You see, these are exactly the kind of vague assertions I was talking about. Just saying things doesn't make them true. No offense, but I asked for specific examples for a reason, and you haven't really provided any. In fact, some of the things said here honestly don't really make sense, like PvE being static while PvP is dynamic. Static and dynamic compared to what? It can't be compared to each other; believe it or not but there have, in fact, been games with combat/battle systems that work both in PvE and PvP. If the fundamental concepts of PvE and PvP were incompatible because one is "static" and the other is "dynamic", that wouldn't be possible. Can you give me some specific examples on how PvE is static while PvP is dynamic?
I'm also not 100% sure what your argument is here, but I think I might understand. Is your point that there are certain scenarios in PvE encounters that wouldn't be considered fair in PvP encounters if it were a player in control of the opposing side of the scenario instead of an AI? If so, that doesn't really hold a lot of water either, considering it's easy enough to both have those scenarios in the single player campaign of the game while not having them in during PvP battles. If not, I'm afraid I have to ask you to explain yourself better.
And why aren't these things possible, exactly? I can't think of any reason. You might need to change a few abilities that trigger on switches as switching is a lot more dynamic in this game, but is the fact that a handful of abilities might need to be rebalanced really a good reason to exclude the mechanic altogether? As for switching, is it possible to compensate for the fact that there are fewer opportunities to switch in PLA? If not, why not?
For that matter, if there are legitimate concerns with the playability of the battle system in PvP battles, is it not possible to come up with an alternate battle system that both preserves the immersivity of PLA's non-simultaneous turn-based system but also allows for switching in a manner more consistent with traditional games? What about a system that's based on real-time and cooldowns instead of turns at all?
The honest fact of the matter is that it is absolutely possible to have a battle system that's both an immersive, balanced experience in single player but also reasonably balanced for PvP. The standards aren't even that high; the traditional battle system sucks, and I say that as someone who's been battling competitively since DPPt and at one point was quite decent at it.
My first portion may have been more vague, but it’s due to stuff already been mentioned. Yes, theoretically, you can have the same system for both, but the things that might be more fine in pve aren’t as fine in pvp. Just an off the cuff example: freeze. Freeze is perfecty fine in story, let’s be real. It’s hard to land, but it’s rewarding with shut the AI down with it. But in PvP, it’s a negative player experience because nothing can be done about it. Thankfully, freeze is rare enough. The traditional style works enough, but that doesn’t mean another style, that is definitely more pve focused, would also work. The negatives of the traditional style are mitigated enough. The negatives of the legends style..would be harder to do so, imo.
The thing with switching in Legends is you can switch in, and it’s not like your opponent is locked into a move at that point. You can switch, and they can then decide how they’ll attack. In the simultaneous turn style, you have more mind games and strategy going. Do they predict you’ll swap and doing something else, can you afford a gamble to attack or nullify their move?
See, but what does a real time format look like? That’s also a bit vague as there can be different ideas of what that looks like. Real time, imo, would shift this from strategy battles to an action/combo battle style. And idk what that would look like or fall to.
You also have to deal with how speed works, and agile and strong being instantaneous is..off. Imo, they’d be better using the system like Ruined King and the game it stemmed from, utilizing cast/charge times. The way speed impacts things can lead to one-sided battles way too quickly, coupled with how much damage actually gets done.
like I pointed out, Wolfey has a whole video on the battle style and why it wouldn’t work for PvP, and he puts it far better than I can. Idk what more you want, as I said, I’ve gone into details on this. And as I also said, if you introduce an “alternate style”, you have to also teach it in some form to the players. But why make two systems then when the core system can work, like how the traditional, simultaneous turn based style does?
