>2000+16 >still no 6v6 option in battle spot How can they

We've been over this. 6v6 is a broken meta with all the Megas allowed and shit. The majority of every battle will either be a 6-0 sweep or a stall fest.

Fuck that.

>>29305466
Who cares? I can play a triple battle in battle spot even though thats never going to be an official format. OP isnt asking for VGC to be 6v6, we just want a fucking option to play that format instead of pinging random people on PSS.

>>29305505
>I can play a triple battle in battle spot even though thats never going to be an official format.
Not any more you can't. Also what does that have to do with anything?

>>29305505
>we just want a fucking option to play that format instead of pinging random people on PSS.
Then use a sim. There's a reason why that broken format isn't supported.

>>29304740
>ORAS remake
>No option for Contest battles in battlespot

>>29305466
>I don't like it so it shouldn't exist in that capacity for the people who do like it

>>29306040
>Liking The Waiting Game
I'd rather watch paint dry, or the presidential debate.

6v6 is awful and Gamefreak knows it, sorry pal

>>29306075
Then don't fucking center the games around 6v6 battles if you want nobody to play in that format. Gamefreak is retarded.

>>29306126
(You)

>>29306126
The games aren't centered around 6v6 at all though, opposing trainers in-game pretty much never have a team of 6

>√(4,064,256)
>finally a vgc rating battle mode
Only took half a damn decade.

>>29306126
You can count the number of 6v6 battles in each individual game on one hand, the vast majority of battles are 2v2 or 3v3

File: what.gif (2MB, 244x194px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 244x194px

>>29304740
Aside from horrible balance issues, like getting a STAB surf on most of the enemy team, can you just imagine the framerate issues?

The game can barely handle hordes, so it'd probably take a full 2-3 minutes to register and then execute 12 moves and faint animations

>>29306174
Except the games allow you to use 6 mons in a battle and most of Gym leader rematches, E4, Champion and final rival battles have 6 Pokemon. So if you're playing the game as it should be played and using a full team of 6, the most important battles in the game will be 6v6

Here's your (You)

>>29306223
While I agree the system would shit itself at 6v6, but my 3DS does just fine with horde battles.

>>29306126
>Then don't fucking center the games around 6v6 battles

??????

Anon, have you ever even played a Pokemon game? Barely any NPC has a team of 6, its usually a team of 3.

>>29306232
>1 or 2 6v6 matches in the whole game means the game is "centered around" it
whatever helps you sleep at night

>>29306232
Regardless, it's still a shitty idea. 6v6 would mean they would have to balance some Pokémon even more, just because of a shitty mode.

>>29306299
Except OP never asked for it to be an official format. Gamefreak's official format is only 4v4 doubles yet they have other formats on battle spot that they don't give a shit about balancing. Is it so hard to include the most important format of the main game on battle spot?

>>29306378
>most important format
VGC is more popular than smogon anon...

>>29306388
>of the main game

>>29306223
Anon you silly goose, they were talking about battling on Battle Spot with two teams of six Pokemon, not having all six out at once

>>29306404
see >>29306264 >>29306289

>>29306378
He kind of did, anon.

>>29306426
>most important battles of the game are 6v6
>game is centered around you catching whatever pokemon you want and having a full team of 6
>if you arent retarded, you'll have 6 mons by the 3rd gym anyway regardless of how many the NPCs do
>not the most important format in singleplayer

(You)

>>29306461
So you're saying they should implement a 6v3 format?

>>29306461
To think the topic would get this derailed....

>>29306069
Feel free to do that then, anon

>>29306069
The interesting thing is no one is asking you to play it so no one gives a shit about your opinion on it. We want the option, if you thinks its boring you dont have to select it.

>>29305466
How does masuda dick taste like you whore?

>>29306512
>WE
KEK
It's a shit idea, and it will never be used, thankfully.

>>29306477
Are you fucking autistic? Just because the NPCs don't have a full team doesn't mean you cant or that the NPCs dont have the potential to have 6 mons. You can go online and challenge someone to a 6v6 and only use 1, 2 or 3 Pokemon, same fucking shit, it doesn't mean that the format isn't 6v6.

If Gamefreak wasnt retarded and wanted to promote their formats, then they would let you have 6 mons but at the start of a battle they'd have you choose only 3 to use. Or just have the majority of battles be double battles. But no, they don't do that. The format the singleplayer uses is 6v6, it allows you to use 6 mons in a fight.

>>29306547
>then they would let you have 6 mons but at the start of a battle they'd have you choose only 3 to use.
This is how battle facilities have always worked.

>>29306547
Anon, you were giving the impression that 12 Pokémon were going to be in battle at the same time
>Inb4 no I wasnt!

>>29306541
How could you possible think i included you in the "we"? I meant myself, the OP, and anyone else who wants 6v6. Obviously you're against it, why would i try and speak for you?

I can respect the fact that you think its a terrible idea. But why wouldnt it just be an option? Its not going to be the official VGC format, just like triple battles and singles aren't. Its just another thing for people to do in game who are into it.

>>29306558
Who cares if 99% of the rest of the singleplayer functions in a 6v6 format?

>>29306461
It's already been explained why 6v6 is barely even relevant to single player, but even then, why do you think in-game casual play and competitive online play are related at all? I can use a team of 6 Arceus in-game too, should I complain I can't do that on battle spot?

>>29306541
WUZ

ITT: Bunch of faggots arguing over a misunderstanding what OP, the faggot, was trying to say.

I sure hated double battles and the people that defend them.

>>29306603
HE'S

It doesn't hurt a single thing to have the option. If you don't like it, or you think it's unbalanced, don't play it. Complain about it though, that's fine, but there's no real good reason to not have it.

>>29306705
B-but i think 6v6 is boring so no one else is allowed to like it!

>>29306705
It's not like it's taken out of the game, you can still play 6v6 with passerbys and friends

Random matchup is their competitive play and 6v6 isn't intended to be competitive, it's pretty simple

>>29306793
Triple battles are intended to be competitive?

This is news to me.

>>29306810
Yes?

Though they are gone from rating battles in SM, so I guess not anymore

File: 1475868768631.gif (2MB, 347x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 347x200px

>1998+18
Still no fire dark dogger

>>29306422
oh