Proposed Marquess of Queensberry Rules of PvP - Please comment
The Marquess of Queensberry Rules are the traditional rules of boxing. Boxing is a bit analogous to PvP. I suggest some sporting rules for PvP. I do this to promote PvP because application of the rules suggested below would give both players a win and a chance at a Sinnoh Stone. I offer these rules for your consideration in light of my experience that the player that looses the first round often just leaves after the first round.
Round One: No rules. Each player builds his or her team however that player likes and makes the best moves and takes the best shots possible.
Round Two: The player that won Round One uses the exact same team and in the exact same order as that player used in Round One. The other player can modify that player's team as desired, maybe educating that player or giving that player a chance to experiment. If the player that lost Round One wins Round Two, then the PvP is over. There is no third round.
Round Three: The player that won the first two rounds puts in a garbage team, allowing the losing player to win Round Three and have a chance to be awarded a Sinnoh Stone. This compensates a weaker player for the time and effort of doing a PvP, thus encouraging PvP.
What say you?
Answers
Personally, I think it is unnecessary. You get Sinnoh stones from loosing battles, from the easy battles against the team leaders, and I also received one from a 7-day-gym. At this rate, within a month any frequent player will have a surplus of Sinnoh stones, as with any other artifacts.
With this, anything that removes the challenge from PvP battles in order to give the other side an easy win is bad. PvP is the only thing in the game that requires some tactical planning. Especially for the second round, after one has gotten a feel for what your opponent is likely to field.
Of course it is unnecessary. It is not just about the stones. The loser of the first round is given a chance to improve that players team against a known opponent in the second round. The point of the third round is to make the twice loser feel good. Players don't like getting clobbered 3 times in a row. The last rounds is a feel good round for the twice loser.
How should lose on purpose be a sporting rule?
I mean I understand if you do it sometimes that the opponent wont quit playing with you (specially if you have limited options of replacement). It's a little bit like playing with a child
But anyway, it doesnt matter you can get Stones even if you lose (some say you have even a higher chance)
Participation trophies shouldn't be awarded either.
Does anyone save participation trophies? Do they look back on them with fondness 20 years later? No. No one cares.
Participation trophies are a waste of money and resources. You have to be a really soft person to think they are a good idea.
Life doesn't give out participation trophies.
Another courtesy would be to request a battle starting with ultra league, if you want and expect 3 consecutive battles great and master league pretty one-dimensional to do 3 straight times (great is random pokemon; master very few worthy pokemon to choose from). As time goes maybe you communicate with some daily/nearby opponents that actually care/bother to PvP with you: start great, next ultra, last master
>title
I wonder who could be behind this post.
Like others have said, you pretty much have the same odds at a stone regardless of who wins. Throwing the match just so the other person can win seems more condescending than anything, as if you're saying they can't beat you unless you let them.
And calling it over if player A wins round one and B wins round two? Who doesn't go for the "best 2 out of 3" rule of thumb anyway?
The OP has been on the board for a long while and seems like a straight shooter (he fully relies on his friend list to accept battles instead of self-battling as a daily stone/dust fail-safe).
In that case, maybe his extra-sensitivity is warranted. I end up battling myself bc with 50+ eligible battle friends I’ve been random/unannounced challenge less than 5 times TOTAL.
I do try to pick different matchups and compare moves/effectiveness...I obviously want it to end quick so no shields, do great league a lot of the time, too. I have found that the fast move Scratch on Persian is really good in PvP. Now I’ll try to figure out why and if there are any other similarly situated PvP moves I never would have thought about...In case they ever offer up more chances to PvP (a random opponent generator)
My comment was a joke that the title of the post contained "Marquess of Queensberry" and that's the name of a character in Mike Tyson Mysteries. Not everything is an attack on someone else. I even went out of my way to post a picture of the guy.
Either way, I still disagree with the "need" to throw a battle just so the other guy gets a win. I'm not a PvP tryhard or anything but I can admit when I've been beaten. I don't need or even want a sympathy match against a squad of level 1 junkmons to pad my wins. Against other players I'd rather have an actual fight rather than have it end as fast as possible just to scoop up rewards. Against the AI leaders though I agree, the faster I can plow through wins for the Ace Trainer badge the better.
I didn’t get the joke, been decades since I’ve willingly watched cartoons...besides watching the first season of Pokémon on Netflix last year...I guess having no Pokémon history is major hindrance since now it is not ALL about having max of everything powerful and then just wrapping my mind around 1 tier 5 opponent.
Well, my 4 y/o now likes watching PAC-Man and the Ghostly Adventures...that should help me since I got a classic Nintendo mini few weeks ago...I only ever played Ms. Pac-Man.
The "Marquess of Queensberry" is a hereditary (?) English title of nobility, most likely preceding the "Mike Tyson Mysteries" (whatever they are) by many centuries. Apparently one of the Marquess took a fancy to boxing and came up with some rules, a long, long time ago. I rather suspect that the "Mike Tyson Mysteries" were piggy-backing on the long-preceding name recognition of the Marquess of Queensberry to add gravitas to those mysteries.
And, having met Mr. Tyson one time, while on a run along the Phoenix, Arizona canals, I would not recommend as as a role model for one of my sons or any other young male seeking to pursue a more typical path in life, but whom I certainly admire as a spectacular boxer. In his realm, he is great. In mine, not so much.
A very legitimate response. The rules do suck in some respect. However, the weak will not be weeded out. Hundreds of thousand years of human evolution show otherwise. The weak will just avoid playing with you. Maybe they will play with me. That is what I want, just to play with a human. Playing with most any human is likely to be better than playing against the bots.
