(Data) State of the Game - 09/05/2011 (Gym Announcement Post #53, Pay Day HotFix in OP)

[Deck Knight]

ASB HotFix: Pay Day is now capped at Three (#) Extra TC per match, AND you must win your match in order to collect extra TC from Pay Day. This Change applies to all battles from this point forward, including ones which are ongoing. The spamming of Pay Day has become unethical, immoral and against the purpose of ASB as a whole. Until Deck gives us a final ruling, I am taking matters into my own hands to stop this BS that is undermining ASB entirely. -Kaxtar

Committee Members:
Seven Deadly Sins
DarkSlay
Kaxtar
Flora
iiMKUltra
deadfox081
Objection
TravelLog
Rediamond
IceBug
Gerard

A large number of changes have been made, which can be view in the ASB Policy Advisory. Because there were no votes last time, the Standing Committee remains the same.

Now for questions:

1. New Substitution rules.

It's been a week, so there's been a chance for some battles to spring up. Do additional substitutions help against diverse, threatening Pokemon like Gengar and Cyclohm?

I have received a few complaints about the lower limit being 20 moves. While this might be too low, any change would not be large, perhaps up from 20 to 22. In any case, I'm interested to see what the results of this change are.

2. Weight/Size Feedback

These changes were quite sweeping and increased offensive potential even further, both for and against heavier Pokemon. Don't know if anyone's been using Bodyblock/Take Cover, but I'll take any feedback on that. Dodge feedback is also welcome, but please don't turn it into an evasion discussion.

3. Minor updates

I'm considering a few minor tweaks to moves and effects.

3a. Ending Toxic cap.

5 DPA is pretty strong, but Toxic really doesn't have an in-game limit. And really, if your opponent even gets to the point where Toxic would go above 5 DPA, you're either hopelessly outmatched or they are ridiculously good at stalling.

3b. Removing Sky Attack's next-action flinch.

Given that the combination system has been fleshed out, there are a lot more actions that have -2 priority, meaning Sky Attack can legitimately flinch them. Sky Attack also has generally fewer weaknesses as a move in ASB than in the cartridge, so it really stands on its own. 14 BAP with only a charging drawback is manageable.

4. Energy Restriction on combinations.

While I still believe individual moves should be usable even if it would energy KO you (bar Selfdestruct/Explosion), for combinations, I'm implementing a stipulation you must be able to afford the combined base cost of both moves, even if you can't afford the final cost of the combination (e.g. For Focus Punch + Ice Punch you need to have 10+ 6 [16] EN even if you can't afford the 24 EC to use the combination.

Announcements:

Two Projects will be coming shortly to ASB.

ASB Gym League:
The first project is the implementation of Gyms. Upper level staff have discussed the parameters of Gyms and have reached a conclusion. I will provide a brief outline of what will be needed to apply.

1. At least 5 Fully Evolved Pokemon of the Gym's type.
2. Confidence that the movepools of these 5 Pokemon are sufficient to hold their own against a variety of diverse opponents.
3. The availability of time and dedication to be involved in at least two additional battles at once against gym challengers.

The first Gyms will be decided based on interest. In order for a gym to be established, at least two trainers must express an interest in that gym type. If there are more than two, a process will be in place to select the two most fit. Then those trainers will battle on muutally agreed to terms for battle format (3vs3 singles of 4vs4 doubles), and the winner will become the Gym leader. The other trainer may then choose to become a gym apprentice (a stand-in for when the leader goes on vacation, with perhaps other duties to be fleshed out later). There will be no gym selections by fiat, regardless of any previous arrangements.

CAP Revamp:
The second project (which might impact the previous one) is a revamping of the 4th Gen CAP Pokemon for ASB. When ASB was initially created in February, in order to enhance interest and allow input a haphazard process was put in place to determine the CAP Pokemon's 5th Generation movepools, Hidden Abilities, etc. This project will start that from scratch, while keeping the stats, types, size/weight, and all 4th Gen data the same. I will directly manage the process for each CAP going forward, directing user input with specific questions. This will be a lengthy process, but will be better for the game as a whole. Note that this process does not apply to Tomohawk, as it was created solely in the 5th Gen and is thus locked, canonically speaking.

[Maxim]

One question I had, will the 5th gen move revamp remove moves from mons that already have them. (For instance, if Stratagem's Giga Drain is removed from his level up list, will I have to remove that move from him)?

Other than that, I'm excited for the gyms, good work so far!

EDIT: Oh questions

1. I don't have too much experience for that, but I think how the current system works is fine. However, it might help to have some other way to have two substitutions. What I mean is, trying to avoid fiasco's like this match where his pokemon was weak enough to have only one sub, but having two moves that would result, at best, in him scoring three hits and me scoring one hit (Bounce and Dig). Not trying to berate my opponent or anything, just something I'd like to see fixed.

2. Eh, I've never used it. Almost feels like it's nerfing bulkier pokemon like Snorlax in exchange for fast, agile pokemon like Weavile. Of course, Snorlax can still bodyblock effectively so take this with a grain of salt.

3. I'd agree with removing both of those things, since most things get something to avoid poison anyways (it might even encourage a minor stalling metagame)

4. Yeah, that would be really good In my opinion.

[Engineer Pikachu]

1. Substitutions

I think that they are definitely helping, not just against "brokenmons", but against more developed Pokemon as a whole. Given that most Pokemon with some move investment can circumvent a substitution, being able to block off more than one possible route is good.

2. Weight/Size

This really hasn't impacted me in terms of battling, but it does make reffing a tad bit harder, what with having to keep track of two more stats and some moves. Just throwing that out there.

3 and 4.

I agree with these.

EDIT: Some thoughts of my own.

How does the multiple substitution rule apply to Double and Triple battles?
Since the number of substitutions you can make is based on the move count and BST of your opponent, what do you do if your opponents do not warrant the same number of substitutions?

Increase the cost of Signature Items.
As of now, some signature items are extremely good; the Electirizer/Magmarizer acts pretty much as Muscle Band and Wise Glasses combined, the Protector is essentially Focus Band and Focus Sash averaged out, and the Thick Club is a Choice Band but without the "Choice" part. All these signature items can be bought for less than half or sometimes one-third of their 20 BP equivalent item. I'm not complaining that it's unfair to Pokemon who do not have a signature item; I'm complaining that it is too easy to obtain the signature items. What I propose is simply doubling the cost of these items; in all cases, it's still less than 20 TC, but it's not too cheap anymore.

[zarator]

I agree with almost anything you presented in the OP (finally a chance to give Colossoil the much deserved Drill Run!), but as I said on IRC, one thing bugs me especially about Gyms.

In order for a gym to be established, at least two trainers must express an interest in that gym type

I can see why you put these rule in, but there are a lot of situations where it would make little to no sense. Let's suppose Alchemator is the only person who wishes to become a Psychic-type Gym Leader (or at least assume he's the only one who wants to and meets the requirement). Does this mean he'd be rejected solely because there are no other challengers, regardless of the fact Psychic is a very good type?

This sounds kinda silly IMO, and I hope this part is changed or eliminated.

[Gerard]

^^
THIS!

I was going to say, that wouldn't that serve to "hold" a gym, if only one person has good bug team, then he deserves to be the gym leader unless his team is underdeveloped, in theory as long as there is only one person looking forward to do that then you have all the time to go wild and train your pokemon to beat that gym leader, which seems kind of unfair (as long as i hate to give the dream of psyquic gym u.u)

[Deck Knight]

RE: Needing two people for a Gym

There are two reasons for this.

The first is that there are 17 types. The types with the most interest will be the first to be established. I don't intend on setting up 17 gyms at once, it will most likely be the 8 most popular, and then expansions after that.

The second is that there needs to be an alternate to take care of gym battles if the leader has a standard vacation length hiatus (1 week). Being qualified to have the gym implies some level of familiarity with the type.

No one "deserves" to be a gym leader just for being unique. Gym Leaders will lose their positions if they cannot maintain a good winning record (at least 3 of their first 5 battles must be wins or they will be replaced.) If anything, Gyms are designed to be more meritorious than the rest of ASB, not less.

RE: Size/Weight/Dodge

The actual addition of Size Classes increased the ability of all Pokemon to Dodge, since it added the base rate to the formula. Lax just isn't good at dodging, period. Unless TR is active.

RE: Bounce/Dig

Combinations can work around this if you're slower than the Bouncing/Digging foe. The hit on Dig/Bounce is at -2, combinations have -2 priority. It's expensive, but you can just smash them with a combination to get that damage in.

Originally Posted by Fat Engineer Pikachu

How does the multiple substitution rule apply to Double and Triple battles?
Since the number of substitutions you can make is based on the move count and BST of your opponent, what do you do if your opponents do not warrant the same number of substitutions?

If you are making Substitutions against a Pokemon that qualifies for two, you can make two substitutions. If you are making substitutions against a Pokemon that only qualifies for one, you can only make one. Finally, if you are making a substitution against one pokemon and another Pokemon is strong enough to warrant two substitutions against it, you can also issue a substitution if that Pokemon acts. However, your substitutions between the two Pokemon cannot conflict. (e.g. if A Taunts use Focus Punch A1, if B use Dig use Earthquake A1 - it's entirely possible for A to Taunt and B to Dig simultaneously.) The maximum number of substitutions in any battle is two.

[Tortferngatr]

1. New Substitution rules.
I've been one of the complainers. I still have to see how this pans out-given that I haven't really faced anything brokemon besides Cyclohm (and TBH, if I had played better I might have had a better chance,) I can't yet give an opinion besides that outside of Gengar, Cyclohm, Steelix, and Dragonite (the latter two simply having a crapton of options, Dragonite in particular only being overshadowed by Cyclohm), I didn't exactly think the second substitution was ever necessary.

2. Weight/Size Feedback

I've actually considered using Bodyblock in NFE Triples. It's definitely good there, where most things are only 1 size.

3. Minor updates

I'm considering a few minor tweaks to moves and effects.

3a. Meh, Toxic is a generally good move. It doesn't need a buff. Besides, couldn't this be a little...self-serving? Toxic Spikes would be buffed in turn, which would make them a tad more annoying than they currently are.
3b. ...Meh. While Togekiss will miss it, I don't really mind this changing.

4. Energy Restriction on combinations.

YES.

Announcements:


ASB Gym League:
The first project is the implementation of Gyms. Upper level staff have discussed the parameters of Gyms and have reached a conclusion. I will provide a brief outline of what will be needed to apply.

1. At least 5 Fully Evolved Pokemon of the Gym's type. Currently 90% there-just need to fridge-ify Rotom or evolve Piloswine. Technically I could also evolve Eevee into Glaceon, but she's farthest away.
2. Confidence that the movepools of these 5 Pokemon are sufficient to hold their own against a variety of diverse opponents. About 50%. I'm confident enough in Walrein's and Syclant's movepools, but Abomasnow and particularly Froslass still need plenty of work, Piloswine is still in training (but getting a larger movepool fast,) and Rotom is practically untrained. (Eevee is...barely trained.)
3. The availability of time and dedication to be involved in at least two additional battles at once against gym challengers. Sure.

The first Gyms will be decided based on interest. In order for a gym to be established, at least two trainers must express an interest in that gym type. If there are more than two, a process will be in place to select the two most fit. Then those trainers will battle on mutually agreed to terms for battle format (3vs3 singles or 4vs4 doubles), and the winner will become the Gym leader. Okay. This breaks down, however, if one goes for a fairly unpopular type...Ice isn't exactly an easy type to win with. The other trainer may then choose to become a gym apprentice (a stand-in for when the leader goes on vacation, with perhaps other duties to be fleshed out later). There will be no gym selections by fiat, regardless of any previous arrangements.

CAP Revamp:
The second project (which might impact the previous one) is a revamping of the 4th Gen CAP Pokemon for ASB. When ASB was initially created in February, in order to enhance interest and allow input a haphazard process was put in place to determine the CAP Pokemon's 5th Generation movepools, Hidden Abilities, etc. This project will start that from scratch, while keeping the stats, types, size/weight, and all 4th Gen data the same. I will directly manage the process for each CAP going forward, directing user input with specific questions. This will be a lengthy process, but will be better for the game as a whole. Note that this process does not apply to Tomohawk, as it was created solely in the 5th Gen and is thus locked, canonically speaking. This describes it pretty well.

Movepools would be best to change, and I think a lot of people wanted that eventually. (Lol@no Drill Run Colossoil.) Just...nothing else. I'm hesitant to change hidden abilities, as a lot of players based their buys on their existence-for example, Water Pulse wouldn't be on my Syclant if it weren't for Technician. As for Clohm...test him with 2 subs first.

[Maxim]

Yeah, that size question of mine was just plain silly. :P

In any case, what about this one?

One question I had, will the 5th gen move revamp remove moves from mons that already have them. (For instance, if Stratagem's Giga Drain is removed from his level up list, will I have to remove that move from him)?

[Dogfish44]

1. New Substitution rules: I have yet to see these in action, and I'm not sure how these apply in multi battles. A boost might be reasonable though, I don't think there is enough info. I do like the rule itself though.

2. Size/Weight Classes: These I have seen in use, and I think Psychic pokémon benefit a LOT from this. Steelix also gets a boost, but I've yet to see any OP things. Then again, not seen any Aggron usage lately ^_^

3a. Toxic: Support

3b. Sky Attack: Support

4. Combo energy rules: Fine, if you add a clause which prevents the Move X + Move X (Brick Break + Brick Break, as an example) from having the same rules

Gyms: I, like Zarator, do not believe that competition should be a requirement - Do we add Bugs over Dragons because of this? I may be exaggerating, but many people have actually avoided some gym types because of the users picking them. This generally means the avoided users are stronger, and better gym candidates. I think it would be a cruel irony to deny these users Gym Leader Status (Even if they would gain it later on).

Edit: Just seen Deck's post, and although I understand I would like confirmation that stronger types will be selected over weaker types.

CAP Revamps: I support, so long as it's all moderated harshly when flame wars are started. A lot of it is flavour, so arguments will likely occur. Also, I'd support the demoting of some old Gen 4 moves from level up pools.

[zarator]

DK, I see where you're coming from with the "we need a substitute in case of vacation" thing, but to me it still seems unfair to people who worked hard for a type and they don't get rewarded only because they were the only ones to do so.

Often the lack of candidates hasn't to do with popularity. For example, Ghost requires an extreme amount of counters to work, and in fact I think I already invested 500+ counters in it. Just because I'm the only one who did so, it shouldn't mean I should be disregarded for other types and/or Gym Leaders, especially if they are weaker than Ghost (and there are a lot of types which are clearly weaker than Ghost).

EDIT: @Gerard: I can't really imagine a Bug-type Gym Leader being stronger than a Ghost-type Gym Leader. Not all types are on the same foot, regardless of the amounts of counters you spend in them.

[Gerard]

Originally Posted by Fat zarator

Often the lack of candidates hasn't to do with popularity. For example, Ghost requires an extreme amount of counters to work, and in fact I think I already invested 500+ counters in it. Just because I'm the only one who did so, it shouldn't mean I should be disregarded for other types and/or Gym Leaders, especially if they are easier than Ghost (and there are a lot of types which are clearly easier than Ghost).

I think easier is better word, no type on ASB is really awesome or worst than all of the types thanks to big movepools and many good poke, but for example, a good Cyclohm does nees a lot less counters to destroy everything than a good Gengar or a trained Gardevoir which need some more moves to use their own tricky styles

[Kaxtar]

I'm glad about all of this new stuff happening, especially considering that getting the work for gyms off the ground and CAP revamps were my ideas (mostly)!

All new stuff is working great Deck, and I'm liking those changes to Sky Attack and Combo+Energy requirements.

I am echoing the concerns of others about requiring two gym candidates for types, however. Obviously some types deserve gyms before others, and the best type/most qualified candidates should not get shafted early on. Additionally, I don't think Substitute Gym Leaders are a good idea. If someone couldn't become a leader in the first place, they shouldn't be able to battle in matches in which Badges are on the line. Also, if a Gym has to close for a week or two while someone is on vacation, it wouldn't be a bad thing tbh. We have plenty of other gyms for players to challenge, and since Gym Pokemon can be used in regular matches (this applies to both GLs and challengers), it wouldn't be to big a deal for a gym battle to get stopped halfway for a few days.

On the CAP revisions, we need an orderly process, otherwise many problems will ensue. I suggest we do one Pokemon a week, extending or subtracting time as needed. Pokemon like Scylant are fine and need little to no revisions/discussion, but others will take a lot of time. therefore, if we focus on CAPs one at a time, everything gets done quicker.

[Ragnarokalex]

I think that the ruling on waiting for more people to be ready for a gym is fine, while it kind of sucks for the people that are ready NOW for their gyms to be open, opening these gyms later will give other people a chance to get interested and ready to try out for it themselves. And we need at least 1 other person there to test the original candidate to make absolutely sure that they can take this position and hold it competently. Its not like theyll never have a shot at this gym, theyll just have to wait for their opportunity to prove they can handle it.

[zarator]

Originally Posted by Fat Ragnarokalex

And we need at least 1 other person there to test the original candidate to make absolutely sure that they can take this position and hold it competently.

I doubt such a test is necessary in some cases, tbh. If a person has a strong team and a good record of battles, he'll be a good gym leader. You don't need any more "tests" to aknowledge that.

[Terrador]

@ Kaxtar, your logic about Substitute Gym Leaders seems fallacious to me.

Originally Posted by Fat Kaxtar

If someone couldn't become a leader in the first place, they shouldn't be able to battle in matches in which Badges are on the line.

Just because they were beat out by the current Gym Leader doesn't mean that they aren't worthy of the position in any way, shape, or form. I can't think of an impartial example off of the top of my head where there are two very able competitors are going for the same position, but just because someone's running against a monster like SevenDeadlySins or Zarator or Deck Knight doesn't mean they wouldn't be fit Leaders.

Moreover, concerning your statement here about the fact that they're unnecessary:

Originally Posted by Fat Kaxtar

Also, if a Gym has to close for a week or two while someone is on vacation, it wouldn't be a bad thing tbh. We have plenty of other gyms for players to challenge, and since Gym Pokemon can be used in regular matches (this applies to both GLs and challengers), it wouldn't be to big a deal for a gym battle to get stopped halfway for a few days.

I think you may be failing to recognize the fact that going through the Gym League, even if you win every match you enter, will be horrendously slow going already. We have well over eighty active ASBers, with up to 34 slots open at what appears to be the current maximum capacity (two battles per Leader with all 17 Gyms up and running). Even if there's some sort of screening process for challengers, that's still at least fifty people going at the Gym League. Again, this is assuming maximum capacity, which probably won't be reached for several months. Long story short, it's going to be bogged up badly enough as is without vacations and IRL issues shutting down some of the Gyms.

ilu Kax, and I hope you didn't take any of this as an insult

[Fire Blast]

Agree with everything in OP. Not much to say about that.

Originally Posted by Fat Fire Blast

However, I will suggest something for the subreffing system of ASB, which seems to have a problem.

Right now, the amount of RC given to a subref is based on the amount of KOes. While often this is a fine system, there are many cases in which this has, and could go wrong. The problem is that the amount of KOes reffed does not accuratly display the work done by a ref. A KO can take 1 action, or 30 actions. For example, in a 2v2 Singles, a subref could ref the last action and recieve half the tokens of the battle. However, this is clearly not representive of the work done by a subref.

What I suggest is awarding RC using the percentage of rounds reffed by the subref, and the total amont of RC given from the battle. So a subref who reffed 4 rounds of a 6 round 2v2 Doubles, would recieve 2/3 (4/6) of the counter. The amont given would always be rounded normally. 2/3 * 4 = 2.66 ~ 3. The subref would recieve three ref counters, and the original ref would recieve one.

tl;dr

Equation for RC given to subref: [Rounds subreffed/Rounds in the battle] * Amount of RC given out from the battle. (Rounded normally)
Equation for RC given to original ref: [Amount of RC given out from the battle] - [Amount of RC given to the subref]

[Blazikenmaster-Zeo]

I don't really have much to say, I've yet to have been in a battle where two substitutions have been a real issue/even used. I think that ending the toxic cap though would be good, if a pokemon can manage to get to 5 DPA like you said, then the other trainer probably needs all the help they can get getting rid of said mon.

[Son_of_Shadoo]

I do not agree with the change to Toxic (surprising, since I run it on fucking everything). My opinion is, in singles, it's good enough as it is, and I find it rare that the cap ever gets reached. In doubles and triples, it's near-useless as the rounds rarely last long enough for Toxic to be significant at all. So I see no benefit to buffing it even further.

[Engineer Pikachu]

Originally Posted by Fat Son_of_Shadoo

My opinion is, in singles, it's good enough as it is, and I find it rare that the cap ever gets reached. In doubles and triples, it's near-useless as the rounds rarely last long enough for Toxic to be significant at all. So I see no benefit to buffing it even further.

If this is the case, then what's the big deal about removing the cap? Besides, it's harder than you think to Toxistall your way up to 5+ DPA.

EDIT: And since this will probably be forgotten with the influx of gym comments:

Increase the cost of Signature Items.
As of now, some signature items are extremely good; the Electirizer/Magmarizer acts pretty much as Muscle Band and Wise Glasses combined, the Protector is essentially Focus Band and Focus Sash averaged out, and the Thick Club is a Choice Band but without the "Choice" part. All these signature items can be bought for less than half or sometimes one-third of their 20 BP equivalent item. I'm not complaining that it's unfair to Pokemon who do not have a signature item; I'm complaining that it is too easy to obtain the signature items. What I propose is simply doubling the cost of these items; in all cases, it's still less than 20 TC, but it's not too cheap anymore.

[Son_of_Shadoo]

^My point is that there is no point to removing the cap, that's all. However, it's late here, and my logic is doubtless flawed.

On a side note, I agree with the above sentiments on signature items.

[Blazikenmaster-Zeo]

Troll is Troll
but SoS, thats kind of the point the way I took it, if you manage to let a pokemon get to cap Toxic damage, you probably suck, or have a bad match up, were not having a toxic cap would be invaluable to you. But most the time thats not going to happen so why would it really matter, might as well take the cap off for those one in a hundred chances.

[Objection]

New substitution rules: Actually, there is one thing I want to bring up:

One Substitution:
Pokemon with a total of 18 or less in their Original Ranks (convert HP and Speed to a Rank), with 30 or less moves.
...
Two Substitutions:
Pokemon with 18 or less in their Original Ranks (convert HP and Speed to a Rank) with 25 or more moves. (ex. Pidgeot, Nidoking, Alakazam, Noctowl, Girafarig, Mismagius)

So ... if a mon with 18 ranks or less has between 25 and 30 moves, how many substitutions does it qualify for?

Apart from that, I originally thought these substitution rules were rather convoluted, but now I think they're OK. Of course, it would be nice if people would write how many moves each of their mons had instead of forcing us to count them (and by us I mean both battlers and refs), but as it is, there's nothing mega wrong.

Weight/Size: I likes this.

Removal of Toxic damage cap: Funnily enough, I remember my friend showing me a battle on Platinum (or was it Pearl?) in which it was revealed that Toxic damage capped at 50%. Either way, I'm neutral on this.

Removal of Sky Attack's next action flinch: Is this being changed to a normal flinch or does this mean Sky Attack no longer flinches at all? I'm fine with whichever it is.

Energy restrictions on combos: Personally, I think the pokemon should require however much energy the combo actually costs since I have no idea where any pokemon gets energy beyond 100% from, but at least Deck's proposal is better than nothing.

ASB Gym League: I'm going to break this one down.

At least 5 Fully Evolved Pokemon of the Gym's type: So, no NFE + Eviolite shenanigans? I'm not sure how I feel about this.

At least two trainers must express an interest in that gym type: As has been mentioned before, part of the reason some types are not as popular as others is, ironically, that people expected those types to be more popular than others. With this current system, the gyms we'll end up with will not be the best types to have gyms for. Still, I do see your point about needing substitutes and if you're planning on getting gyms for all 17 types eventually, then it's not too big a deal.

CAP Revamp: Completely in favour of additions, not completely in favour of changes. As Tort said, people with CAPs are buying moves for them based on what the CAPs' moves, abilities, etc. currently are. Changing the abilities of a pokemon or swapping one move out for another ... I personally don't see it as a "fuck you" to the owners of those CAPs, but I'm willing to bet at least several people will.

Increasing TC costs for signature items: If an item has the same effect as more than one currently existing item or the same effect as one currently existing item but better, then this item should cost MORE than the item(s) whose effect(s) it has. The fact that only one to a handful of pokemon can use said item is utterly irrelevant.

Fire Blast's RCs for subrefs proposal: Totally agreed.

[Gerard]

Originally Posted by Fat Objection

CAP Revamp: Completely in favour of additions, not completely in favour of changes. As Tort said, people with CAPs are buying moves for them based on what the CAPs' moves, abilities, etc. currently are. Changing the abilities of a pokemon or swapping one move out for another ... I personally don't see it as a "fuck you" to the owners of those CAPs, but I'm willing to bet at least several people will.

Well, most pokemon have flavour abilities that may remain unchanged, but this could give he change to balance CAPs that seem the most overwhelming (I think if you lose one move you should get one "free" move)

Increasing TC costs for signature items: Completely Agree!
Fire Blast's RCs for subrefs proposal: Completely Agree!
Removal of Toxic damage cap: Completely Agree!

Removal of Sky Attack's next action flinch: Would this be a 100% change or the 30% chance, because if the first, it could be an interesting way to stop combos, very helpfull in some situations and hardly overpowered thanks tou loosing the normal flinch

Also, does the Flicnh from King's Rock stacks, the reason i'm asking this is because if not, it's use as a signature item is almost useless in Politoad and Slowking (more on the former), since they are never going to outspeed anything that moves, they are very slow and the flinch chance is useless against the majority of the mons (and any taunter will rend TR useless), at least as part as it being a signature item let the flinch pass round if they use it since then it can actually happen

[IceBug]

Alrighty then:

1. I haven't had Substitution changes come into play in any of my battles, but I think it could be boosted just a bit. Also, agreed with codification on multi-battle substitutions.

2. Haven't really had any experience with this either. Normally, it's me wishing Bodyblock and Take Cover had priority, but I know up front that would be broken beyond belief somehow. However, I do wish, more reasonably, that a Pokemon could perform a successful Take Cover behind a Pokemon with a Size Class one or more above, instead of two. This would make it see more use, since otherwise, you basically need to be using something particularly tiny or particularly large to make it work.

3a. Toxic damage cap removal is fine, you and your opponent deserve everything coming to you if the damage hits 6+ DPA.

3b. Abstain, I have absolutely no opinion on Sky Attack, whatever everyone else decides is fine by me.

4. Agreed, throwing a death action is fine, but allowing a 20 Energy combo for 2 Energy is kinda stupid.

Gyms: Hmmm...looks like the Bug Gym is going to take a while to establish, since I'm the only one who's currently even close (6 Fully Evolved, but one's a Beedrill, one hasn't battled, movepools are...getting there...). And I do really worry about having to win 3 of my first 5 with a type notoriously lacking in type coverage and raw killing potential. It sounds like some of these gyms are going to need a freaky gimmick to be able to keep up, whereas something like Dragon (which, mind you, will require serious counter investment) will be grueling anyway. I'm actually fine with the leader/subleader system, but I'm not sure it should be required from the get-go.

CAP Revamp: Eh, I'm not down for a RADICAL overhaul, but revisions are fine in my book. Fidgit will still be Fidgit, Krill will be Krill, ect. at the end of the day anyway.

Signature items: Raising TC would be fine.

Subreffing: Yes, please change this. I feel kinda dirty when I do an action's worth of work for 2 Omnicounters...

[smashlloyd20]

I'm about to go spend a lot of MC fleshing out some movepools, but first who else is interested in Steel gym?

EDIT: Also, when's the cutoff for registration (I guess)?