OPEN DISCUSSION - Gym Concerns and Issues

Frosty

=_=
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Regarding 1: Everybody makes abuseable subs. But better players make subs harder to abuse. If you can do well vs a very good player, you can do really well vs an only decent player. Also when the player is winning solidly, the tendency is that they lower their guards and don't focus as much, which makes it worse to measure the potential of that player to the point of being able to distinguish small gaps in abilities. I personally find it best to face a better player because that way the candidate will be pretty much obliged to be on their toes the entire game.

But honestly, I don't really care as you would need candidates with really really close capabilities for that to make a difference. More often than not you can clearly determine who played the best.

Regarding 2: Treat them the same way as megas= more than 1? Allow only on special situations when the typing or arena warrants that. In the end you would get pretty much the same end result, but at least consistency?

Regarding 3: I do 6vs6 for a while now with DQ= 4 (trying 3 and 6 for whoever orders first now. Will check how it goes as soon as I have stable computer not at work for a change ;_;) and my matches hardly go over 2 months. Actually some of them do, but that is more due to me and/or my opponents being johns (/hides battle vs df) than because of the number of pokemon per side or DQ rules.

Personally I see no reason to stabilish a limit like that. 4vs4 on Poison Gym is slow as fuck, while on Ground Gym is super quick. Both Fairy and Ice Gyms have the same settings, but the former is considerably faster than the latter. There are offensive and defensive gyms and not every challenge has to be quick. I like gyms that can give a variety of tests to the challenger and a longer battle is a kind of test, as the strategies you apply there are different from the ones you use on shorter battles. And variety is good on a league or else it is boring to no end.

It is best to just have the committee put limits on a case-by-case basis, as they are doing right now. No need to put a single limit for everything, as: a) it is too restrictive; and b) 5vs5 singles is still bogus and 4vs4 triples is ridiculous. 3 days to order on singles is a lot, but while ordering first on doubles/triples it certainly isn't.
 
Last edited:
Oops, kinda let this die out. I want to tackle a host of topics, but since we only have one thread imo it makes sense to do things one at a time. So briefly getting back to the possible change in qualifier setup, it seems like most people are in favor of this change and that nobody has any hard objections to it?

As for who weighs in to decide the candidate that played best, I've given it some thought and I'd prefer to just have the committee decide. While of course other users can give their opinions, as Frosty said, it is usually clear which player played best, so I don't see the need to formally involve a latge group of people. I think a bigger group will just slow down the process without adding much value.

I don't mind the person conducting the qualifiers using rental Pokemon. I hadn't thought about that until Birkal brought it up, but I think it's a good idea. In the case that the person conducting the qualifiers changes, this will help to keep different qualifiers around the same difficulty? I think having the rental Pokemon have around 80 KOC each to invest sounds appropriate? IDK, I would like just a little more feedback on this before we move forward one way or the other.

On that note, if anyone has any more feedback in general on this, I'd like to wrap this up soon so we can finalize an ETA for Dragon and Grass qualifiers. Tentatively (and without talking to Dogfish/Stratos) I'm spitballing end of June, but thats far from a finalized date.
 

Its_A_Random

A distant memory
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Incidentally can we have an activity check on Gerard?

He has not been on since the 28th of March, last posted on the 23rd in our SiCK match that ended in DQ recently, and has not made a post related to his Psyquic Gym since the 9th of March when we wrapped up our gym match. He has also been DQed from his gym match with Frosty and has had unaccepted matches with Rediamond and Geodude6. Not fully sure that it warrants a review yet but this is starting to become a concern (I really hope he is okay).

That said, I do not have much on this qualifying proposal though it is better than what we have. Rentals are a good idea but how is that going to work?
 
Devil's advocate to the qualifier proposal:

For types with many weaknesses, the exact team brought by the challenger can really change the match. For example, let's say that for a hypothetical bug qualifier the leader candidates brought the following teams:

1) Heracross, Galvantula, Armaldo, Shuckle, Wormadam-S, Scizor
2) Heracross, Aurumoth, Volcarona, Scizor, Pinsir, Armaldo

The first team is three-deep in checks to all potential type threats and can bring in the best counter to a 1 Fire/1 Rock/1 Flying team, but in exchange half of it is near deadweight against a balanced challenger or one trying to win without major counter-teaming. But the second one is going to do much better against a team trying to win on something other than sheer type advantage and features the strongest singles threats that the bug gym can offer (as well as a solid check for each type.

If the opponent were to bring in a relatively balanced team, Team 2 would make for a much better response. If the opponent were to bring in Pyroak, Charizard-X, and Infernape, Team 1 is doing a fair bit better. And while you might discount whether or not the candidate wins and rely solely on subjective "quality of play," that ignores the reality that having momentum constantly against you due to matchup alone makes good plays much, much harder to pull off and means you have to devote almost all of your subs to just not getting decimated, making it look like you're routinely being outplayed even when you gave the best subs possible. So for some types (flying suffers this too, for example) the nature of the team brought by EM or whomever could lead to dramatically different outcomes in apparently playstyle due to different response strategies. And for a real gym leader where type-heavy challenges and relatively type-neutral (or at least type-balanced) challenges will be about equal.

For electric this wouldn't be as much of a problem since the choice between going three-deep in checks or bringing the three strongest 'mons isn't a real choice. But for ice, flying, grass, etc. that's a problem. I think you would need to have multiple challengers with different team styles or strategies to really see how effective a leader would be and at that point qualifiers just save time and refs.

EDIT: Devil's advocation over. It's not really a bad idea, and the status quo certainly has its own problems, but I can't think of an incident where a blantantly unqualified candidate beat out a qualified one. Is this really an issue that's been a problem before? Especially since for most types there are good qualifier mons that are at least decent in a gym battle.
 
Devil's advocate to the qualifier proposal:

EDIT: Devil's advocation over. It's not really a bad idea, and the status quo certainly has its own problems, but I can't think of an incident where a blantantly unqualified candidate beat out a qualified one. Is this really an issue that's been a problem before? Especially since for most types there are good qualifier mons that are at least decent in a gym battle.
Red, I think the problem with the status quo of qualifiers is that, they need the Gym Leader candidates to prepare a team that could beat a team of the same type, rather than testing the candidates on the real challenges that would come their way.

But as you said, it would be cool if a Gym Leader candidate could face different folks with different teams and strategies to prove themselves as worthy for the title. Although, keeping logistics in mind, and giving due credit to Elevator Music's judgement, we may not need such an extensive test of the candidate's skill. Though your point would be the way to go in a perfect environment (with computers doing our reffing probably? ^_^), I think Elevator Music's suggestion is apt for our status quo to take that 'next step' towards better qualifiers.

Elevator Music, I think that maxed rental mons would be a good test for a Gym Leader candidate. Although 2/3rd of the move pool is pretty decent. So if a pokemon has 100 moves, then 66 would be the number of moves we could look at. So something like this would be decent imo:

Pokemon #Signature Item / Mega Stone / All Items
Total moves: 100
Max allowed moves: 66
Total KOC: (66*1.5) = 99
All level up moves
5 Egg moves
5 TMs
Prev Gen Tutor / TM = 2 move slots

Also for the items, I think they should be unique across the rental pokemon. Like, no using 3 Expert Belts. But it is just for fluff.

Edit: Imo, just avoid the whole KOC thing and go Maxed rentals to make things easier (atleast for the first time).
 
I understand that the qualifiers distort incentives in team-building, but since a few recent gyms have banned strong challengers at their opening and this hasn't demonstrably led to someone unqualified getting a gym (with the arguable exception of flying years ago) I think this is trying to add subjectivity to an objective formula to fix a problem that arguably doesn't exist.
 

Frosty

=_=
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
I feel we are splitting hairs here. No method is perfect. The one proposed is at least much more likely to netting the better results then the current one, as it mimics what the gym leader is supposed to do. Be the Gym Leader for a battle and see how it goes, the one that does it better will be the gym leader. Seems like a valid plan.

Teambuilding and trying to counterteam is as important as the actual orders, so what red pointed out is actually a good thing about qualifiers. Candidates must be able to predict the team that will be used against them and prepare properly...or admit that they can't do so and go with a conservative route. No reason to have any kind of fluff in that department, as the gym leader, in the end, will have to perform in that exact same situation without any handicap or special fluff other than 3 extra pokemon to work with.

Sure, prediction is "glorified guessing" as some ingamers would say, but the situation that presents itself to the leader has raw prediction involved. It is only logical that the candidates pass through that exact same situation.

(On that vein I fail to see the need for rentals. Unless you have like 10-15 known rentals to choose from and make a team to face the candidates, having a specific pool of pokemon to choose from is necessary so we see how well the leader tries to counter the major threats.)
 
I'd only support rentals if the candidates are fully aware and able to see what these rentals are, like Frosty said. If these rentals are hidden until the thread goes up, it takes the "glorified guessing" that some people may call correctly predicting what will be brought into the Gym to "ok who the fuck told you what they were gonna bring?"

Furthermore, making profiles from scratch is just a waste of time imo. Why not take a pool of 10 or so already existing profiles (a la SICK) and say that those are the only profiles that the proxy challenger has in their "profile" that are viable picks for the Gym and have the potential leaders prepare for whatever mons Emma or whoever is gonna pick from that?
 

Stratos

Banned deucer.
2) Similar to allowing more than one mega evolution, can we require gyms by default to require at least one mega evolution? Dropping to zero can severely limit what you bring. Given that mega evolutions are such an integral part of the game, gym leaders should have to use up an arena effect to justify dropping down to zero.
i guess if u never want the grass gym to win a match again then u can do this
 
i guess if u never want the grass gym to win a match again then u can do this
While I understand that the 1 Mega rule can hurt some types more than others (I'd have a harder time when allowing people 1 Mega, too), I doubt it can render a certain type completely helpless. Or are you telling me that suddenly, allowing Megazard X/Y is going to put Grass-type in an unrecoverable situation?

EDIT: If it weren't clear, I'm in favor of forcing all gym leaders to allow 1 Mega evolution to their battles. No more, no less.
 

Its_A_Random

A distant memory
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
zarator: Because there are a crapton of mega evolutions that are capable of completely ripping the Grass-type gym to shreds. Mega Salamence, Mega Charizard X and Y, Mega Houndoom, Mega Beedrill, Mega Blaziken, Mega Glalie, Mega Scizor, Mega Gengar, Mega Venusaur, I could stand here for two hours and name Mega Evolutions that can destroy that gym. Compare it to other gyms and you will never see a list as long as the Grass-type gym has. Grass-type gyms in ASB have it very bad and are generally reliant on Pyroak to be able to stop the Gym from arguably being an easy-beat gym, and that is not factoring in Mega Evolutions.

I am against this change because it is arbitrary, it is pointless, and the argument that it limits what you brings is bullcrap (stop thinking that counterteams are the only way to win a gym), especially when there is zero justification behind that argument. You want it, you gotta prove it.
 
Its_A_Random: Half these Mega Evolutions are only slightly stronger than the base Pokemon with an item such as Expert Belt. The only exceptions I can think of are Mega Charizard X/Y, Mega Beedrill (who's not THAT powerful compared to a strong base Pokemon with an item), Mega Gengar (mainly because of Shadow Tag), and maybe Mega Salamence and Mega Pinsir (because of Aerilate). I won't touch upon Mega Venusaur because the Gym Leader can use it as well and some Grass mons (most notably Ferrothorn) counter it nicely.

Bottom line is: most Mega mons are actually quite comparable to a good Pokemon with an item - look at Mega Scizor or Mega Houndoom for example. Sure, they do put some extra pressure on some gym leaders, but I fail to see that as a reason for excluding a mechanic that is otherwise as part of standard gaming as is, say, switching <.<

EDIT: Also I'd like to point out that Arena effects DO exist. A Grass-type gym arena with everlasting Rain and default Stealth Rock on the opponent's side (basically EVERYTHING that threatens Grass-types but Poison-types are Rock weak), for example, can cripple half these apparently threatening Mega Evolutions with little effort.
 

Its_A_Random

A distant memory
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
zarator: Mega Venusaur is very hard for a Grass-type Gym to deal with being forced to rely on Pokémon such as Jumpluff and Exeggutor to hit it super effectively and it is vastly bulkier. Furthermore Mega Houndoom has Flash Fire and Solar Power on by default, allowing it to raze through Fire-type weaks with ease. Chucking in perma-rain as an arena effect only succeeds in weakening Pyroak who is one of the gym's most important Pokémon and default Stealth Rock on the opponent's side would likely never get approved by the Gym Committee unless in exceptional circumstances. The "You can use it too" in the case of Mega Venusaur is just a flimsy excuse. Also team-mates exist.

But that is nitpicking. With the exception of Mega Scizor, Mega Sableye, and Mega Sharpedo, the idea that a mega evolution is just a regular mon with an item attached in terms of offensive power is wrong, especially when it comes with a change in speed tiers, generally improved bulk... Try stepping into Stratos' shoes and be the Grass-type Gym Leader for a few months and realise just how tough it can really be.

I am still yet to see a compelling argument for making one mega evolution compulsory in gyms. You could say "But in-game precedence" but this is not cartridge Pokémon; this is ASB. Sure we might borrow a lot from the cartridge but that does not mean we have to be like the cartridge. Forcing players to play with one Mega Evolution is like forcing players to play Singles Formats or with Two Recovers/Five Chills per Pokémon only or forcing you to play All Abilities in your Gym: It is a pointless, arbitrary, variety-removing change that causes more harm than good.
 

Birkal

We have the technology.
is a Top Artistis a Top CAP Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
I don't know why my post has been translated as, "all gyms must allow at least one mega evolution." Of course Grass-type gym should opt for zero mega evolutions, since allowing them only exacerbates Grass' problems. But similar to how gyms must request access to more than one mega evolution, we should require gyms to provide justification for going zero mega evolutions. I doubt it would be hard for Grass-type to make the case for it.

The difference between requiring one mega evolution and other 'pointless, arbitrary rules' is that people pour a lot of time and energy into raising their mega evolutions. Many of them could have niche purpose within a gym that they wouldn't have anywhere else. Beedrill, Pidgeot, Ampharos, Audino, Blastoise, Pinsir, Houndoom, Manectric, Abomasnow, Sceptile, Sharpedo, Glalie, and more are all relatively unviable Pokemon that suddenly become usable when we allow one mega evolution. As a personal anecdote, I have a well-trained Ampharos that I was looking forward to bringing to the Water-type gym as a niche slot. But since the gym leader chose zero megas, I pretty much lost the only reason to bring Ampharos to the gym. To me, it's frustrating that a gym leader could hamper a team without their being any repercussions for it in terms of their arena effects.
 

Its_A_Random

A distant memory
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
The same thing could be said for other things like battle formats and Ability numbers though. "Oh no it's one ability I cannot bring Conkeldurr to the Steel Gym anymore." How is mega evolutions any different to the other clauses?
 
There is also the argument that forcing a mega evolution also limits team building. I mean sure the challenger doesn't have to bring one but if they know the leader is they might feel they must and of course it limits leaders who already face the disadvantage of type specialization.

Also, what's the point in making it an "arena effect" when the value of arena effects are so nebulous and arbitrary anyway? I very much doubt people would rank all of the gyms as "equal" but even putting that aside what "value" would "No Megas/One Mega/Two Mega" have? What "value" should 1v1 or 3v3 have? You want to talk about constricting team building, a triples match changes things quite a bit compared to a singles and far more than mega or no mega does.
 
Last edited:

Birkal

We have the technology.
is a Top Artistis a Top CAP Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
The same thing could be said for other things like battle formats and Ability numbers though. "Oh no it's one ability I cannot bring Conkeldurr to the Steel Gym anymore." How is mega evolutions any different to the other clauses?
Because you can actually use Conkeldurr when abilities are limited. These are two different things. The fact that you can still bring Conkeldurr to the match is what makes it fair. Now, whether or not bringing Conkeldurr would be a good idea or not is up for the challenger to decide, but at least they have the option. By limiting challengers to zero megas, you cannot bring any Mega Evolutions to the gym. I'd argue that Mega Evolutions are not the same as their original Pokemon, but of course the point is arbitrary. Both Mega Ampharos and Mega Pinsir, for example, change types, get a new ability, and serve almost an entirely different niche. These Pokemon and their niches are inaccessible when any Gym Leader is allowed to ban them with no consequence (in the form of a gym effect).

This is a gray area, naturally, so it'd be nice if you stopped treating it as a black or white one.
 
How did challengers ever win a battle before mega evolutions exist, if not allowing mega evolutions severely limits what the challenger can bring?
 
Because you can actually use Conkeldurr when abilities are limited. These are two different things. The fact that you can still bring Conkeldurr to the match is what makes it fair. Now, whether or not bringing Conkeldurr would be a good idea or not is up for the challenger to decide, but at least they have the option.
By that same Logic, you can still bring Ampharos, you just can't equip it with the mega stone. Now, whether or not bringing Ampharos would be a good idea or not is up for the challenger to decide, but at least they have the option.

Mega Ampharos is not a different pokemon from Ampharos. Items can change how a mon is used (Leftovers/Black Sludge, vs Expert Belt, vs Focus Mand, vs Mega Stone) but it's still the same mon.
 

Its_A_Random

A distant memory
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Yes Birkal attacking the poorly constructed example is totally going to help your argument, especially when your Ampharos example can just as easily be twisted to suit the defence... -.-'

Your teambuilding argument is not convincing in the slightest, especially when you look back to before mega evolutions existed and you still have not proved to us how making one mega the default changes things or helps with team teambuilding; Cannot use Mega Ampharos? Magnet Ampharos is a great substitute for the Water-type gym. No Mega Pinsir? Adapt and use Everstone on it to beat the Grass-type gym instead. You act as if a Pokémon is useless without its Mega Evolution when it is in fact, not. Players adapt to the conditions instead of resorting to black and white tactics. That is not limiting teambuilding or at least, not limiting teambuilding to a noticeable effect to care (as in, no mega evolutions is inherently restrictive since 40-odd items have no effect but it goes both ways so it balances out to no noticeable restrictions).

Again. How is it any different to the other clauses to warrant a change?
 
I see banning megas being more like banning really high-powered legends more than anything. Most megas are way stronger than the average pokemon, with some notable exceptions. Some gyms just can't handle them (looking at Grass, Ice, and Rock, who all have a wide variety of powerful megas to deal with, from types that really like megas). I'm not quite sure why water went 0 megas (Swampert and Slowbro make quite nice megas), but even gyms like Dark, Electric, and Ghost prefer 0 megas since the megas aren't that helpful (At least, not compared to the megas they'd have to deal with).

Disclaimer: this is all IMO

Types that don't like megas:
Dark (Absol, Gyarados, Houndoom, Sableye, Sharpedo, Tyranitar) Could probably go one mega, but then it'd have to deal with bug, fairy, and fighting megas
Electric (Ampharos, Manectric)
Ghost (Banette, Gengar, Sableye) All its megas can be used against it just as well as for it .-.
Grass (Abomasnow, Sceptile, Venusaur)
Ice (Abomasnow, Glalie)
Rock (Aerodactyl, Diancie, Tyranitar)

Types that like 2+ megas:
Bug (Beedrill, Heracross, Pinsir, Scizor)
Fairy (Altaria, Audino, Diancie, Gardevoir, Mawile) Emma only has Mawile (Audino doesn't count), so one mega. Probably only needs one mega, though
Fighting (Blaziken, Gallade, Heracross, Lucario, Medicham)
Fire (Blaziken, Camerupt, Charizard X, Charizard Y, Houndoom) Maybe, there are 3 pokemon with really good megas though so eh. Frosty runs 1 mega though.
Flying (Aerodactyl, Charizard Y, Pidgeot, Pinsir, Salamence) Mostly because there aren't a lot of electric/ice/rock megas that are actually good in flying gym
Poison (Beedrill, Gengar, Venusaur)
Psychic (Alakazam, Gallade, Gardevoir, Latias, Latios, Medicham, Metagross, Mewtwo X, Mewtwo Y, Slowbro)

Types that like 1 mega:
Dragon (Altaria, Ampharos, Charizard X, Garchomp, Latias, Latios, Salamence, Sceptile)
Ground (Camerupt, Garchomp, Steelix, Swampert) Maybe 2, since Camerupt and Steelix are both really useful
Normal (Audino, Kangaskhan, Lopunny, Pidgeot)
Steel (Aggron, Lucario, Mawile, Metagross, Scizor, Steelix) Could probably go 2 megas, but then again fire and fighting mevos so it could go 0 as well, like tavok did
Water (Blastoise, Gyarados, Sharpedo, Slowbro, Swampert)


Since there's just so much variety in how many megas a gym could want, I would say anywhere from 0-2 mevos should be an option for gls without an arena effect (over 2 is just ridiculous though -.-). Honestly, I think that having a variety of max mevos helps keep gyms fresh, just like any other rule change between gyms, so we should let them do that.
 

Birkal

We have the technology.
is a Top Artistis a Top CAP Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Mega Ampharos is not a different pokemon from Ampharos. Items can change how a mon is used (Leftovers/Black Sludge, vs Expert Belt, vs Focus Mand, vs Mega Stone) but it's still the same mon.
See, and I would argue they are different, which is why I alluded to this being a gray area in my previous post. They could be considered the same Pokémon, but my argument is that there is enough difference to warrant this shift.

I don't care enough about this game to host a serious debate on it (sorry lol). Just something I thought we could improve. Obviously I will concede if in the minority. Would be nice if we could all be on the same team in this thread =/
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top