Substitutions Overhaul

[Frosty]

If you aren't on the council, a mod or Deck, Buzz off.

Thread: http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/substitutions-overhaul.3487268/page-4

This is basically to vote if the paragraphs below (or some better-written version of them) are to be included on the Handbook.

Yay
Nay
Return to Drawing Board as I don't like *fill in here*

Proposal 1:

Proposal 1: On Substitutions Interaction

On Substitutions Interaction

It is possible for a Substitution to interact with other substitutions, whether as a kind of chance clause, or as the Action Clause. So clauses like the below are acceptable:

If Magmortar's second substitution is to be activated THEN ...
If Chansey's first substitution activates for the second time THEN ...
If Rain Dance AND Eelektross's first substitution doesn't activate THEN ...'
If (...) THEN Disregard Aipom's first sub
If (...) THEN Rain Dance AND Replace Thunderbolt on the first sub with Thunder
If (...) THEN (...) AND Replace all instances of Hyper Voice with Surf, including on substitutions

ZhengTann Texas Cloverleaf Engineer Pikachu Gerard Frosty Dogfish44 Flamestrike

 

[Gerard]

Yay

 

[Dogfish44]

Nay

This opens up way too many loopholes for me to consider it, especially when many of these can be done through other means as is

 

[Engineer Pikachu]

Nay

While I don't necessarily agree with having all substitutions exist in a vacuum, some of the examples bring up strange equivalencies and eh it doesn't sit well with me

 

[Frosty]

Yay

For more complex subs, there isn't any way to replace "disregard this sub" and "replace X with Y on the first substitution". Not with 100% equivalency. If you want I can show that.

First-to-order is a very big disadvantage and that is due to our sub rules. If the problem were it being abusable, then ok. But if the issue you have is with it being complicated, then I really question that. "Disregard this sub" is being proposed to simplify the extremely complicated subs you would use to replace that, same with the replace stuff.

The other option is not allowing those subs at all, and that only increases the problem with first-to-order disadvantage. Games should be won on skill, not on who was lucky enough to order last first.

 

[Frosty]

ZhengTann
Texas Cloverleaf
Flamestrike

 

[ZhengTann]

Nay

I may not have Frosty's examples at hand, but personally I felt that Substitution interactions already exist. The first-orderer arranges them so as to determine the priorities of conflicting subs, and the second-orderer either avoids them, or abuses them. If we want to limit the disadvantages on ordering first (especially on higher-tier matches that involve a LOT of disruptive moves), we could probably advocate more subs instead (Ever try a 4++ Subs match)?

 

[Its_A_Random]

Suspending this vote until we get a new council, if we get a new council and basically voiding this vote; one member has gone and the other simply will not vote so it makes sense to leave this to the new council (if there is a new one).

 

[Its_A_Random]

This vote is being re-opened with the new council and the above votes are voided.

You know who you are, go vote.

 

[Avnomke]

Yay

 

[Dogfish44]

Nay

 

[deadfox081]

Yay

I really don't see the harm of this

 

[Frosty]

Yay

 

[Gemini Taurus]

Yay

See deadfox's post for my reasoning.

-----------------------------------

And that reaches majority here as well!!

 

[Avnomke]

Not quite, there's still 3 parts to go through.

Yay
Nay
Return to Drawing Board as I don't like *fill in here*

Proposal 2:

Proposal 2: On more than one substitution activating

Also, it is possible that two or more substitutions activate on a given situation, as long as there isn't any conflict between them. To give one example, consider the following actions:

Sludge Bomb (Staraptor) - Sludge Bomb (Staraptor) - Sludge Bomb (Staraptor)
IF Protective/Evasive move THEN Redirect towards Mr. Mime
IF Rain Dance is up THEN Thunder

If, on Action 2, Rain is up and the pokemon uses a Protective/Evasive move, the first substitution activates and the second too and there isn't a conflict between them (it is logically possible for both to be applied on the same action). So, due to first sub, the attack is redirected to Mr. Mime and, due to the second sub, that attacks turns from a Sludge Bomb into a Thunder. In the end, in A2, said pokemon will use Thunder on Mr. Mime.

But if there is a conflict between the substitutions, then the player can specify which one has priority or, if they don't do so, the first one listed is applied. So, for example, consider the following actionset:

Sludge Bomb (Staraptor) - Sludge Bomb (Staraptor) - Sludge Bomb (Staraptor)
IF P/E THEN Sludge Bomb towards Mr. Mime
IF Rain Dance is up THEN Thunder

In that case, the first sub calls specifically for Sludge Bomb on Mr. Mime, while the second calls for Thunder. Since it isn't possible for that pokemon to use Thunder and Sludge Bomb at the same time, the substitutions are mutually exclusive and the first one takes priority, ending with Sludge Bomb on Mr. Mime

Finally, if the substitution ends up creating a loop, it is considered illegal. If more than one substitution creates the loop, the one from the player that ordered last is illegal. If both players ordered at the same time (example: both players order without seeing the other player's orders) or if both substitutions were done by the same player, both are deemed illegal.

Dogfish44 Frosty Matezoide SubwayJ deadfox081 AOPSUser

 

[deadfox081]

Nay

 

[Dogfish44]

We already have this implemented - first sub takes prio.

NAY -_-

 

[Matezoide]

Nay

Not a big fan of two subs activating at the same time (Hence why Thunder was used on Mr.Mime).

 

[Avnomke]

Yay

 

[AOPSUser]

Yay just makes more sense to me, idk why.

 

[Frosty]

Yay. This isn't about first sub taking priority. What this tries to implement is the possibility of two subs activating at the same time if the situation allows that (why not?) and the "loop = illegal" part. While the first is debatable (I think it broadens our possibilities, which is good), the second is a common ruling that isn't on the handbook iirc.

SubwayJ

 

[Avnomke]

GemOftheDay

 

[Frosty]

Leethoof

 

[Leethoof]

Nay

 

[Frosty]

Good boy.

Proposal 3 - On Pushing back Substitutions

It is also possible to push back substitutions, but only those set to trigger on specific actions. It works strictly the same way as with usual actions. "Push back" will push subs meant to trigger on an action to the action immediately after it (A1->A2 and A2->A3).

Example:

Poison Tail - Sludge Bomb - Poison Tail
IF Substitute A1 THEN Snatch and push back actions and substitutions.
IF Protect A1 then Swords Dance

If the opponent uses substitute A1, the substitution activates and our pokemon uses Snatch A1. Since actions were pushed back, A1 becomes A2 and A2 becomes A3, so the following actions are Poison Tail - Sludge Bomb. Same will happen with the second sub, which will be triggered if Protect happens A2 instead of A1.

About the matter pay attention to these points:
- If the player says only "push back" or "push back actions" only actions are pushed back. If is said "push back substitutions" only substitutions are pushed back. To activate both actions and substitutions, you must specify both.
- The action clause of a substitution (second half) is not affected by "push back". Write your substitutions with that in mind.

Yay
Nay
Return to Drawing Board as I don't like *fill in here*

Dogfish44 Frosty Matezoide Leethoof deadfox081AOPSUser Avnomke