[Terra Monsters] Discussion about Elemental Strengths and Weaknesses

24 posts

Flag Post

It has been brought to our attention that the game could do with a little rebalancing in terms of whats strong or weak vs what.

We’ve come up with these 4 charts for strengths and weaknesses – which one do people feel is best?

A- http://imgur.com/HQdwG
B- http://imgur.com/XyP5W
C- http://imgur.com/c8EwJ
D- http://imgur.com/s3Tkp

 
Flag Post

I don’t have an opinion on which chart is best; they all are nicely balanced with 2 strengths 2 weakness and 3 normals – which is the important part. Any decisions as which pairings are arbitrary and it’s unlikely that there will be a consensus. So I would be happy with any of the 4, I think.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by End_Of_Ends:

As long as each element has 2 strengths and 2 weaknesses, it doesn’t really matter what elements beat what. However, if I had to vote on which one I thought was the most logical, I would have to say A.

 
Flag Post

I’d say go for A.

 
Flag Post

A got voted the best on a Facebook poll we did, it looks like we’ll go with A unless anyone has any strong objections to it. And thank you for your feedback :)

 
Flag Post

I don’t see why everything needs two strengths/weaknesses, seems kind of boring to me. Different elements already have certain advantages (e.g. Typhoon) so why shouldn’t elements have different numbers of strengths and weaknesses? It definitely would give the game more competitive complexity.

 
Flag Post

I think option B would be a better choice, it is basically what whe have right now but with a little upgrade to balance everything out. If B was implemented then everyone would not be too surprise with the changes compared to if A was implemented. I think people choose A cause it’s a first choice but B seems more logical and easier to implement for me.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by anhoinguyen:

I think option B would be a better choice, it is basically what whe have right now but with a little upgrade to balance everything out. If B was implemented then everyone would not be too surprise with the changes compared to if A was implemented. I think people choose A cause it’s a first choice but B seems more logical and easier to implement for me.

I agree.

 
Flag Post

I prefer option A or D because there is no types that are weak to their own which just annoys me. So changing to option A is alright with me

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Blowout0:

I don’t see why everything needs two strengths/weaknesses, seems kind of boring to me. Different elements already have certain advantages (e.g. Typhoon) so why shouldn’t elements have different numbers of strengths and weaknesses? It definitely would give the game more competitive complexity.

Simple way to make things fair. We don’t need uber types because everyone would use those and then leave the others in the dust. It’s what happened with electric and ice types. Everyone made teams with those two elements because they were the best and that left the other types in then dust.

Originally posted by EarthSensei:

I prefer option A or D because there is no types that are weak to their own which just annoys me. So changing to option A is alright with me

Option A please! I dislike elements that are weak to itself. Such types are really only good against one type because it’s too risky to fight fire with fire. BTW in option D, air is weak to itself.

 
Flag Post

CAn we fix this problem: The 3 elements strong against air, are all weak against earth. So, any air mon (Equiness/Equinar, Lotis/Mantislash, etc) with earth moves can fight back against water, electric, and ice, despite being at the wrong end of the elemental draw.

 
Flag Post

marine,

lotis and mantislash are EARTH types. just so you know.

 
Flag Post

i dont like A it completely changes the what beats what and would change the entire way the system works right now. it would throw alot of us off to go from ice beating arcane to arcane beating ice

 
Flag Post

yeah option A is no good. it flips too many things. anyone not paying attention to this thread would be getting killed if you use it. i don’t know what those face book people were thinking but they probably didn’t care and just picked a cuz it’s first.

actually i don’t really like any of them. i mean the current system isn’t too bad. just take away earths strength against ice. take away waters strength against air and in it’s place make it strong against ice. and make air strong against earth. and it should fit the scale you were trying to make. and it would all fit. no big changes and would make water types usable later in game. yep that’s the best plan.

edit: well crap. ice will still be strong against 3. well i give up. i’ll just have to learn a whole new system i guess. man this is gonna suck.

 
Flag Post

I choose B.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by anhoinguyen:

I think option B would be a better choice, it is basically what whe have right now but with a little upgrade to balance everything out. If B was implemented then everyone would not be too surprise with the changes compared to if A was implemented. I think people choose A cause it’s a first choice but B seems more logical and easier to implement for me.

I concur.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Shadowsil:
Originally posted by anhoinguyen:

I think option B would be a better choice, it is basically what whe have right now but with a little upgrade to balance everything out. If B was implemented then everyone would not be too surprise with the changes compared to if A was implemented. I think people choose A cause it’s a first choice but B seems more logical and easier to implement for me.

I concur.

Not true in my case. I picked it because it was the only system where no element was weak to itself. Under the old system I thought it was ok that arcane was weak to itself because nothing resisted arcane attacks. Under this system the arcane element no longer hve that, but is still weak to itself thus, making it the WORST element. If someone wanted to beat up arcane monsters, they wouldn’t grab an arcane monster, they could grab an ice.

So in short I picked A because it was fair to ALL elements.

 
Flag Post

Also need to consider the resistances. Elements with 2 resistances, 1 of which is itself isn’t as desirable as resisting two elements unrelated to itself.

 
Flag Post

Honestly, I wouldn’t really want to change anything. I’ve played it for a while and if you changed it now, it would throw everything off.

 
Flag Post

thats what i was sayin dragon

 
Flag Post

In an effort to please everyone I have tried to make an element table on my own. And this is the result:
http://imgur.com/TUy5o
I hope you like it.

 
Flag Post

I like it husey! It’s fair, balanced, logical and close enough to what we’re used to that it shouldn’t throw people off too much. Well done! :D

 
Flag Post

I don’t really get why it matters if the new chart is really different from the current one. I mean, people would catch on quickly wouldn’t they?

Honestly, as long as every type has two strengths and two weaknesses, and we don’t end up with super-types equivalent to Steel and Dragon type Pokemon, It doesn’t matter to me which is chosen.

However, I will say I like A most. For the same reason as Glaceia.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Shadowsil:
Originally posted by anhoinguyen:

I think option B would be a better choice, it is basically what whe have right now but with a little upgrade to balance everything out. If B was implemented then everyone would not be too surprise with the changes compared to if A was implemented. I think people choose A cause it’s a first choice but B seems more logical and easier to implement for me.

I concur.

i agree