Pain Split

[ZhengTann]

This thread will be moderated to keep discussion focused. ​

In what might be a bid to further balance the game until you can only deal a 25 HP differential per action max (j/k), here's what to be said about Pain Split:

...... I am here to bring up another issue: Pain Split. While Pain Split isn't as bad as Endeavor, a 50hp spread move is still ridiculous. I would link battles where it changed games to no end, but I have little time. But I feel everybody already saw how a sure victory becomes a tied game thanks to two pain splits and around 55EN. A fair price to pay for a fucking 100hp spread TBH.

Can we please lower the cap please? Or/and make it cost more?

So the center of the question lies in the numbers:

So does it need tweaking? How and Why? We'll let the everyone pitch in.

Fire away ^_^

 

[Flamestrike]

I'm not entirely sure what needs to be done about it, but I agree; Pain Split is absolutely insanely good right now. Used properly it'll almost always be a 50 point swing for a fairly reasonable EN cost and can easily turn what should be a one-for-one trade into a two-for-one with good play. I don't have a specific suggestion in mind right now; either changing the EN cost to 6 + (|Opponent's HP - User's HP|)/2 (or /2.5 if people feel that's to drastic) or lowering the cap to 20 seem like good starts, but the other thing I want to bring up is this: Why don't we make it a recovery move? Admittedly yes, this might not actually help balance it given a fair amount of matches have more than 2 recovers nowadays, but it certainly couldn't hurt, and 99.99% of the time it's going to be either a recovery for the user or (and this use of it is incredibly rare in my experience) a recovery for an allied target. Heal Pulse uses a recover for its user and not its target, so I don't see why Pain Split can't be the same.

 

[Its_A_Random]

RE Pain Split for recovery move:

[11:32:12] <&Its_A_Random> "Why don't we make it a recovery move?"
[11:32:37] <&Its_A_Random> by its nature it does not recover or deal damage
[11:33:08] <Flamestrike> Yes, but unless both user and target have exactly the same HP
[11:33:09] <&Its_A_Random> and a recovery move is defined as a move that exclusively recovers hp
[11:33:14] <Flamestrike> At least one of them will recover HP
[11:33:22] <Flamestrike> Hmm
[11:33:37] <&Its_A_Random> that is what happens as a hp equaliser
[11:33:45] <Flamestrike> I guess that's true, Giga Drain et all aren't recovers either
[11:34:38] <&Its_A_Random> if we are considering it a recovery move, then we are going to open up a can of worms
[11:35:42] <&Its_A_Random> should big root be considered a recovery move
[11:36:09] <Flamestrike> IAR Big Root isn't a move
[11:36:13] <&Its_A_Random> it "deals damage" and "recovers hp" just like pain split effectively does
[11:36:20] <Flamestrike> Unless you mean Big Root draining attacks
[11:36:30] <&Its_A_Random> I meant big root draining kiss

We could get hung up on nomenclature/semantics/all that jazz but given we have an objective definition for a recovery move, unless we want to change it... or create an exception but that could still open up a can of worms i guess haha

 

[kingmidas]

The flavor of pain split from my point of view is like its a status move version of leech life on a much larger scale, such as draining the opponent life to heal its own, or sharing the pain. and if leech life is considered a recovery move, then so should pain split imo.

 

[Flamestrike]

I still feel like we could justify making an exception for Pain Split; once could say that the healing is based off of HP percentages and not a fraction of the damage of an attack (even if that fraction is >= 100% in the case of Big Root Draining Kiss). But it was more of a suggestion than anything else, as up till now I hadn't heard any reason why it couldn't/shouldn't be a recovery move; if people don't like it then I wouldn't be crushed or anything haha

 

[Gerard]

The flavor of pain split from my point of view is like its a status move version of leech life on a much larger scale, such as draining the opponent life to heal its own, or sharing the pain. and if leech life is considered a recovery move, then so should pain split imo.

Leech Life is NOT a recovery move, and neither is Leech Seed which is the move I think you're referring to (since no damaging recovery move is considered a recovery move)

 

[kingmidas]

Leech Life is NOT a recovery move, and neither is Leech Seed which is the move I think you're referring to (since no damaging recovery move is considered a recovery move)

no I wasn't exactly sure of what damaging recovery moves are considered, and leech life and seed seem the same flavor wise to me.

 

[ZhengTann]

Not supporting the "recovery move" motion, IMHO, because it is not consistent with actual Recovery Moves, or even HP Draining Attacks, for the matter (Protective/Evasive moves, anyone?)

To me, this move has the exact same issue as Endeavour - they fulfill a niche situation where using them would be far more beneficial in the long run than spamming 20+ damage attacks. You need to actually be in a serious HP disadvantage (somewhere around 38 to 50) compared to your opponent for Pain Split to be actually effective, whether by chance or by design. If we're worried about Pain Split ruining the "Good Stats and 20++ Damage Attacks per Action" trend in battles, then I'd suggest sky-rocketing the EN cost.

Why? Simple. Under the said "trend", you'd never exhaust a Pokemon's EN before it is KO'ed. So let's provide a situation where it becomes a HP-versus-EN conundrum for the player. By all means, make it so that Pain Split costs more if not as much EN as a good combo. I can't delve into the maths right now, but this is my proposal for your scrutiny :)

EDIT: Reposting this for thread revival. Here's my proposal:

Energy Cost Formula: 6 + (|Opponents HP - User's HP|) / 3 6 + (|Opponents HP - User's HP|) / 2

Basically, if we near-doubled the EN cost, I think it would serve as a deterrent for Pain Split spam, especially in longer matches where conservation of HP and EN is important. Under the proposed changes, at the best circumstances (exactly 50 HP differential) you'd spend 31 energy just to regain the HP footing on your opponent. Of course, if peeps still think it's not severe enough, we can even remove the factor to raise the EN cost. Heck, add in a multiplier if we want to go all the way...

 

[Mulan15262]

Why is it that no one considers the 25 HP limit on Pain Split? Under ZhengTann's idea (and how it currently is), a 75 HP differential leads to a higher energy cost than a 50 HP differential, even though both cases cause the user to gain 25 HP and the target to lose 25 HP.

 

[Gerard]

That has always been the case. It's one of the downsides of the move to avoid it from being so easily spammable. I don't like ZT's proposal because It's too much of a nerf, a more conservative number such as 2.5 (like Protect) or even 2. Remember that Pain Split is also one of the most common tools low Hp mons have against HP behemoths. And many pokes only recovery move. I rather not see it nerfed to the point of being unusable on normal play.

 

[Flamestrike]

Yeah, I think I'd rather see / 2 because / 1.5 makes it borderline unusable if there's a massive HP difference (say 100 vs. 20). That would make it incredibly expensive, but probably still usable.

EDIT: Actually the more I think about this the more I think that the EN cost is okay (maybe change the divisor to / 2.5) and that the real issue is the cap. The cap on this should really be no more than 20 and could possibly afford to be even lower than that; a 30 point swing (15 cap) is still nothing to scoff at, although not nearly as ridiculous and possibly not worth using any more.

 

[tavok]

I agree with Flame (and a lot of other people) that Pain Split's cap should be lowered to 20. A 50 HP swing is something HUGE. I mean, 40 is still enormous, but considering what Gerard said (a lot of frailer mons needing it to have a chance vs. high HP behemoths, and some even needing it to be ss viable as they are right now at least imo) lowering it further would be too much of a nerf, specially if we consider an increase in EN cost. Just don't make it unusable.

 

[Engineer Pikachu]

I think we're overestimating the amount of EN that's needed to justify an HP swing of this magnitude.

Consider Leech Seed, a continually-triggering move that grants a 36 HP differential (which we don't generally consider enormous, yet many are saying 40+ is rather gigantic for Pain Split) and costs 10 EN. A 36 HP differential costs 18 EN under Pain Split – is it really that overpowering? I realize that the connection between HP differentials that are this different is tenuous at best, but it's one of the only points of reference we have. And for the arguments about continually-triggering versus one-off effects being different: while Aqua Ring does heal more for less EN than Recover, the difference between 10 and 18 is rather large.

Personally, I'm fine with the Pain Split we have now taking into account other somewhat similar attacks, because the EN cost as it stands is already pretty taxing. Maybe that's just me, though.

 

[Flamestrike]

The issue I have with the Leech Seed vs. Pain Split comparison is that Leech Seed isn't guaranteed to get you the full +36 swing; it's blocked by Substitute whereas Pain Split is not, in Switch=KO you can U-Turn/Volt Switch out of it, and in Switch=OK you can just switch to break it. There's also Rapid Spin, which is admittedly a somewhat niche way to break it but still exists. The issue with Pain Split is that it's an /immediate/ (meaning it will almost guaranteedly let you live an attack on that action that you wouldn't otherwise, which Leech Seed won't) 50 point swing that can only be blocked by P/E, DE, or Taunt. Which makes me wonder if we could find an alternative way to nerf it (perhaps make it -1 Prio to make it guaranteed tauntable/dodgeable with DE like Perish Song?).

I admit that I think we made a mountain out of a molehill concerning the EN cost; really Pain Split is already incredibly expensive and short of making it unplayably expensive we probably won't make much difference making it somewhat moreso. At the end of the day the issue is that an immediate 50 point swing is ridiculous, hence why I think lowering the cap to 20 (and thus bringing it closer to Leech Seed; pay more EN in exchange for the immediate effect) is probably the best solution. That being said, if we do cap it at 20 I think we may want to consider either capping the EN cost as well or just making it cheaper. Some food for thought.

EDIT: I could have sworn someone made an arena specifically so that Substitute would block Pain Split. Apparently I am retarded, so ignore that part.

 

[tavok]

The problem is that Leech Seed can be removed through switching and Rapid Spin (but most importantly, switching) and is over time: it may save you from fainting, it may not, and it has to last for a while 6 actions to get the effect.

Pain Split, on the other hand, is instantaneous, which IS a big deal as it can easily save a mon from fainting.

EDIT: ninjaed

EDIT 2: Also, Leech Seed doesn't affect Grass types.

 

[Geodude6]

Also Substitute blocks Pain Split (obviously except mons with Infiltrator)

 

[ZhengTann]

Guys, please, let's not dive too deep into the "Move 1 versus Move 2" back-and-forth-argument. As far as I see it, pulling one of those always had us going in circles.

Thus far in discussion we have two major ways to balance Pain Split: down-scaling the cap, or upping the EN cost. For the latter, I have myself put forth the argument behind it in the second and third paragraph in my previous post. That is the same reason I oppose the former option: the "OP pls nerf" reaction so changes nothing much, really. 40 HP swing is still alot: in fact, I could argue that anything above 25 HP swing is considered "too much" when the only time a regular attack with regular BAP will score more that much damage, is against Skill-Swapped Carracostas / Camerupts.

End of the day, we need to agree or at least debate on "what Pain Split is (not) supposed to do" before any option to balance it holds any weight or value. Otherwise, we're just following buff/nerf cultures without giving thought, at least, into the move/Ability/Pokemon itself.

P.S. Changed the proposed EN cost formula to have a factor of 2. To answer Gerard's concerns, the reason I scaled it to my personal upper limit is to gauge how peeps will react to it sorry :P

 

[Flamestrike]

I feel like a properly timed Pain Split should be a large swing, but not overly so. Right now it's the single largest swing we have in the game as far as I know (barring ridiculous matchups like Mega Zard Y vs. Dry Skin Parasect and such), and probably by a decent chunk. I feel like bringing the cap down to 20 and making it a more reasonable 40 point swing is enough to allow the move to keep its use without having it take over entire games. I wouldn't necessarily be against ALSO increasing the EN cost, but I don't think increasing the EN cost is enough on its own and I think reducing the cap would be enough of a nerf without also making it more expensive.

 

[Frosty]

Bring the cap down to 20 and be done with it. The problem is being able to reliably turn the tides of a battle on 2 actions, regardless of the final EN cost. Reducing the power should be enough to make this less of a problem. Unless you make the EN Cost really unbearable, people will still prefer to pay the price for the result. Like with double team.

 

[ZhengTann]

I'd like to argue that the intention behind raising the EN cost is to make it so that people can't pay the price for the result unless they planned ahead in their previous rounds, but seems that side has complications of its own :)

Okay, since we're moving around in circles, let's form a tentative slate and see if we can push it further:

• Changing EN cost to 6 + (|Opponents HP - User's HP|) / 2
• Changing maximum HP that can be siphoned from 25 to 20

If everybody can get their final thoughts, that were not yet expressed during the course of this discussion, into the thread within the next 24-hours, we can then move on to Voting. Cheers ^_^

 

[Flamestrike]

I think I've said everything I need to say on the situation; while I wouldn't necessarily mind an EN increase I think reducing the cap is a more practical solution and will get us our desired result.

 

[Gerard]

I rather see the energy vote as:

No Change (6 + (|Opponents HP - User's HP|) / 3)
Change

If Change:
6 + (|Opponents HP - User's HP|) / 2.5
6 + (|Opponents HP - User's HP|) / 2
6 + (|Opponents HP - User's HP|) / 1.5

Otherwise looks good

 

[Mulan15262]

How about making the voting like this (vote for as many as you want, in order from most to least preferred)?

Energy cost vote:
No change (6+(|Opponent's HP - User's HP|)/3)
6+(|Opponent's HP - User's HP|)/2.5
6+(|Opponent's HP - User's HP|)/2
6+(|Opponent's HP - User's HP|)/1.5

HP cap vote:
No change (25 HP cap)
20 HP cap
15 HP cap

 

[Flamestrike]

I agree with Mulan's proposal for the slate, although I'd suggest we vote on the cap first, then vote on whether or not an energy reduction is still required, rather than the other way around.

 

[ZhengTann]

Thanks for helping me reform the slate, Mulan :) We'll do this in two parts then, as suggested by Flamestrike.
Onwards to Voting then!


What should be done to the maximum HP difference for Pain Split?
No change (25 HP cap)
20 HP cap
15 HP cap

What should be done to Pain Split's EN cost?
No change (6+(|Opponent's HP - User's HP|)/3)
6+(|Opponent's HP - User's HP|)/2.5
6+(|Opponent's HP - User's HP|)/2
6+(|Opponent's HP - User's HP|)/1.5



That's it for now, thank you all for your time ^_^ Mods may now close this thread at their discretion.