Jump to content
  • 1

3v3 Singles and 4v4 Doubles PvP Formats Implementation


AFDC98

Question

One of the things that puts me off the competitive scene in PokeMMO is that PvP matches tend to be really long, the shortest being 20 or 30 minutes. There can be exceptions, like a good player literally destroying a noob, or someone not as experienced, but PvP battles generally result in boring Pokemon Switches, Leftovers, Walls, Tanks, etc. (at least in my experience, note that I've played 10 or 20 battles at most, I don't know how is it like with more experienced players but I'm guessing a similar situation considering the length of some tourneys).

 

Like I said, I'm not very interested in the competitive scene, neither I'm any good at it, (probably because I have no perfect breeds nor much experience). Nevertheless, I still think playing PvP is fun, so I suggest implementing new Formats with different restrictions to make battles quicker and more engaging for new players: 3v3 Single Battles and 4v4 Double Battles. These formats are well known within the Pokémon competitive community as a whole (Smogon thread explaining 3v3, mentions 4v4 doubles in VGC: https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/an-introduction-to-3v3-singles-aka-bss.3601012/, Side Event Schedule from 2015 Pokémon National Championships with both 3v3 and 4v4 events: https://www.pokemon.com/us/play-pokemon/nationals/2015/side-events/).

 

I think this would be a great way for introducing new players to the PvP scene, considering that it requires less resources per player to breed the necessary Pokémon and battles would become something quick, not so much a nuisance.

 

I'm not saying that these formats should be ranked. PokeMMO has a great battle system and I think 6v6 is most balanced of the formats (correct me if I'm wrong). 3v3/4v4Doubles would be nice side formats, just like in VGC, where quick wins could net you some BP (maybe 100-200 per win?), or even no BP at all, just for fun.

 

I'm not saying these should become the next metagame, nor substitute the other established formats. Like I said before, it would be modes for quick battles, and of course completely optional, never intented to substitute the already established PvP meta.

 

Some advantages are:

  • Quicker matches (great in my opinion, in case you're busy).
  • Easier for new players, also great, considering the wave of new players coming from Android platforms.
  • Cheaper to enter and be competitive at them (you would have to breed half the Pokémon).
  • More variety for tourneys/matchmaking.

 

Disadvantages:

  • Divide PvP playerbase → If these formats manage to attract more people like me into PvP, this wouldn't be a problem.
  • Not balanced at all → You can get around this since it could be made so you have to bring 6 Pokés to the match and then choose 3 to battle (4 if doubles) based on Team Preview (or seeing your opponent's full team before battle), though that feature is still to be implemented, I guess. After that, you could increase the number of matches to 3 (or the first 2 wins), especially in tournaments, with the same 6 interchangeable Pokémon, to make it more competitive and fun to strategize (also trying to guess the next 3 Pokémon of your opponent and their moves).
  • Not enough players to maintain them → This can be a problem, because only a small minority is probably interested in these formats, but I sure think they make for a nice distraction, and I want to make my opinion known so more people is interested in them.

 

I'm not very well versed at Pokémon PvP, so I can't possibly know the full consequences of this, not how hard of time-consuming it is to be implemented, or even if the game and the players want these formats, but if you've read until this point and you want to give feedback to this suggestion I ask you to do so, and also upvote this post if you want to see this idea become a reality.

 

I'm open for discussion below. Thanks for reading.

Link to comment

4 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

there is another way to make pvp more interesting and take much less time, banning all the wall like chansey, blissey, skarmory and others the meta is all about wall wich just turn into a fight of who has more pp or patience. i usually try going into pvp once in a while and when i get fight with people that don't use wall (not talking about noobs) it's usually a good and fun fight and even when i loose i am happy becaus it was a fun fight and i want to do more until i have to fight someone with a team of walls that nearly never attack you (usually doesn't take long before i find such a person).

 

but there was many request to change pvp or add other mode but they all have been rejected for the same reason the community is to small to split it becaus tier like NU are like the name implies never used allready

Link to comment
  • 0
8 hours ago, AFDC98 said:

I think this would be a great way for introducing new players to the PvP scene, considering that it requires less resources per player to breed the necessary Pokémon and battles would become something quick, not so much a nuisance.

 

Some advantages are:

  • Quicker matches (great in my opinion, in case you're busy).
  • Easier for new players, also great, considering the wave of new players coming from Android platforms.
  • Cheaper to enter and be competitive at them (you would have to breed half the Pokémon).
  • More variety for tourneys/matchmaking.

 

Disadvantages:

  • Divide PvP playerbase → If these formats manage to attract more people like me into PvP, this wouldn't be a problem.
  • Not balanced at all → You can get around this since it could be made so you have to bring 6 Pokés to the match and then choose 3 to battle (4 if doubles) based on Team Preview (or seeing your opponent's full team before battle), though that feature is still to be implemented, I guess. After that, you could increase the number of matches to 3 (or the first 2 wins), especially in tournaments, with the same 6 interchangeable Pokémon, to make it more competitive and fun to strategize (also trying to guess the next 3 Pokémon of your opponent and their moves).
  • Not enough players to maintain them → This can be a problem, because only a small minority is probably interested in these formats, but I sure think they make for a nice distraction, and I want to make my opinion known so more people is interested in them.

so a snipped the bits I'm not gonna reply to or were mostly filler.

 

First of all, some of your main points for these formats are that they're easier/cheaper to enter due to requiring less pokemon, and that they're faster. However, you also acknowledge in "Disadvantages" that these formats actually DO require 6 pokemon, as you bring a team of 6 and then select the pokemon you'll use, and that formats like these are typically Best of 3, so it doesn't make matches TOO much faster, since you're playing more games to compensate.

 

So, based on this, you're already aware that a good half of the points in favor of these formats aren't really true. You still need 6 pokemon to play them, and although the games are faster, you have to play more of them. Plus, people will probably push the timer a lot further in these shorter games, since they have less turns to worry about timer management. Ultimately, I wouldn't be surprised if it Bo3 sets were faster on average, especially because of the 2-0 blowouts, but it shouldn't actually be insanely significant.

 

Ultimately, though, aside from all that, not wanting to divide the PvP Playerbase is a pretty big deal. It's why the TC doesn't want to add RU; NU is already struggling with relevancy & support, why add another format? Adding alternative OU formats would make the problem even worse. There's already a pretty decent variety of tier options in the game, and sometimes there's even gimmick tournaments, more official, major formats aren't really necessary right now.

Link to comment
  • 0
8 hours ago, Senile said:

First of all, some of your main points for these formats are that they're easier/cheaper to enter due to requiring less pokemon, and that they're faster. However, you also acknowledge in "Disadvantages" that these formats actually DO require 6 pokemon, as you bring a team of 6 and then select the pokemon you'll use, and that formats like these are typically Best of 3, so it doesn't make matches TOO much faster, since you're playing more games to compensate.

I think that carrying 6 Pokémon and picking 3 and Best of 3 matches should be features only available in tournaments 3v3, not in matchmaking, considering matchmaking wouldn't be ranked and tournaments are much competitive. And even if we apply these rules to matchmaking, I would prefer it over the current system. Remember the main goal here is to have fun, and more formats would be a deal-breaker, at least for me.

 

Plus, even if you carry 6 Pokémon, that doesn't mean you have to breed and train them all perfectly. You can end up using those you are more comfortable with or the most refined ones.

 

Anyway, I acknowledge that the real problem here is the small playerbase, and probably not many people are going to play these formats, but I just think variety is what PokeMMO PvP needs.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.