But in fact, it isn't based on opinion. Strategy being reduced, battles becoming unfair as well as them taking an insanely long time to complete are all actual flaws.
-
Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.
However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.
We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure. -
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
Why only 6 pokemon?
- Thread starter Chetz
- Start date
But in fact, it isn't based on opinion. Strategy being reduced, battles becoming unfair as well as them taking an insanely long time to complete are all actual flaws.
The Fire Starter
Well-Known Member
How would battles become unfair because of a change in number? By that logic, battles can already be unfair with just 6 pokemon in a team.
Strategy would not be reduced. It may change depending on the number, but strategy would keep a ratio with how many pokemon players are allowed to use. You think it would make things easier on you, but you don't see how it could be harder when opponents take advantage of the numbering as well. It doesn't become so easy anymore.
Insanely long battles can depend on the number. 8 pokemon teams wouldn't be much worse, the most acceptable for me probably being 10. But this is why options can be put in the battling systems. Don't want to battle with 10 pokemon? Choose an option to battle with 4. Or 6. Or 2. With that, everyone wins as the only change is a couple more features. Even if HYPOTHETICALLY (as in I don't see thios happening) we can use 100 pokemon, who knows if some people wouldn't enjoy that? I wouldn't, but I'm not the only person in the world. Other people may enjoy different things.
foxyman1167
From Zero To Hero
Because Nintendo is Satanic, and wanted to piss off the Catholic Church by using 6, the devils number 
Let's see, increasing the number lets players use too many Pokemon which'd otherwise be restricted. The offensive component of a team could now consist of Lucario, Gyarados, Infernape, Scizor, Dragonite and Heatran whereas normally, that'd be restricted. I don't want to up against something like that. 6 Pokemon evidently doesn't make battles unfair, because people would've noticed if it did. 6 wasn't just an arbitrarily chosen number; I'm sure Game Freak tested the game to find out how many Pokemon would be optimum. And it's worked out well.
Building a team requires less strategy and thinking when you can throw together a larger number of Pokemon to do the same job that 6 needed to do previously. During the battle, you have access to say, a larger number of sweepers or a larger number of walls to safely switch in and stall your opponent to oblivion. And no, this doesn't cancel each other out because opposing teams aren't necessarily polar opposites of each other.
We already have options, 6 or below. The problem with making a higher number the "standard" is that the standard format would be broken and that's never good. There's also no way of restricting it in-game.
And just because someone wants 100-Pokemon per battle doesn't mean that it should be implemented, nor does it mean that it's a good idea.
Because Nintendo is Satanic, and wanted to piss off the Catholic Church by using 6, the devils number
giratina hates shaymin
OVER 9000!!!!
6....enough said....
giratina hates shaymin
OVER 9000!!!!
6....enough said....
HoennKyogre
Well-Known Member
Six because it just makes things more organized. And in my opinion, it gives you a better oppurtunity to bond closer with them.
tumbleweed93
Is on the case!
Six is definately an easy amount of pokemon to handle and craft into a team, although I think it would be nice to have a seventh that just follows you about. Or If all six could follow you!
Hey, hey! This isn't pokemon ranger, you know.
poizonsting
Pokemon master
Letting us have 6 Pokemon in the team is perfectly fine, and I won't suggest to change it. What I would suggest is Gamefreak can have us extra 2 slots for HM slaves, that is, we can have 8 Pokemon total in team but can use only 6 at any given point of time, and the rest can only be used outside of battle.
Todoserugi
Never Forget
i think you should be able to get like a portable pc item that holds like 2 or 3 for minor team changes
Carrying a laptop in the hottest volcano, the highest mountains and underwater? Right. If anything the portable PC would contain 5 or 10 pokemon at a time. It could still work though, as you can still only use 6 pokemon and can only switch pokemon outside battle.
The Fire Starter
Well-Known Member
Did you really just apply that logic to Pokemon? What with all the hamerspace that has already been demonstrated?
Devastator2000
Are you high...?
It's logical to have like, 999,999, especially when your bag carries 999 of every item.
BCVM22
Well-Known Member
That's as much the opposite of being "logical" as anything can possibly be.
Amazing that people are still posting stuff like this.
Devastator2000
Are you high...?
How can you fit 999 of every item into one backpack? If that's the case, then you should be able to have way more than 6 pokemon at a time.