Quoted By:
I recently started playing Pokemon after a long time (I think the last game I played was Emerald). Here's a few questions about the decisions taken by the devs in handling mons' uniqueness.
1. Why let some mons just be better than others of the same species by allocating random bonuses to stats? Why can't it at least be something like distributing a constant 31x6 points, so that there's some amount of fairness while still generating mons that are different? Yes, this doesn't solve the problem of mons that aren't optimal, but I don't know if that even is a problem.
2. Why decide effort values based on the mon you kill? Doesn't it make more sense to decide them based on the moves used while in battle? For instance, constantly spending turns attacking the enemy would yield points in the attack stats, and using status or utility moves would give you points in the other stats. I don't understand why you have to kill a few hundreds of the same type of mon for it to count as training that stat.
3. Wouldn't it also have made sense to include other factors that modify your experience with the mon apart from IVs, EVs and natures? Like growth rate for experience, growth in stats, separate multipliers for each type of attack, etc. I'm not talking about flat bonuses here, more like altering the shape of the curve of progression while keeping the moment sum the same.
4. Is it okay to unlink experience levels and stats? Levels could play an even more major part in move success calculations, and stats could be recomputed every time an event happened that changed them. Levels could still determine base stats, though. I'm not so sure about this one.
5. What are some ways in which the relatively worse aspects of randomness and the associated grinding issues can be dealt with? I don't play a lot of RPGs so I can't really come up with anything for this.
