Why does the Pokémon World Championship have only doubles battles?

bad gen III feature*

singles are completely unbalanced and stall is an available tactic there. doubles is faster paced, some things are less broken there than singles and stall isn't used in doubles.

>>27803191
The format is a joke just watch ucl or something

This is why competitive pokemon fighting isn't as great as it should.... Singles is the best kind of battle, and the one that really depends on reads/tactics, doubles battles are just spamming multiple dmg attacks, fake out and protect, its shit

Everything in the game is literally balanced around 4v4 double battles. Whenever you think about some stupid broke move or ability, just remember it's most likely because you're not playing the format GF wants you to play.

I always was against double battles untill I tried them out. It's way more fun, action packed and fast paced. Nothings needs to change. Singles is worse

>>27803191
1st, you suck - gen3 is one of the best, if not the best gen.

>>27803208
they could make it BO3 battlespot or make a new meta, like you could pick 4 of 6 pokemon and banning protect+sub. with pokemon like kanga,salamence,lucario and aegisword, they will be no stall.

>>27803241
No, Dark Void is definitely broken in doubles.

Anyway I will say because it makes the games faster. Stall games on smogon go like 150+ turns. These VGC games go like 8.

>>27803191
Doubles go a lot faster so tournaments can actually get finished. Doubles is also somewhat easier to balance, since the powerful setup sweeper role is harder to pull off, as is the unbreakable wall role.

>>27803236
High level doubles requires just as much prediction as high level singles, arguably more because there are so many more options on each turn. VGC 16 doesn't represent that very well, but it's the exception

>ITT: Smogon kiddies

The game is balanced around doubles. I think as of gen 3 gamefreak realized that there's a major problem with the overcentralizing of things like switching in singles and efforts to tone that down with entry hazards, trapping etc just shift the overcentralization to a different spot (which is why every team in OU runs pebbles as an obligatory issue).

Learn doubles, fgts
I used to hate on it too until I got used to it, now I vastly prefer it to singles

>>27803236
This is objectively wrong.

On a single turn in 6v6 singles you can have at most 9 possible courses of action at your disposal (1 pokemon * 4 moves * 1 target + 1 pokemon * 5 switchable party members)

In VGC, you can have up to 28 possible unique actions on a single turn (2 pokemon * 4 moves * 3 targets + 2 pokemon * 2 switchable party members).

File: image.jpg (86KB, 500x562px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 500x562px

>>27803302
>Dark Void
I can't wait for Smearglecucks to be BTFO come November.

>>27803302
Dark void is actually not that broken in most formats, vgc 16 just happens to make it really good. Smeargle with Dark Void was legal in 2014 and 2015, but didn't see huge success in either year because the potential payoff wasn't enough. For starters, dark void only has a 64% chance of hitting both opponents, and they start being able to wake up after just one turn, so often having smeargle is only giving you a little bit of space. It's only worth using Smeargle if you can sacrifice the potential offensive and defensive presence of something else in exchange for the chance of one or two free turns. In most rulesets it isn't practical to exploit those turns enough to be worth the tradeoff. In 2015 there were some smeargle teams, but they relied pretty heavily on Power-Up Punch kanga and Belly Drum Azumarill. Now though, we have Geomancy Xerneas, Primals, and Mega Rayquaza, each of which only needs a couple of turns to tear through anything in the game. Since they're so powerful, the offenses of your non-restricteds can't compare anyways and going heavy support is one of the best options.

Anyways my point is that while Dark Void is stupid in this format, I wouldn't actually say it's broken overall. Dark Void + Moody is some RNG bullshit and I'd love to see that combo gone though.

>>27803191
Doubles is fun. However CHALK is the meta with Battle Tower rules (no box legends, no mew legends) and VGC2016 is that with those legends unlocked.

VGC2014 was the definitive vgc meta. No genies. No genies at all. Genies are cancer in every meta they are in.

>>27803236
>Singles is the best kind of battle, and the one that really depends on reads/tactics, doubles battles are just spamming multiple dmg attacks, fake out and protect, its shit
what the fuck am I reading

Doubles basically has all the same things as singles except there is way more to think about in terms of reads/predictions and there are more types of strategies to use

>>27803208
/thread

>>27803562
Eh CHALK is overhyped just because it did well at worlds. Other team archetypes are still totally viable under 15 rules. 14 was pretty good but it began the reign of mega mom. I would love an Alola-only format with no kanga, no genies, no heatran, no cress. This is all I ask

>>27803568
He's probably just playing shitters. It's like playing low ladder ubers and facing entire teams of frail set up sweepers.

>>27803661
Sadly kang is already confirmed, it was in the Japanese trailer that demonstrated how Dazzling works.

>>27803191
Double is fun and short, you can't stall in a double battle, and it offers chances for pokemon unused in other formats to be played like the Pachirisu or Clefairy and give some diversity to the teams but allowing legends was a shitty choice and every single team is the same

>>27803774
Goddamnit. They better not allow megas or nerf parental bond or something, because I'm so tired of kang.

>>27803191
It's a passive acknowledgement that their own competitive gameplay is a fucking joke thanks to the lack of game balance and good mechanics

>>27803876
i'm fairly certain they will have nerfed parental bond. it's been prominent every year since xy were released, even now with the primals and box legendaries thrown in. that should be sending off alarm bells for them to nerf it.

>>27803208
sadly, this
GF just stopped trying to balance singles after a while

>>27803474
Holy shit anon you know what you are talking about. Do you play in the VGC circuit?

>>27804510
I played online a decent amount in 14, played heavily online and moderately IRL in 15, but haven't played 16 for a couple months. I got pretty fed up with the format + didn't have the time and money to travel to events outside my area. If 17 is an ok format I'll probably get back into serious play.

>>27803297
One of the worst posts I've ever seen. Underage as fuck.

>>27804510
Also please do take my opinions with a grain of salt; I'm a decent player but there are many who are much better qualified to evaluate the meta.

>>27803191
Doubles are more balanced and more exciting. Though 3v3 singles aren't bad, I could see that being an e-sport thing, 6v6 again is just stally, slow and boring.

>>27803802
>allowing legends was a shitty choice
Well that happens only like every 3rd or 4th year?

So its not too bad, what is bad about it is that people see one years shit and think that the rest are the same while its not, since every year has different meta.

>>27804937
2010 and 2016 are the only years of VGC so far where box legends have been allowed. Personally I would be OK with a ban on all legends because Genies, Heatran, and Cress are consistently top picks in every format that allows them.

>>27805004

Cresselia was a pain in the ass in Sinnoh Classic.

>>27804640
>>27804813
Gotcha. I started in 14, loved it. 15's build up was great to the culmination of it with chalk. Funny how no one was prepared for it, so the japs ran rampant that year. Excited to see wtf goes down this year.

As for 16 im in the same situation as you, lack of diversity in meta and money to travel cut my season short. Looking forward to '17 and staying optimistic.

6v6 isn't as stally as people make it out to be.

Most matches are about 5-8 minutes.

File: 1470948454121.png (243KB, 652x603px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 652x603px

>>27803213
>watching ucl

>>27803191
Doubles is more balanced and faster paced so it's more suited for tournaments.
And by that I mean, the metagame is so horribly centralized and all the threats are so powerful that every battle is essentially a three minute long coin flip, which is ideal for getting tournaments over quickly so that Game Freak and TCPi can spend as little time as possible pretending the competitive in their game isn't horribly broken.

>>27805839
>horribly centralized, threats so powerful, coin flip
that's true of this year, but not of most

Doubles is more interesting to watch than singles.

It allows for more varied strategies (especially when considering that it's best 2 out of 3 in most places), and is generally faster paced. I, personally, also believe it is more fun to play.

It's just an all around superior format.

I think Nintendo should contact Smogon and make their tournys by their rules.

Smogon OU actually has decent variety and doesn't have broken shit like Dark Void or Mega-Salamence. And if you niggas are so worried about stall they can just ban MegaSableye or something.

>>27803236
I hope this is bait. Otherwise, I don't think you have the ability to think critically.

>>27805919
>Mega Mence being broken
This is why they do doubles, far fewer things are that OP than in singles

>>27806036
Even in doubles MegaMence is broken as shit. Why do you think so many teams use it?

>>27806054
Strong and popular != broken

how do doubles even work, no setup sweepers, no walling, wtf is even left at that point? Just supporting a strong attacker with the other pokemon?

Why do doubles only use 4 per team instead of 6?

>>27806054
Literally anything with an ice move greater than a 60bp threatens it.

More importantly, why are doubles only 4v4?

there is less diversity in doubles than in single...

everyone has the same team in double

>>27806126
http://pastebin.com/CTNNVeyH
here's an example of a popular archetype in 2015.

>>27806153
>>27806172
That's just an official-format thing they like to do. Battlespot singles you only bring 3. It makes battles go faster, and it also creates some interesting teambuilding options. For example, you can have a flexible core and two different megas that you bring against different threats.

>>27806198
VGC 16, yes. As a general truth, no.

>>27806153
>>27806172
I also don't understand this, what's the reasoning?

>>27806126
Try it and find out

>>27806172
>>27806153
Might have to do with the best 2 out of 3 thing I guess, and there's a certain strategy element in deciding what 4 Pokemon to bring that would be most effective against various combinations of the enemy team.

Does anyone have any statistics regarding 2016 comps? I really hope Nintendo realized that no one likes this year's shitty ruleset.

>>27803236
Bullshit.

tfw you want to see triples or rotation be the mainline format just for the chaos that would ensue.

Wouldn't combo moves be more viable? That's what I wanna see. Stupid but unique strats that aren't just baiting

>>27806778
Well people already used grass + fire pledge on Charizard-Y + Venusaur teams in 2014, so...

>>27803191

because singles take longer due to constant switching for counters and triples are way too fast.

File: image.jpg (46KB, 766x460px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 766x460px

>making doubles the official format
>not rotations

>>27803474
Yep.

People act like it's broken and so forth, but if you went to 2014 and 2015 with it, you were laughed at.

>>27807098
>Rotation
>Even more mind game than single
My mind just exploded when trying to play rotation format

>>27804510
I do play, and >>27803474 is mostly right. Smeargle is only an issue in this format because 1 free turn is literally enough to set up and win. In previous years, 14 and 15, it was often used with Kang, and while it is indeed a powerful mon, there's only so much it can do, even at +2 attack; it can only hit one mon at a time, can be burned/intimidated, can't hit ghosts/faster threats at the same time. Xerneas on the other hand, can boost itself to ridiculous levels, hit both targets and after a single Geomancy, 2HKO 90% of the metagame, and the things it doesn't, are beaten by Groudon which is it's partner very often.

>>27806126
there are set up sweepers and "walling" in some degree, though being a much faster paced format is not that common. having 2 pokemon at the same time enables strategies that aren't possible in singles. honestly is a much better format to see than 150+ turns of purely switching back and forth, which would not be possible due to the timer.
>>27806054
you clearly never even played vgc. MegaSalamence isn't broken at all. Sure, it's very good, but that's it.

>>27806054
Mega Salamence is actually a good example of a Pokemon that is very good without being broken in doubles.

>>27803191

>Doubles are bad

No

>>27808605
>>Doubles are bad
>No

Let me say it clearer: VHC is bad, not doubles

>>27803208
How is singles unbalanced? Unless you're talking about no rules singles, in which cases, you can say the same thing about VGC being unbalanced.

>>27803365
Just because something can happen, does not mean it will happen. It doesn't change the fact that VGC is filled with the same crap being spammed for each team.

>>27805743
UCL drafting is a pretty neat idea, IMO. I'm not sure why you would shit on it?

>>27808634
It's requires a lot more bans to make a reasonably balanced singles meta than to make a reasonably balanced doubles meta. Despite all the memeing about CHALK, VGC 15 was actually pretty balanced with the only bans being Mythicals and box Legends. This is because it's a lot harder for something to truly sweep in doubles - very few mons get access to boosting moves + enough bulk to take hits from multiple opponents + spread moves to KO both targets.

>>27808691
As I said before, that's a problem of VGC 16, not of doubles in general. Look back to pretty much any previous season, or to smogon doubles, or to any of the various battlespot tournaments which were doubles.

>>27808691
but anon, this is literally only because of this year's VGC rules. The past ones have had tolerable diversity in comparison.

So why not triples or rotation battles?

>>27808918
Probably because they've been doing doubles for so long that they don't want to change it. Honestly though I could see them doing triples in a future season to shake things up. Probably in a situation like 16, where they've already had a full-dex format but have another season to burn before new games come out. Given how badly 16 has gone, I don't expect they'll try the "allow Ubers" gimmick again

I don't have any actual experience with competative other than a hundred or so matches with battle spot, and doubles is just so much more fun than singles. Doubles let's me bring in pokemon I'd never be able to use in singles and still win, and I feel like there is a lot more strategy in team building, because you jeed to thing about coverage and synergy a lot more.
But like I said, just casual experience.

>>27808918
I don't know about triples, but for rotation battles they would have to introduce a bunch of shit designed to work with that, since most of the competitive things they do are made for doubles.
Also, I don't think Triples or Rotation are very popular

Doubles is objectively better

>>27810633
Yeah rotation is more similar to singles than to anything else, so it doesn't make use of all the double-oriented moves and abilities. I've played a good amount of triples (standard battlespot and the Festive Feud competition) and it's fairly similar to doubles. I'd almost say that it compared to doubles is like doubles compared to singles: spread moves are even better, weather is even better, field support is even better, etc.