• Welcome to The Cave of Dragonflies forums, where the smallest bugs live alongside the strongest dragons.

    Guests are not able to post messages or even read certain areas of the forums. Now, that's boring, don't you think? Registration, on the other hand, is simple, completely free of charge, and does not require you to give out any personal information at all. As soon as you register, you can take part in some of the happy fun things at the forums such as posting messages, voting in polls, sending private messages to people and being told that this is where we drink tea and eat cod.

    Of course I'm not forcing you to do anything if you don't want to, but seriously, what have you got to lose? Five seconds of your life?

The Suggestion Box

Metallica Fanboy said:
Why talk about what people can and can't do, when the discussion is whether a Pokémon could or couldn't?

Personally, I see little reason to implement that, seeing as it hardly makes a difference -- it's a whole system around one move (and one ability, but nobody mentioned that yet). And if sexuality is enough of an issue to warrant this change, then we might as well knock binary gender off and let people have Pokémon who identify as a gender other than their biological gender. Not saying the idea is ridiculous, of course.
Click to expand...

Well, it takes a little suspense of reality considering how in the form of ASB it's still going into sanctioned fight territory (Though I prefer to think my 'mons are deciding for themselves despite how I command, or taking me as a coach as opposed to a 'boss'), but I personally see Pokémon as being near, if not as capable as humans, intellect-wise. I treat all of mine very personally and tend to have some sort of backstory and personality pinned to each, that's why it tends to upset me when, say, one of my Lesbian 'mons gets woo'd by a dude - even in the context of 'acting' and 'battle'.
Also, there's also the likes of Captivate, and possibly Rivalry which could come into play. Rivalry would just, presumably, switch the genders it affects just like the moves. (Males get a boost against females, a penalty against males, vice versa and etcetera)

Also, as far as I'm concerned, a 'Mon who identifies as the other gender is treated the same way as a transperson, in that their preferred gender /is/ their gender. I'm not against specifying it, of course, but if you have for instance a FtM Pokémon who prefers females, he's simply a straight male.

Karkat Vantas said:
You could always make homosexuality into a sig attribute if you'd like.
Click to expand...

Little Bluberry Bomb said:
- Could we perhaps have the option to specify a Pokémon's romantic preferences in relation to moves affected by gender without using up a signature attribute? It always kind of bothered me how.. well, how Attract works in general, but that Pokémon only show a single alignment ever, sans one case of the aforementioned attribute.
Click to expand...

...Way to miss the point entirely. The idea is that being queer shouldn't have to be a Pokémon's only unique, defining characteristic.
 
I think there's plenty enough to keep track of on every pokémon without adding another field for sexuality. It just seems like a lot of administrative upkeep to cover one attack that might get used on a pokémon in any given battle.

While ordinarily I prefer for signature attributes to be tightly unified, I don't care if you throw sexuality in there as a rider with whatever else you were going for. This also has the advantage of your being able to define terms however you want, e.g. "Fluffy is asexual so he can't attract other pokémon/Fluffy is asexual but can attract other pokémon anyway." If you really don't want to do that, perhaps you could just ban attract from your battles if you suspect it's going to be an issue.
 
Maybe it's already been suggested, but could a Gym-Leader system be implemented into the ASB? Perhaps it's just a ridiculous amount of effort for administrators, or something that just couldn't be worked out or kept track of, but it does seem like a healthy system. Other ASB systems (look at Seribii) have Anime-Style Battling Gyms, and I can't seem to think of any reason why it would be a huge problem, except, of course, that I don't really know about the upkeep/administrative effort involved, which may be the deciding factor.

Anyway, just throwing it out there.
 
I know. I mean, at the moment it's just a system of random battles, and aside from the tournaments and competitions, there isn't really any reward or drive for playing the game. I think it would help and really bolster the popularity of the concept, and of the game.
 
Just horsing around is more than enough reward and drive for me, thanks; speak for yourself. I don't need gyms to prove I'm better at this than just about everyone else anyway

That said, the gym system is not a bad idea in and of itself. I believe there were plans to find gym leaders and run with that a long, long time ago (the "Contests and Tournaments" forum was named something like "Tournaments and Gym Battles" before the crash, iirc), but it never happened for various reasons and as far as I can tell Negrek's attention has since been elsewhere.
 
Originally, there were going to be gyms; there was a tournament way back when the league started to determine leaders. The problem with tournaments is that they have a tendency not to finish. Establishing gyms wouldn't be difficult if I were simply to pick people to be the leaders, rather than having leadership determined by a tournament; that's more or less the way it's worked out in leagues that actually use the gym system. The only real downside to having gyms is that they are a drain on referee resources that could go towards normal or tournament battles, but if gym leaders are restricted to only one gym battle at a time or something, then it's not a big deal. (On the other hand, it then takes ages and ages for anybody to earn badges.)

As for whether there actually will be gyms, it's entirely possible. I am well aware that ASB as it stands lacks a clear and compelling progression sequence, which would keep some people more interested in it. The trick is to find a way to provide this without making following it necessary for success; there are plenty of people who just want to ASB occasionally, having fun battles with their friends, and wouldn't be interested in building towards any particular goal. Ideally, the league should be able to provide enjoyment for people with both playstyles.

I haven't decided on the best way to do that yet. There's nothing particular in the works, but it is something I'll probably be thinking of a lot more in the future.
 
Negrek said:
Originally, there were going to be gyms; there was a tournament way back when the league started to determine leaders. The problem with tournaments is that they have a tendency not to finish. Establishing gyms wouldn't be difficult if I were simply to pick people to be the leaders, rather than having leadership determined by a tournament; that's more or less the way it's worked out in leagues that actually use the gym system. The only real downside to having gyms is that they are a drain on referee resources that could go towards normal or tournament battles, but if gym leaders are restricted to only one gym battle at a time or something, then it's not a big deal. (On the other hand, it then takes ages and ages for anybody to earn badges.)

As for whether there actually will be gyms, it's entirely possible. I am well aware that ASB as it stands lacks a clear and compelling progression sequence, which would keep some people more interested in it. The trick is to find a way to provide this without making following it necessary for success; there are plenty of people who just want to ASB occasionally, having fun battles with their friends, and wouldn't be interested in building towards any particular goal. Ideally, the league should be able to provide enjoyment for people with both playstyles.

I haven't decided on the best way to do that yet. There's nothing particular in the works, but it is something I'll probably be thinking of a lot more in the future.
Click to expand...

Why not make it like the Battle Tower in DP, where you choose which one to fight first, so there can be a max of 5 battles(like the castle, arcade, etc), not TOO many, but wont takes ages for people to wait.
 
For selecting Gym Leaders, could one apply the system they used at PFU? They had everybody go into one single battle (much like the Mosh pit one) and essentially fight to the death until there was the desired number of battlers left. Refereeing would lack a ton of description, but it would still work. I think it would finish quicker than all of those individual battles.

Arguably, that tournament never finished (I can't remember if it was from lack of interest, the forum shutting down, or Jax Malcolm leaving), and considering the number of people who would want to enter it would be quite a hassle. Maybe use Effercon's ranking system to determine who could participate?

I'm really just spitballing here, but consideration of my thoughts would be nice.
 
Would these theorical gyms be monotype? If so, then splitting the candidates into their desired types would ease the pressure a lot.
 
Metallica Fanboy made me remember another crucial detail. Before the battle, each trainer had to choose a certain type that they wanted their gym to be, and they had to use a Pokemon of that type for the battle.
 
The problem, that I can see, with that is if, for example, 1 person used a Grass-type and 4 people used a Fire-type. It's unlikely that the Grass trainer would last very long in that battle.
 
Which is why the battles should be split into types. I'm not sure how you would figure the rest out, though.

Of course, we could never use the definitely not convenient tournament taking place at the moment that will result with eight quarter-finalists. No. Never.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom