On Dark: Being able to use Taunt while tainted is REALLY GOOD, how are you supposed to stop taunt then? The same with Torment but at least that's easier to sub against but Taunt, that's probably the strongest move in ASB. Imagine Sableye with that. I don't think Dark needs such a powerful STAB (blah, blah, blah, bias, blah, blah, blah, MeGardevoir, Gallade, Aurumoth, faeries, shut up).
-
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!
STAB Effects
- Thread starter Avnomke
- Start date
I would remove Taunt and Torment and then add stuff like Hone Claws, Embargo, Fake Tears, Flatter, Memento, Nasty Plot, Partying Shot, Quash, Topsy-Turvy . basically, every other dark type status but Taunt and Torment. All of them are niche and much weaker than Taunt and Torment, but being able to be used while Taunted is definitely something that would boost them to find use in some situations.
<.<
>.>
That said, it has been clarified elsewhere what he actually means.
Gerard's DARK STAB; ignore the effects of Taunt, Torment, Attraction, or Confusion when using Embargo, Fake Tears, Flatter, Hone Claws, Memento, Nasty Plot, Parting Shot, Quash, Snatch, Switcheroo, or Topsy-Turvy.
Note on Dark STAB: Currently it lets you use Dark-typed damaging attacks while confused without doing the confusion check.
Are you suggesting that be scrapped, or was it an oversight?
Also, the Fighting weight restrictions comes into play mostly against opponents with >7 WC. Pokemon that aren't fighting type or who only have mediocre Attack (R3 or R4) are unable to use the listed attacks. Granted Seismic Toss has the best distribution among them and is the worst generally, but it has come up in battles before. It would actually be more relevant if we made "can't use Throws if Attack Rank < Opponent Weight Class instead of [Attack Rank + 2] < Opponent Weight Class."
Just some context. When I made the Gen 6 STABs, I put a lot of time into looking over the kind of Pokemon that would use them most effectively, and geared them around that. Which is why "Rock types with Screens" Only applies to powerhouses like Magcargo, Corsola, Lunatone, and Solrock. [And Terrakion's Reflect for those that can win it.]
Are you suggesting that be scrapped, or was it an oversight?
Also, the Fighting weight restrictions comes into play mostly against opponents with >7 WC. Pokemon that aren't fighting type or who only have mediocre Attack (R3 or R4) are unable to use the listed attacks. Granted Seismic Toss has the best distribution among them and is the worst generally, but it has come up in battles before. It would actually be more relevant if we made "can't use Throws if Attack Rank < Opponent Weight Class instead of [Attack Rank + 2] < Opponent Weight Class."
Just some context. When I made the Gen 6 STABs, I put a lot of time into looking over the kind of Pokemon that would use them most effectively, and geared them around that. Which is why "Rock types with Screens" Only applies to powerhouses like Magcargo, Corsola, Lunatone, and Solrock. [And Terrakion's Reflect for those that can win it.]
Agreed. I don't know if this needs changing but I don't mind the change proposed if we need to change it. The change just seems too minor to be remembered and a change just to change though.
I feel these two mirror each other. If Fighting is fine as is then I don't see any need to change Psychic. Neither needs a buff in any case.
Anything is better than the Brighten/Bloom/Store Command. I honestly hope all the commands get axed.
The only reason I would be against this is because it's another command ability. I don't think they're worth the hassle on STABs. A passive benefit IMO would be more desirable if the goal is to make these easier to remember and use.
I don't mind Ice being Rock's mirror.
These two also seem to mirror each other. Honestly I don't find Dragon's effect to be hard to remember while I would say Normal's is more difficult (only takes effect after 3 actions, depends on arena for effect, ect...). If the idea is to make them more memorable then if Dragon gets changed I would think Normal's would as well. -1 energy on all moves might or might not be too powerful (not any more than Dark's proposed change) but it will at least be very easy to remember.
Last edited:
PSA: There is so many option flying around and I have so little time to go through them that I won't slate anything for this in the near future.
If you want this to advance asap, I suggest you try your hand at slating yourself. Specially if you are on council since, you know, you are supposed to be doing that shit <_<;.
Also, let's avoid "for the heck of it" boosts, ok? Some typings are good enough by default that they don't need much extra fluff (steel is an example and possibly dragon and fighting too).
If you want this to advance asap, I suggest you try your hand at slating yourself. Specially if you are on council since, you know, you are supposed to be doing that shit <_<;.
Also, let's avoid "for the heck of it" boosts, ok? Some typings are good enough by default that they don't need much extra fluff (steel is an example and possibly dragon and fighting too).
So I reread this thread and...
Deck Knight is right. Everybody here is simply suggesting random buffs to your types. Typing aren't supposed to give boosts like that -_-.
SO
I am ending this discussion here with one measure and one measure only being taken: Protect and Protect only will no longer be boosted by Rock STAB. This takes place soon (gotta give time for people to rage at me). You will know when it will take place 'cause I will post it on the implementation thread. Or post here if people change my mind (by force).
As for the other types: Buff Culture rule apply (check the buff culture thread), so we will discuss only changes to type effects that are problematic or 100% a waste (and given that type isn't supposed to give any boost really, I doubt anything can be considered a 100% waste). Changes/buffs for the heck of changing/buffing will be handled via word of god, aka, the moderation staff. Until other mod comes here and tells me off and we proceed to bitch and moan at each other on a private room or something. If we are to do changes for balance or shit like that, we will open a can of worms that I'd much rather leave closed, if you don't mind.
Deck Knight is right. Everybody here is simply suggesting random buffs to your types. Typing aren't supposed to give boosts like that -_-.
SO
I am ending this discussion here with one measure and one measure only being taken: Protect and Protect only will no longer be boosted by Rock STAB. This takes place soon (gotta give time for people to rage at me). You will know when it will take place 'cause I will post it on the implementation thread. Or post here if people change my mind (by force).
As for the other types: Buff Culture rule apply (check the buff culture thread), so we will discuss only changes to type effects that are problematic or 100% a waste (and given that type isn't supposed to give any boost really, I doubt anything can be considered a 100% waste). Changes/buffs for the heck of changing/buffing will be handled via word of god, aka, the moderation staff. Until other mod comes here and tells me off and we proceed to bitch and moan at each other on a private room or something. If we are to do changes for balance or shit like that, we will open a can of worms that I'd much rather leave closed, if you don't mind.
Discussion is dead. People are only willing to make suggestions for their focused types and say that everything else is too powerful and needs to be nerfed. Except for their well buffed types. Their types are completely balanced and should be left alone.
Funny thing with all of this is that the Rock Gym Leader suggested NERFING Rock. A significant difference from pretty much everyone else. The rock focused trained did not suggest buffing his type...
The 3 types that I feel need change are Rock (a Nerf to avoid Priority Protective Maneuvers (which are oddly completely balanced on Prankster pokemon for some reason)), Ice (holy crap that is bad. And now there is a suggestion to NERF freeze to make the current Ice STAB effect worthless), and Bug (Because not all Bug-Types actually benefit from the STAB. A little less than half of them, actually).
I really do not like the command effects, but it is apparent at this point they are here to stay good or bad. Let's try to get something done instead of sticking our heads in the sand until our focused types are buffed to godhood? At a later date we can see about buffing STAB effects or changing them so that they are remembered or have some meaningful effect on battles.
Funny thing with all of this is that the Rock Gym Leader suggested NERFING Rock. A significant difference from pretty much everyone else. The rock focused trained did not suggest buffing his type...
The 3 types that I feel need change are Rock (a Nerf to avoid Priority Protective Maneuvers (which are oddly completely balanced on Prankster pokemon for some reason)), Ice (holy crap that is bad. And now there is a suggestion to NERF freeze to make the current Ice STAB effect worthless), and Bug (Because not all Bug-Types actually benefit from the STAB. A little less than half of them, actually).
I really do not like the command effects, but it is apparent at this point they are here to stay good or bad. Let's try to get something done instead of sticking our heads in the sand until our focused types are buffed to godhood? At a later date we can see about buffing STAB effects or changing them so that they are remembered or have some meaningful effect on battles.
[20:26:20] <Texas> which is why i dont buy the argument that this is buff culture
[20:26:30] <Texas> if the intent is to make the most of the stab effects garbage
[20:26:33] <Texas> than go right ahead
[20:26:38] <Texas> you're on the right path
[20:26:52] <Texas> most of the suggested affects are completely reasonable and at least somewhat flavour justified
[20:27:18] <Texas> i only suggest things for dragont ype ebcause
[20:27:19] <Texas> shocker
[20:27:23] <Texas> i know dragon type the best
tl;dr i disagree with the last two posts
I personally think that the STAB effects should have some sort of passive bonus that actually carries some value. Taking Dragon because once again I know it best, saving 2 or 3 damage per 3v3 match carries zero value to me. Reducing the duration of status as I/akela suggested carries value, is not particularly powerful, and is flavour justified by lore suggesting Dragons are immune to maladies.
If you want the type boosts to be useless than be my guest, that's a valid goal and you're on the right path. If they're supposed to not be crap than the last two posts are going down the wrong road.
[20:26:30] <Texas> if the intent is to make the most of the stab effects garbage
[20:26:33] <Texas> than go right ahead
[20:26:38] <Texas> you're on the right path
[20:26:52] <Texas> most of the suggested affects are completely reasonable and at least somewhat flavour justified
[20:27:18] <Texas> i only suggest things for dragont ype ebcause
[20:27:19] <Texas> shocker
[20:27:23] <Texas> i know dragon type the best
tl;dr i disagree with the last two posts
I personally think that the STAB effects should have some sort of passive bonus that actually carries some value. Taking Dragon because once again I know it best, saving 2 or 3 damage per 3v3 match carries zero value to me. Reducing the duration of status as I/akela suggested carries value, is not particularly powerful, and is flavour justified by lore suggesting Dragons are immune to maladies.
If you want the type boosts to be useless than be my guest, that's a valid goal and you're on the right path. If they're supposed to not be crap than the last two posts are going down the wrong road.
Type stuff aren't supposed to be a changing thing. Just check the types that have 0 boosts. Or boosts that are nothing more than codification of what we had in flavor (see: rock and water). So if you say "they are garbage" then, well, they are? Garbage, niche, situational, if you want I can get more synonyms. They are that way, because they were made that way. and the fact that they are that way don't make them outclassed or problematic. And if there is no real issue that affects gameplay, we aren't fixing the game, we are changing it, doing creation.
We do little to no creation. We only tweak stuff that are wrong. Problematic. We don't change or create stuff for the heck of it. The creation part is not a matter of policy. Its a matter of game creation and that comes before policy kicks in. A matter of doing arbitrary changes to virtually anything, based on fluid and subjective parameters like personal preferance and what the person wants the game to be. And since it gets out of hand really fast, Deck decided to centralize everything on him (which means that now it falls upon the moderation staff to decide upon it).
The only part of STABs that was possibly problematic, that caused an issue, a severe unbalance was Priority Protect Passing. That gave rock types a considerable boost on doubles+. As for the other types: does steel become a worse type because it has no boosts? no. Does Dragon and Fairy become worse types because their boosts are easily forgetted? No. You play them out as usual and don't go thinking "oh if I had a type boost I would have a chance here". Any type boost (heck change or even nerf) for any type would be convenient, not necessary. "Convenient" = arbitrary and that is NOT to be dealt under policy, or else any and every aspect of ASB would be eligible for a change and last thing we know we would be playing an entirely different game. "Buff Culture" is a misleading expression really. In a nutshell we aren't change stuff that should be changed, the proposals here is to change stuff because we want them to change, because it would be convenient or nice and that is subjective, arbitrary and that reasoning can be used to change any and every aspect of ASB, even the ones that are "fine" as is.
"Oh but X type effect isn't as good as Y type effect!". I agree. But it was by design. If that difference is not problematic to the point of considerably affecting gameplay (like priority passed protect affects), then changing it is "arbitrary" not "necessary". We wouldn't be "fixing" the game, we would be changing the design of it, the intentions behind its creations and that goes beyond policy and falls upon the "buff culture" umbrella, even if it isn't actual buffing.
But making something clear: This is what I think. All changes proposed here are "for the heck of it", in my vision and as such aren't to be handled by the council, but via Word of God. And since Word God is divided in three triangular pieces (got the reference huehuehue) I decided to stop the discussion and making the change that everybody I asked deemed necessary. If the other mods feel that those changes are to be made, we can resume the discussion, but it would still be to be decided via word of god and not via council voting.
tl;dr: Buff Culture = changes (not necessarily buffs) that are too subjective or arbitrary and don't aim to fix problems that actually affect gameplay considerably. They are to be handled by word of god and not council. I fiated the protect part because it was unanimous. The other stuff I, as policy head, stopped because they are, at heart, arbitrary changes based on arbitrary suggestions that aim not to fix a broken part so it fulfills the intention behind it, but change the intention itself and those can't be made by council, so the discussion was pointless as it won't be sent to be booth. But if the mod team (or the majority of it) decides that those changes are convenient to be made, then we can resume the discussion on where we left off, with the difference that the final decision will be made by the mod team, not the council.
I haven't consulted IAR or DF on this btw and did that due to my own duties as policy head. If they both disagree with me you can consider the above part overruled and someone (read: not me, this is too confusing as is) can move forward to slating and stuff like that.
We do little to no creation. We only tweak stuff that are wrong. Problematic. We don't change or create stuff for the heck of it. The creation part is not a matter of policy. Its a matter of game creation and that comes before policy kicks in. A matter of doing arbitrary changes to virtually anything, based on fluid and subjective parameters like personal preferance and what the person wants the game to be. And since it gets out of hand really fast, Deck decided to centralize everything on him (which means that now it falls upon the moderation staff to decide upon it).
The only part of STABs that was possibly problematic, that caused an issue, a severe unbalance was Priority Protect Passing. That gave rock types a considerable boost on doubles+. As for the other types: does steel become a worse type because it has no boosts? no. Does Dragon and Fairy become worse types because their boosts are easily forgetted? No. You play them out as usual and don't go thinking "oh if I had a type boost I would have a chance here". Any type boost (heck change or even nerf) for any type would be convenient, not necessary. "Convenient" = arbitrary and that is NOT to be dealt under policy, or else any and every aspect of ASB would be eligible for a change and last thing we know we would be playing an entirely different game. "Buff Culture" is a misleading expression really. In a nutshell we aren't change stuff that should be changed, the proposals here is to change stuff because we want them to change, because it would be convenient or nice and that is subjective, arbitrary and that reasoning can be used to change any and every aspect of ASB, even the ones that are "fine" as is.
"Oh but X type effect isn't as good as Y type effect!". I agree. But it was by design. If that difference is not problematic to the point of considerably affecting gameplay (like priority passed protect affects), then changing it is "arbitrary" not "necessary". We wouldn't be "fixing" the game, we would be changing the design of it, the intentions behind its creations and that goes beyond policy and falls upon the "buff culture" umbrella, even if it isn't actual buffing.
But making something clear: This is what I think. All changes proposed here are "for the heck of it", in my vision and as such aren't to be handled by the council, but via Word of God. And since Word God is divided in three triangular pieces (got the reference huehuehue) I decided to stop the discussion and making the change that everybody I asked deemed necessary. If the other mods feel that those changes are to be made, we can resume the discussion, but it would still be to be decided via word of god and not via council voting.
tl;dr: Buff Culture = changes (not necessarily buffs) that are too subjective or arbitrary and don't aim to fix problems that actually affect gameplay considerably. They are to be handled by word of god and not council. I fiated the protect part because it was unanimous. The other stuff I, as policy head, stopped because they are, at heart, arbitrary changes based on arbitrary suggestions that aim not to fix a broken part so it fulfills the intention behind it, but change the intention itself and those can't be made by council, so the discussion was pointless as it won't be sent to be booth. But if the mod team (or the majority of it) decides that those changes are convenient to be made, then we can resume the discussion on where we left off, with the difference that the final decision will be made by the mod team, not the council.
I haven't consulted IAR or DF on this btw and did that due to my own duties as policy head. If they both disagree with me you can consider the above part overruled and someone (read: not me, this is too confusing as is) can move forward to slating and stuff like that.
wall of text blah blah blah
"If you want the type boosts to be useless than be my guest, that's a valid goal and you're on the right path."
I really don't care if STAB boosts go through or not, what I cared about was that the discussion was shut down with inadequate reasoning.
If what you've posted is the official policy going forward than that's fine. That's adequate reasoning to deal with pretty well any attempted creations. That hasn't been the case in the past, it hasn't been made clear and evident previously, and it wasn't the case under the context of this thread. I personally have no problem moving forward under that set of assumptions, just make sure that such a majorly central component of policy as this is made clear and evident in places of importance (feedback, beginners, handbook perhaps). Ensuring that the community is aware of that stance and that policy being established is a far more important outcome of this thread than any changes to STAB effects.
Summary of thread:
- Passed Protect is poof
- All other types get fukt
- Non-game detrimental effects are not the domain of the council
- /endthread
"If you want the type boosts to be useless than be my guest, that's a valid goal and you're on the right path."
I really don't care if STAB boosts go through or not, what I cared about was that the discussion was shut down with inadequate reasoning.
If what you've posted is the official policy going forward than that's fine. That's adequate reasoning to deal with pretty well any attempted creations. That hasn't been the case in the past, it hasn't been made clear and evident previously, and it wasn't the case under the context of this thread. I personally have no problem moving forward under that set of assumptions, just make sure that such a majorly central component of policy as this is made clear and evident in places of importance (feedback, beginners, handbook perhaps). Ensuring that the community is aware of that stance and that policy being established is a far more important outcome of this thread than any changes to STAB effects.
Summary of thread:
- Passed Protect is poof
- All other types get fukt
- Non-game detrimental effects are not the domain of the council
- /endthread
Hey it is your decision Frosty you are the policy leader after all...
Though I would not have minded the council voting on Rock STAB nerf between no change, remove protect, and akela's proposed nerf or w/e since that technically is not buff culture and proposals were done because some people felt the current Rock STAB effect is "too good", not because why not.
Though I would not have minded the council voting on Rock STAB nerf between no change, remove protect, and akela's proposed nerf or w/e since that technically is not buff culture and proposals were done because some people felt the current Rock STAB effect is "too good", not because why not.
Alright update.
We had a little conversation on the PM corner and we decided, for now, to pass on changes only for:
a) Rock: put the above for voting
b) Fairy: change the STAB Effect to something that counteracts Fairy's lack of moves.
Reasoning for "a" was given here. For "b" the reasoning is that ingame having only one physical move of a type isn't a problem if said move is good. But it is a big problem here, with imprison, torment, disable and such being a thing. We thought it would be adequate to have ASB's special type effects counter a weakness for the fairy typing that wasn't by design and resulted from ASB's special mechanics. Suggestions given so far are:
a) Mini-Pixilate command
b) Reduction on consecutive usage penalty
We would like some discussion before implementing anything. The choice/implementation will probably be done via council, obeying the guideline above (unless there isn't discussion, in which case we will just fiat something).
Other types (mostly the ones with commands on) may be revisited later.
We had a little conversation on the PM corner and we decided, for now, to pass on changes only for:
a) Rock: put the above for voting
b) Fairy: change the STAB Effect to something that counteracts Fairy's lack of moves.
Reasoning for "a" was given here. For "b" the reasoning is that ingame having only one physical move of a type isn't a problem if said move is good. But it is a big problem here, with imprison, torment, disable and such being a thing. We thought it would be adequate to have ASB's special type effects counter a weakness for the fairy typing that wasn't by design and resulted from ASB's special mechanics. Suggestions given so far are:
a) Mini-Pixilate command
b) Reduction on consecutive usage penalty
We would like some discussion before implementing anything. The choice/implementation will probably be done via council, obeying the guideline above (unless there isn't discussion, in which case we will just fiat something).
Other types (mostly the ones with commands on) may be revisited later.
Personally, I prefer options d and b. I am totally fine with how fairy stab is now, and if anything is to be done, I feel that the arguably least powerful option should be chosen. I don't see the reason to bastardize Pixilate, and option c is, IMO, far too powerful.
Well since nobody else provided additional input for days, I shall slate it as per Frosty's:
For reference, this is the Enchant Command, suggested by IAR in the last page. Although I would like it better if we name it the Trolliate Command.
And in the event that option c) gets majority, we'll be voting, one by one, which of the three moves would Fairies be immune to. 48-hour window on last thoughts for the slate, and then we'll wrap it up for good.