Disaster Area
formerly Piexplode
I've heard marco not being a fan of screens starmie.. I'll see if I can open up some convo on 2k10 or pp about it.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
All Gens Implementing all old gens in PS - Testers required!
- Thread starter Joim
- Start date
Fixed the 1024 roll over, I intend to implement all mechanics on this properly eventually (I will change the mod so it basically runs its own damage engine as opposed to a modded gen 6 engine).
Edit: Also fixed critical hits, they now double level of attacker instead of damage.
More fixes to the engine will follow soon.
Edit: Also fixed critical hits, they now double level of attacker instead of damage.
More fixes to the engine will follow soon.
Last edited:
thanks, joim i'm glad gen1 is finally having work done to it.
I just remembered another problem with this sim: trapping moves are supposed to have a 37.5% chance (as long as it connects) to hit 2 or 3 turns and only 12.5% for 4 and 5 turns, on this sim i'm almost 100% certain they are given equal weight of 25%. I.E. getting a wrap to hit 2 turns is equal to 5 turns, and that isn't correct.
further reading on this:
http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Wrap_(move)
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/wrap.3483979/
I just remembered another problem with this sim: trapping moves are supposed to have a 37.5% chance (as long as it connects) to hit 2 or 3 turns and only 12.5% for 4 and 5 turns, on this sim i'm almost 100% certain they are given equal weight of 25%. I.E. getting a wrap to hit 2 turns is equal to 5 turns, and that isn't correct.
further reading on this:
http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Wrap_(move)
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/wrap.3483979/
MoxieInfinite told me to post this glitch for ADV:
http://pastebin.com/YBgqNA1M
it's a visual glitch only and it will keep saying porygon2 used trace even if he isn't using trace.
http://pastebin.com/YBgqNA1M
it's a visual glitch only and it will keep saying porygon2 used trace even if he isn't using trace.
This was done by when I made the first beta of gen 1:
https://github.com/Zarel/Pokemon-Showdown/blob/master/mods/gen1/scripts.js#L247
It seems it isn't entirely accurate, though, as it's right now 2/6 for 2 and 3 turns and 1/6 for 4 and 5 turns. Will review this soon.
looking at that code I think it's a real quick fix, you could just add a higher 2 and 3 ratio compared to the 4 and 5's to make it 75:25 and that would give it the same effect as what the game has anyways.
edit: actually adding in one more 2 and 3 would fix it. 12.5*3=37.5
Last edited:
If an opponent has a double of a Pokemon (e.g. two Mews) then the second one won't be revealed in the overview - even if it's clear there are two of them - until one has fainted and the other comes out again.
See here, turn 40; when he sends out a Mew at 100% when I know he has a Mew at 44%, it is plainly obvious he has two Mews. But the opponent's team view doesn't update accordingly; it shows the last Pokemon as unrevealed until turn 44 (when one of his Mews has fainted and he sends out the other one).
See here, turn 40; when he sends out a Mew at 100% when I know he has a Mew at 44%, it is plainly obvious he has two Mews. But the opponent's team view doesn't update accordingly; it shows the last Pokemon as unrevealed until turn 44 (when one of his Mews has fainted and he sends out the other one).
Last edited:
Disaster Area
formerly Piexplode
I believe these are the correct mechanics in hackmons terms, I'm tagging Adrian Marin to confirm or deny this.
Confirming, this is a well-known bug that occurs in all gens.
But you didn't confirm what he said at all. He said the mechanics are as intended, you're saying it's a bug. :S
Disaster Area
formerly Piexplode
okay so..
it is a bug, and it's not generation-exclusive, and it's already well known about and been reported.
I guess it's good to know it holds in other generations too (outside of gen 6)
it is a bug, and it's not generation-exclusive, and it's already well known about and been reported.
I guess it's good to know it holds in other generations too (outside of gen 6)
I thought Team Preview would make it irrelevant in Gen 5/6 and thus an old-gen bug. Sue me, I didn't test it myself or read the whole bugs board. :-/
Disaster Area
formerly Piexplode
it's ok I just knew from watching gen 6 BH games that it was the state of play, but that was why I tagged someone who plays the meta.
(Balanced) Hackmons in any generation is No Preview
(Balanced) Hackmons in any generation is No Preview
At least it was, it has team preview now, and this bug/mechanic/whatever it is seems to occur as long as someone has 2 of the same species, usually with both of same species having 100% HP.
EDIT:
Forgive me if I misunderstood, as some bugs in the BH metagame actually grow to be a part of it, so mechanics/bugs are pretty much the same to me since we're talking about the simulator's mechanics.
Last edited:
It came to my attention today that PS! doesn't have Freeze Clause active for RBY (or any other generation for that matter, but I'll focus on RBY here). This is not suitable and should be changed.
For all that I know, every single RBY tournament played in the past three years or so - be it on Smogon, Pokémon Online, RBY2K10, or Pokémon Perfect - has had Freeze Clause activated as part of their tournament rules.
Here's some links to show you what I am talking about.
On Smogon:
http://www.smogon.com/forums/thread...ent-finals-won-by-lutra.3497133/#post-5164330
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/smogon-all-generation-tournament-ii-sign-ups.3514244/
Rules weren't specified in the SPL 4 commencement thread, but I played in it and I remember Freeze Clause being on (if nothing else it was on during my games). The current SPL commencement thread should specify its ruleset if there's any doubt, but I'm positive that Freeze Clause is assumed to be on.
Pokémon Online's upcoming Old Generations tournament:
http://pokemon-online.eu/threads/old-generations-tournament-signups.29570/
The RBY ladder on PO has a mandatory Freeze Clause.
POCL (PO version of SPL) and POWC (PO version of WCoP) both have Freeze Clause in place. http://pokemon-online.eu/threads/official-tours-timetable.29263/
Pokémon Perfect's most recent season announcement:
http://www.pokemonperfect.com/forums/showthread.php?3218-RBY-OU-Season-6
RBY2K10:s anniversary tour:
http://rby2k10.proboards.com/thread/1432/2nd-anniversary-tournament-sign-ups
Not a single tournament that I am aware of has actively taken the stance that Freeze Clause is not to be featured in RBY OU (or any other RBY metagame). The Pokémon Showdown ladder is unique in that it doesn't have Freeze Clause active, but even if you step out of the ladder, you're not even given the option to play with Freeze Clause in a custom game!
The counter argument is that Freeze Clause is technically impossible, but we've already decided as a community that we're allowed to make changes to the original version of the game to enhance the experience. Freeze Clause is one such enhancement and I see it as very important - I'd always choose to play with Freeze Clause on rather than off.
I think it's a poor decision to make the Pokémon Showdown ladder unique in this way, rather, uniformity across platforms should be the goal for the older, "dead" metagames. Personally, I will refuse to play RBY tour games on Pokémon Showdown even if the mechanics get fixed, as long as Freeze Clause remains a non-option for RBY.
For all that I know, every single RBY tournament played in the past three years or so - be it on Smogon, Pokémon Online, RBY2K10, or Pokémon Perfect - has had Freeze Clause activated as part of their tournament rules.
Here's some links to show you what I am talking about.
On Smogon:
http://www.smogon.com/forums/thread...ent-finals-won-by-lutra.3497133/#post-5164330
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/smogon-all-generation-tournament-ii-sign-ups.3514244/
Rules weren't specified in the SPL 4 commencement thread, but I played in it and I remember Freeze Clause being on (if nothing else it was on during my games). The current SPL commencement thread should specify its ruleset if there's any doubt, but I'm positive that Freeze Clause is assumed to be on.
Pokémon Online's upcoming Old Generations tournament:
http://pokemon-online.eu/threads/old-generations-tournament-signups.29570/
The RBY ladder on PO has a mandatory Freeze Clause.
POCL (PO version of SPL) and POWC (PO version of WCoP) both have Freeze Clause in place. http://pokemon-online.eu/threads/official-tours-timetable.29263/
Pokémon Perfect's most recent season announcement:
http://www.pokemonperfect.com/forums/showthread.php?3218-RBY-OU-Season-6
RBY2K10:s anniversary tour:
http://rby2k10.proboards.com/thread/1432/2nd-anniversary-tournament-sign-ups
Not a single tournament that I am aware of has actively taken the stance that Freeze Clause is not to be featured in RBY OU (or any other RBY metagame). The Pokémon Showdown ladder is unique in that it doesn't have Freeze Clause active, but even if you step out of the ladder, you're not even given the option to play with Freeze Clause in a custom game!
The counter argument is that Freeze Clause is technically impossible, but we've already decided as a community that we're allowed to make changes to the original version of the game to enhance the experience. Freeze Clause is one such enhancement and I see it as very important - I'd always choose to play with Freeze Clause on rather than off.
I think it's a poor decision to make the Pokémon Showdown ladder unique in this way, rather, uniformity across platforms should be the goal for the older, "dead" metagames. Personally, I will refuse to play RBY tour games on Pokémon Showdown even if the mechanics get fixed, as long as Freeze Clause remains a non-option for RBY.
Last edited:
You've said a lot about how it's standard, but nothing about why you think it's a good thing. Freeze Clause isn't on the Showdown ladder because I made a good case that it doesn't actually make games more competitive and people agreed with me. To be frank, I think the tradition is wrong, and we've clearly got to start somewhere in fixing it.
Freeze Clause removes the luck of multi-freezes, but in return it creates the luck of accidental freezes of non-freezeworthy targets rendering freeze targets unfreezable (and you can't necessarily avoid this with skill, because Ice-type moves are so useful even outside of inflicting freezes). The two cancel out almost exactly, and the tie is broken by Freeze Clause being an "incorrect" mechanic that doesn't happen in-game.
Sleep Clause is essential for competitive RBY play (and was invented to permit competitive RBY play) because there are no Pokemon immune to sleep and sleep can be inflicted fairly reliably. Ice-types are immune to freeze (and most of them resist the moves that inflict it, as well) and multi-freezes cannot be inflicted reliably even in the absence of an opposing Ice-type. Freeze Clause is not essential for a sensible metagame, it isn't faithful to cartridge, and it doesn't even really help much in making the game less luck-based. Ergo, putting it on the ladder is unjustified.
Now, I do think Showdown does need to have checkboxes for these things in fun games like PO has. It's pretty much undisputed that PO is much more flexible with all of this stuff and provides a better experience as a result. But we do NOT need Freeze Clause mandatory on the RBY OU ladder or in tournament play.
Freeze Clause does happen in-game, in-game being Stadium, which is where the thing even originated because it could specifically program the inability for Ice moves to freeze after already freezing something else. Otherwise nobody should give much of a shit either way because honestly, are you really bitching about accidentally freezing the wrong target? oh no I automagically KOed the wrong mon and now I have to play 6v5 against chansey instead of starmie Get good, bitch.
I could take it or leave it, of course. It almost never comes into play, even when it's possible (How often would you even see multiple freezes? It's a 10% chance on one specific attack typing that at most maybe two pokemon on a team have and is rarely their primary attacking option.), and only scrubs intentionally avoid paralyzing shit to facilitate freezing things anyway. I don't really mind it on the off-chance it prevents, well, basically an automatic loss (multiple freezes) but then that's really not much different from doing something like turning off 1/256 misses on 100% accurate attacks either. Freeze Clause is more faithful to the games than that, since the clause came into existence through official means, but if you insist on unequivocally following Gameboy mechanics to a T, that's cool too. I don't care.
I could take it or leave it, of course. It almost never comes into play, even when it's possible (How often would you even see multiple freezes? It's a 10% chance on one specific attack typing that at most maybe two pokemon on a team have and is rarely their primary attacking option.), and only scrubs intentionally avoid paralyzing shit to facilitate freezing things anyway. I don't really mind it on the off-chance it prevents, well, basically an automatic loss (multiple freezes) but then that's really not much different from doing something like turning off 1/256 misses on 100% accurate attacks either. Freeze Clause is more faithful to the games than that, since the clause came into existence through official means, but if you insist on unequivocally following Gameboy mechanics to a T, that's cool too. I don't care.
Last edited:
Except we play with cartridge mechanics. I don't have much issue with its use in a Stadium-based tier, but RBY OU is not such a tier on PS. See: Substitute, Focus Energy, long sleep timer.
Sleep Clause is an exceptional import because without it competitive RBY flat-out doesn't exist.
Freezing "the wrong thing" to the best of my knowledge has never happened in any games I've played nor watched. There's been clutch freezes, unexpected freezes, predicted freezes - but never have I encountered a truly unwanted freeze.
I didn't list the primary argument for inclusion of Freeze Clause (it can make games frankly ridiculous as Ice moves are common and spammable), but that argument has been presented previously and as such I didn't include it, instead I wanted to focus on a point that hasn't been raised previously to the best of my knowledge - the fact that the universal agreement across Pokémon communities has been that Freeze Clause is a good thing and should be in effect. No matter where you look, all non-gen 6 OU metagames have the same tiering and the same clauses, and I don't think Pokémon Showdown should be differing here.
You may have convinced Joim in the past, but I do not believe that you represent a majority opinion. It is my belief that the majority wants Freeze Clause to be active in RBY games, and the reason I carry that belief can be found in my previous post in this topic.
I didn't list the primary argument for inclusion of Freeze Clause (it can make games frankly ridiculous as Ice moves are common and spammable), but that argument has been presented previously and as such I didn't include it, instead I wanted to focus on a point that hasn't been raised previously to the best of my knowledge - the fact that the universal agreement across Pokémon communities has been that Freeze Clause is a good thing and should be in effect. No matter where you look, all non-gen 6 OU metagames have the same tiering and the same clauses, and I don't think Pokémon Showdown should be differing here.
You may have convinced Joim in the past, but I do not believe that you represent a majority opinion. It is my belief that the majority wants Freeze Clause to be active in RBY games, and the reason I carry that belief can be found in my previous post in this topic.
Disaster Area
formerly Piexplode
I was gonna mention this last night (was going to start a separate thread about it as well)
The discussion is healthy (but in the wrong place)
Also when you consider the OHKO clause, and how freeze is similar in a lot of ways to an OHKO (1/3 as likely though), I don't think it's too unreasonable. I know I've had games that without freeze clause would have been dumb (I think one time my zam got frozen then the next turn freeze clause saved lax from being frozen too. This was pretty early game), and it's nice that it very slightly nullifies the stupidity that can sometimes be ice moves. I'll patiently wait for it to be implemented :)
The discussion is healthy (but in the wrong place)
Also when you consider the OHKO clause, and how freeze is similar in a lot of ways to an OHKO (1/3 as likely though), I don't think it's too unreasonable. I know I've had games that without freeze clause would have been dumb (I think one time my zam got frozen then the next turn freeze clause saved lax from being frozen too. This was pretty early game), and it's nice that it very slightly nullifies the stupidity that can sometimes be ice moves. I'll patiently wait for it to be implemented :)
Live soon, proper counter mechanics for gen 1:
https://github.com/Zarel/Pokemon-Showdown/commit/5749082c598d56bafd702dd45e686274ff9d1015
Edit:
I will finish this:
https://github.com/Zarel/Pokemon-Showdown/commit/5749082c598d56bafd702dd45e686274ff9d1015
Edit:
I will finish this:
Substitute should take confusion self-hit damage.Mirror move mechanics.Partial Trapping moves should not be stopped by Substitute.Partial Trapping damage is not really working well.
Last edited: