So, /vp/, this is my dream mechanic change for Pokémon games,

its all terrible

Needlessy complicated

>>26489634
Pretty interesting idea. I like the name changes and some of the battle mechanics are neat.

Some of the examples are a bit strange however. Abra and Gastly can dive and Togekiss only floats?

>>26489634
while it is an interesting idea its the idiom of anti fun in that its no longer fun for the player as much as its sufferingly complicated to keep track off.
also doent account for what happens if say you only have fishes and battles on land and your last fish pokemons 3 turns runs out

also togetic and togekiss are flying not floating

Interesting ideas, that could bring some new tactics to the game, but it would be a pretty big change for most players, that they probably wouldn't like very much in the beginning.
Maybe try to create a rom hack with those mechanics and see, how players react to it?

>>26489681
It's not really complicated if you think about it past the big text.
Most of the things explained here just make sense.
Like certain moves and abilities not working underwater, etc. It's more or less the same kinds of rules that Sky Battles have now, except now Dive and Swimming battles also follow their own rules, and make more sense than Sky Battles too (stuff like Dustox and Pidgey not being able to participate)

>>26489684
You didn't read properly, did you?

Ghastly doesn't need to breathe air, so it can battle underwater. Abra can just create an air bubble with his psyhic powers (ala Mew in the first movie).

>>26489694
Like I said, it's not complicated. It's just things that would make sense in the real world and what most people not familiar with the game would think. "Oops, I'm underwater, this fire move probably won't work, let me use something else"

> doent account for what happens if say you only have fishes and battles on land and your last fish pokemons 3 turns runs out

Well, you're fucked. Maybe the game can lend you a Pokémon like Lapras if you don't have anything that can swim/dive. If you're on land and only have aquatic Pokémon and can't win a battle/catch a lan Mon, maybe the game can come to your rescue and the professor gives you a common Normal type mon at a proper level.

And Togetic and Togekiss don't flap their wings ever if I'm not mistaken.

>>26489634
Where Underground ability?

>>26489634

This is only necessary for a non-turn based battle system. It's always vexed me about how Lanturn can fight on land, that Onix can use Dig on an ocean (and Wailord can use Dive on land). It's something that wasn't needed to be expanded upon in the games' past and present forms.

I'd love to play a game where I need water Pokemon to battle under the sea, and large water routes require you to train up water Pokemon. However, that centralizes things too much (being able to use Pokemon decently after little training would be necessary, which it mainly isn't right now).

>>26489634
what the fuck is the mechanical difference between float and flying in your example? it makes no sense at all to differentiate between the two. why not combine them into something like "airborn" or whatever.

also this>>26489743

>>26489763

The game could always lend/give you a proper Pokémon to swim on / dive on so kids don't get stuck.

>>26489763
But Charizard kids would get butthurt when unable to use their favorite pogemon while diving

>>26489783
You know what, you're right.
I should change that.

>>26489788

Yeah, but I always feel weird going into a Sky Battle against 3 flying Pokemon with just one. I tend to role play pretty hard in-game, so that's prolly why I mention it.

>>26489795
good.

>>26489798
But anon, I role-play too. I want immersion. I want it to feel like a real journey, and on a real journey I wouldn't be able to use my Emboar to win battles underwater, and if you only have one flying Pokémon going against 3, well, you're shit out of luck. It's what would happen in the Pokémon world.

>>26489812
Also, Sky Battles would always be optional, unless it's a Wind Gym or something, or if they add proper Sky Routes where you meet trainers flying on their own Pokémon and shit.

Now, Surf Battles are pretty standard and common. Dive battles would be a lot less common, less trainers, but just as many wild Pokémon.

>>26489740
>You didn't read properly, did you?
I most certainly did. I think that your reasoning is a bit too specific. So can every Psychic-type battle underwater? I'm sure Girafarig knows how to make bubbles. Can all Ghost-types battle underwater? Pretty sure Chandelure doesn't need to breathe. Can Hitmonlee fight underwater? Pretty sure he doesn't have a mouth.

>Togetic and Togekiss don't flap their wings ever if I'm not mistaken
Now it's just getting stupid. They very clearly fly through the sky. Butterfree and Beedrill deserve "Float" more than those two.

>>26489842
No, you didn't read properly. Otherwise you would have read that I proposed SOME Psychic type Pokémon would be able to make bubbles and SOME Ghost type Pokémon don't need air. The classification would be on a Mon-to-Mon basis, not whole types.

>>26489842
OK, if it bothers you that much, you could classify them both as flyers and floaters. I'm thinking it would be better to merge the two categories anyway like >>26489783 suggested.

>>26489740
You really can't take criticism, can you? Just admit that this is a shitty overcomplicated idea

>>26489842
>Can Hitmonlee fight underwater? Pretty sure he doesn't have a mouth.

that's a stylistic design choice, pretty sure "in-universe" it does have a mouth, as it can be fed in Amie.

>>26489896
Nice arguments you got there
But this is 4chan afterall, as if I'm gonna get upset over this lol

>>26489910
The arguments were already given, it needlessly complicates the game to the point where it isn't casual fun anymore, as pokemon should be. You'll constantly have to keep track of what pokemon to use where and might have to catch some just because of certain landtypes. It's like implementing another form of HM's, which nobody likes.

File: sky battles.png (141KB, 856x768px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 856x768px

>>26489681
>>26489694
>>26489896

If you go look at a thorough explanation and breadown of Sky Battles it looks complicated too, but they're not. This is the same.

>>26489634
I like the types being changed. I'd also change certain type-matches but that's probably best saved for another thread.
Definitely behind changing flying -> wind though. Instead of your classifications I would make *all airborne Pokemon are immune to ground, but weak to electric. Wind type would lose the old immunity to ground and the electric weakness.

>>26489634
it's awesome.

>>26489928
Except HMs don't make sense.
"My Sharpedo can carry me on its back but gee, it can't go underwater at all unless I teach it!" is stupid, whereas "I should have Pokémon that are able to battle underwater if I want to catch a Clamperl" makes sense.

>>26489928
>it needlessly complicates the game to the point where it isn't casual fun anymore, as pokemon should be

>>26489812
>>26489830
>>26489788

>>26489634
There is one of those edgy fan games called pokemon reborn, it has fan made pokemon field effects.
This game is a clear example of how overcomplicated mechanics fuck up the game.

I like it, too bad it's never gonna happen

>>26489931
No, this isn't nearly as complicated looking at all

i don't like it

I think the main problem here is that Sky Battles (and by extension other one-off changes in battle mechanics e.g. Inverse Battles) are really small, non-mandatory parts of the game, so a huge change in battling style is a welcome oddity. On the other hand, if you impose such a huge mechanical change on the entire game, effectively making some Pokemon terribly and needlessly nerfed, you remove the 'casual fun' and 'use whatever you want' aspects from Pokemon, which I would consider the main selling points of Pokemon.

Some of your suggestions like the game lending you a free Lapras really just further complicates matters. You're adding more unnecessary details to cover up the flaws in an unnecessary 'solution' in the first place. This really demonstrates bad design.

Overall I think your idea is shit, but you get points for effort and putting your opinions online.

Also there's little reason to change the type namings; the ones we currently have do well enough at giving us the basic idea of what each type should be associated with. If you really wish to be so stringent, we might as well change 'Fire' to 'Hot', 'Ice' to 'Cold' etc.

Also don't talk about immersion nigga this is a series where a lava snail hotter than the Earth's core can get punched to death by evil ice weasels, common barn swallows can emit eardrum-shattering noises, and land-obsessed terrorists have attempted to cause the eruption of a volcano they were standing on. Pokemon is crazy nonsensical shit and there's little reason to tack things on for the sake of immersion or realism.

>>26490905
Also Sky Battles are pretty intuitive in that they're actually also based on whether a Pokemon's default animation has it levitating above the ground. There aren't any leaps in logic required like Abra being able to bubble itself or Gastly not needing air.

>>26489634
So what's the point of this? Meaning what problems does it solve and how does this make the gameplay more fun? Please don't tell me you thought of this just because you don't like the idea of onix using dig underwater.

>>26489634
>name changes for types
No thanks.

>>26489634
Ground type has become shit

Whoah, preety cool idea. I love it.

That would give more diversity on ingame teams

>>26490970
> Haha Rotom-Fun with balloon. So funny I love it haha you rocks xdxdxdxdxddddxdddxddd

Not improve the game for not remove old jokes is boring and stupid.

>>26489634

Who's to say Doduo can't swim?