is the "standard" format. As the game sorta works as some kind of tutorial for those battles, you'd assume that they actually cared a little bit more about teaching people how to do Double battles, but that's, sadly, not the case.
     
    R.F. said:
    Double Battles being special isn't even the problem. Go to any official Pokemon tournament and you'll see that they are playing Doubles. It is the "standard" format. As the game sorta works as some kind of tutorial for those battles, you'd assume that they actually cared a little bit more about teaching people how to do Double battles, but that's, sadly, not the case.
    Click to expand...

    Maybe they want people to have to battle each other to get better at double battling? That's the only justification I can think of for why they would purposely neglect the format while still pushing it as the standard for tournaments.
     
    Lost Heart said:
    Maybe they want people to have to battle each other to get better at double battling? That's the only justification I can think of for why they would purposely neglect the format while still pushing it as the standard for tournaments.
    Click to expand...
    I really don't think so. Doubles is something, that you don't just pick up by doing some random battles against other people. I'd rather say, singles is the main thing in the main game, because people would start to complain a lot, even more than they already do.

    You know, kinda like all those complaints about GF catering to the competitive scene, and stuff.
     
    R.F. said:
    I really don't think so. Doubles is something, that you don't just pick up by doing some random battles against other people. I'd rather say, singles is the main thing in the main game, because people would start to complain a lot, even more than they already do.

    You know, kinda like all those complaints about GF catering to the competitive scene, and stuff.
    Click to expand...

    I guess so. I think part of it also has to do with GF not wanting to overwhelm new or younger players.
     
    rotation battles!! i find it so much fun trying to predict how the opponent is going to move and countering them. i think i like inverse battles second. it really makes you rethink everything you know about pokemon. it's made me slip up a few times.
     
    I love double battles, but that's mainly because they're rare. It's fun to battle in a different style than you're used to and you can abuse Earthquake plus flying type. Single battles are easier however.
     
    Double battles (and their similar brethren of Multi Battles/Tag Battles) for the win! Starting with Pokemon Sapphire Version may have influenced me a bit, but they are so fun! Lots of strategy that gain viability in the Double Battle Mode that are practically useless in the Single Battle Mode. I also like doubling up the offensive on a single opposing Pokemon, as well as "area of effect" attacks like Earthquake that affect the whole field. I also relish that moment when the match-up becomes "2 Pokemon vs. 1 Pokemon", and the "flow/continuity" in battle that occurs when a foe Pokemon faints by your first Pokemon's attack and has to be replaced by another Pokemon, only for the newly-switched-in foe Pokemon to become helplessly susceptible and fall prey to your second Pokemon's attack in the same turn! (well, at least going by Generation 3 mechanics..) Things like Tailwind and Skill Swap are much more useful and appreciated during Double Battles, too..

    Triple Battles and Rotation Battles seem a bit overwhelming despite my love of Double Battles; I'm surprised we even made it that far (not to mention "1 vs. 5" Horde Encounters)... Inverse Battles seem like a nice variation, as do Sky Battles (although the list of eligible Pokemon still needs revamping).

    As for future battle variations, all I can think of is "Underwater Battles", which Pokemon OmegaRuby/AlphaSapphire should have had.. I hope that all future Battle Towers (and the Battle Dome, Battle Factory, and Battle Palace, if they return) incorporate the Battle Modes of Single Battle, Double Battle, Multi Battle, Triple Battle, and Rotation Battle, with options being available so that you can change the battle flavor (aside from "Standard" Battle, Sky Battle and Inverse Battle could be selectable 'modifiers'), so that things like "Inverse Sky Multi Battle" or "Sky Rotation Battle" are possible.

    Pokemon Emerald did a good job of integrating Double Battles and a Multi Battle; hopefully, future Pokemon games can integrate more Double Battles, Triple Battles, and Rotation Battles (along with Inverse Battles and Sky Battles) into the main adventure.

    I also liked the Hoenn Battle Arena's "Set-KO Tourney" event, although I can see how that battle variation could be limiting for certain Pokemon.
     
    Singles primarily for me, they're just simpler. Doubles are pretty neat though. I find Triples take too long. Haven't really done many Rotation Battles but it seems interesting. Inverse Battles are crazy! A good addition but I don't like having to think too much sometimes!
     
    I'm oldschool. Give me the traditional single battles any day, just to keep it simple. Doubles are interesting but just not my thing (I'm not entirely sure why), and I've yet to experience any of the others (so behind in my games), although rotation ones do look like they would be something that would annoy me as well.

    I want to try out the inverse battles, those look like they could be fun.
     
    I love Rotation, Inverse and Double Battles.~

    Aurorus and Abomasnow are beasts at Inverse Battles! It's funny how Steel-types have a lot of weaknesses from the said battle format.
     
    It's always been single battles for me, doubles are alright and the others I dislike. I just like keeping it simple and caring about 1 Pokemon in a battle, plus it gets all the exp. Double battles aren't too bad, the only thing that annoys me with it is stat changing moves that lower both of my Pokemon's stats and when both the opponent's Pokemon both attack the same Pokemon. Triple battles I've just never got my head around, too much going on and it can really just be a painful experience. Inverse battles can be fun sometimes, they just don't appeal to me. Rotation isn't one I've tried yet, but I don't believe I would enjoy it very much, sadly.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top