losing to a gym leader

[ghostman50]

Im getting Sick of the BS. All the fighting is getting out of hand, Its pointless, SO STOP.

Bottom Line: Ghost has his Ideas, we have ours, thats life, suck it up.

Your wasting your time fighting an argument no one is going to win. Forget it.

Who's arguing? who's fighting?
 
He's presenting his points, im presenting mine... kinda like.. ya know.. a conversation.....   

You, stop bit- crying!
 

Hm... what about... your pokemon losing confidence in you?

I like this idea, but the confidence thing would have to be present in all battle types to really be effective. There will be other things to do in PU besides battling gym leaders.
 
There could possibly be a whole week or month gap in between gym battles.... so what are the poke's to do.. maintain the same level of confidence even though he's battling 100 other times in PvP PvE and NPCvP?
 
 
 
 

[St. Jimmy]

I like the idea of pokemon losing confidence in you, but i agree with ghostman that pokemon should lose confidence after losing any battle. Maybe pokemon could lose more confidence after losing to a gym leader than losing to some other trainer.

[Frenchfry]

I like the idea of pokemon losing confidence in you, but i agree with ghostman that pokemon should lose confidence after losing any battle. Maybe pokemon could lose more confidence after losing to a gym leader than losing to some other trainer.

Actually, the drop should be less from the gym leader. Because losing to a gym leader as opposed to a normal npc is like losing to Mike Tyson as opposed to a mediocre boxer. I would be a bit embarrassed to lose to the latter, while I wouldn't think much of getting owned by Mr. Tyson. At the same time, gym battles are far more significant, so should be a heavy hitter... so now we're gonna have to choose between system-logic and social-logic. What-evs.

[St. Jimmy]

Now that i think about it that makes more sense.

[Jerry]

Hmm... maybe 'link' the confidence level to each trainer level you go up.

Unfortunately, I still don't know how the system of trainer level will work, but it's just an idea. And, a pokemon battle remains a pokemon battle no matter what, so the lost in any case will be the same, IMO. Acquiring badges is just a way to boost that level, while NPC battling, PVP battling etc just help to maintain their confidence at the level they are.

Woops, those are clashing ideas now... perhaps not so much after some thinking... hmm...

How about it?

[Frenchfry]

I like the confidence level. I think it shouldn't be affected by pvp battles, though, because you don't really have to be bad at the game to lose in a poopstorm* of people that are looking up strategies for battles during the battle.

[Jerry]

That can be considered too...

But in any event where you get a good reward, I think that the confidence level should increase (I referring to badges, and trophees from tourneys)

[ghostman50]

I like the confidence level. I think it shouldn't be affected by pvp battles, though, because you don't really have to be bad at the game to lose in a crapstorm* of people that are looking up strategies for battles during the battle.

lol, what do you have against challenges?
 
 
 
Oh, and the confidence thing would also have to rely on how often players are allowed to re-challenge (non-gym related) NPCs. Obviously if the option to re-challenge NPCs is available, the NPCs would end up possessing stronger poke's after subsequent battles (at least that's the idea). So should the confidence lost/gained count more for/against the player when battling NPCs with poke's higher than the base levels ?
 
 There was a thread, a while back, inquiring about re-battling... but I cant find the thread.. nor do i remember if there was a definite conclusion to if it will even be available.
 
And, should confidence gained be applied to an entire team... or just the poke's used. Same for losses, should the confidence lost only be applied to the team, or for all poke's (even the one's in PC)?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[Jerry]

If each pokemon had a different confidence level, that would be another problem too I think. First off, it'll mean more work, then, it also means you can have pokemon that once disobeyed, you put it in a box, and when you retrieve it, it still disobeys you even when you have got badges in between that period. I think that it would rather be attached to the trainer, like some sort of background calculations, on all the pokemon.

Hm... perhaps put it like this (in this 'scale' fashion and level ups):
Get a badge: +30 points
Win a match: +1 point + (negates all the loss due to matches with that same opponent)
Lose a match: -1, -2, -4, -9, -16, -25 (perhaps in this way)
Get a trophee (tournaments): +50 points

Now, there are confidence levels.
Say...
Lv 1 - 10 points
Lv 2 - 15 points
Lv 3 - 25 points
.
.
.
Lv 20 - 1600 points
etc

Negatives will bring down the points, and subsequently levels.
If you lose against a trainer say 5 times using this math, you lose 16 points.
If you now win the 6th time, you get a total of 17 points, that is the lost is cancelled, and you get your usual point. (or your pokemon see that you succeeded in overcoming an obstacle once unable for you to overcome, so they 'appreciate' that effort)

Well, I know this might not make sense, or should the loss be kept? I don't know. Some might find it unfair that after finally winning, the pokemon still don't obey him/her much.

[Frenchfry]

lol, what do you have against challenges?

It's not that I have something against challenges, it's just that, as I said, you can be good at the game and still lose to several other players in a row, just like you can be good at Super Smash Bros. and still lose to one of those wavedash-y tournyfags.

[ghostman50]

First off, it'll mean more work, then, it also means you can have pokemon that once disobeyed, you put it in a box, and when you retrieve it, it still disobeys you even when you have got badges in between that period.

Shouldn't a poke' have low confidence anyway for being stuck in the PC? It actually makes sense to link poke's confidence to the actual pokemon and not the trainer. If the trainer is stuck training his 6-10 wiht 200 other poke's (sparsely used and have low confidence from previous losses) in the PC, he/she shouldnt expect them to automatically accept (obey) the trainer.
 
 

you can be good at the game and still lose to several other players in a row,

Impossible.
 
Pokemon is one of those "here and now" games, as most are. No one cares if you know the rules or if you have an amazing team. Only thing that constitues a "good player" is defeating your opponent at that given point in time. If you're unable to defeat your opponent, then you're obviously no good.
 
fairly simple eh.

[Frenchfry]

If you're unable to defeat your opponent, then you're obviously no good.

I'm going to let the absolute nonsense of this statement slide.
Are you trying to tell me that never, EVER, in the history of mankind, has someone good at something lost to someone else at that thing? Losing to someone else at something does not mean that you're no good at it. Muhammed Ali was certainly good at what he did, but Mike Tyson could destroy him in one punch.
Even in pokemon, I'm assuming that you find yourself to be pretty good at it, right? Don't even TRY to tell me that you've never lost to an NPC, because that would just be a downright lie. And NPCs in pokemon have the worst AI ever. If someone good at the game can lose to an NPC, they can certainly lose to an actual player.

[Jerry]

Shouldn't a poke' have low confidence anyway for being stuck in the PC? It actually makes sense to link poke's confidence to the actual pokemon and not the trainer. If the trainer is stuck training his 6-10 wiht 200 other poke's (sparsely used and have low confidence from previous losses) in the PC, he/she shouldnt expect them to automatically accept (obey) the trainer.

Hmm.. what I had in mind is the PC that we already have in the handhelds, that is, there is some sort of 'stop in time' when you put a pokemon in the PC. If we're really going towards making sense, then you would probably end up with only a small group of pokemon with high confidence.

You can keep 6 with you at a time. Say you switch pokemon each day, still, there will be pokemon which will remain in the PC for more than 30 days (assuming there are 200 pokemon). Should these pokemon experience a drop in confidence too? You are however trying to keep all of them at a reasonable confidence level.

I understand that it makes more sense to link each pokemon to the trainer rather than all of them... maybe we could align it with the system of EXP?

I'm going to let the absolute nonsense of this statement slide.
Are you trying to tell me that never, EVER, in the history of mankind, has someone good at something lost to someone else at that thing? Losing to someone else at something does not mean that you're no good at it. Muhammed Ali was certainly good at what he did, but Mike Tyson could destroy him in one punch.
Even in pokemon, I'm assuming that you find yourself to be pretty good at it, right? Don't even TRY to tell me that you've never lost to an NPC, because that would just be a downright lie. And NPCs in pokemon have the worst AI ever. If someone good at the game can lose to an NPC, they can certainly lose to an actual player.

I agree, because there is also the element of luck in pokemon battles, and by this, I'm referring mainly to critical hits, and the random number generated before each damage is calculated and applied.

EDIT: I think I overlooked something

Of course, losing several matches in a row require sheer bad luck, lol

[ghostman50]

If you're unable to defeat your opponent, then you're obviously no good.

I'm going to let the absolute nonsense of this statement slide.
Are you trying to tell me that never, EVER, in the history of mankind, has someone good at something lost to someone else at that thing? Losing to someone else at something does not mean that you're no good at it. Muhammed Ali was certainly good at what he did, but Mike Tyson could destroy him in one punch.

Im sure he could, he has Parkinson's (sp?) disease and he's like 70 something.
 

Even in pokemon, I'm assuming that you find yourself to be pretty good at it, right? Don't even TRY to tell me that you've never lost to an NPC, because that would just be a downright lie. And NPCs in pokemon have the worst AI ever. If someone good at the game can lose to an NPC, they can certainly lose to an actual player.

I get what you're saying... but what really constitues a good player? beating an NPC, is that really an accomplishment (other than gym leaders and elite 4)?
 
When I say "here and now" game.. i mean exactly how it's said.  No one cares about past accomplishments (so what if you're number 1). There is no possible way to gauge a player's worth in a game until it's actually played (There is no DBZ radar gun mask eye patch thingie.) The only way to tell if someone is really good, is to see them in action.. and if the player in question happens to lose to "several players in a row"... does that really mean that he/she is any good?
 
hmmm. In mi eyes, No.
 
In your passive illusory world... probably the greatest alive.
 
 
 In short, you're only as good as your last match.
 
 

[Frenchfry]

When I say "here and now" game.. i mean exactly how it's said.  No one cares about past accomplishments (so what if you're number 1). There is no possible way to gauge a player's worth in a game until it's actually played (There is no DBZ radar gun mask eye patch thingie.) The only way to tell if someone is really good, is to see them in action.. and if the player in question happens to lose to "several players in a row"... does that really mean that he/she is any good?
 
hmmm. In mi eyes, No.
 
In your passive illusory world... probably the greatest alive.

Mmm... More personal interference?
Anyway, Losing streaks happen. Nobody cares what you've done in the past in Call of Duty, either, but a good player can still have a losing streak if he goes up against BETTER players.
I don't think you're getting the detail that good and bad isn't black and white. There's a big-ass gray area of average, okay, good, skilled, great, pimped, awesome, and godly.
If someone at the 'skilled' level battles five 'pimped' players in a row, he's liable to lose, but that doesn't mean he's any worse at the game. It just means he was in several mismatched battles.

Im sure he could, he has Parkinson's

Really, dude? I'm talking about both of them in the peak of their careers. Ali was great. Tyson was better.