1. Welcome to Smogon! Check out the Smogon Starters Hangout for everything you need to know about starting out in the community. Don't forget to introduce yourself in the Introduction and Hangout Thread, too!
  2. Welcome to Smogon Forums! Please take a minute to read the rules.

ASB Feedback & Game Issues Thread (New Proposal Handling System in OP)

Discussion in 'Policy Center' started by Seven Deadly Sins, Feb 10, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Frosty

    Frosty =_=
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributor
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Messages:
    731
    To be honest I prefer having them decay and speed multiply by 1.75. The first because in ASB pokemon tend to last for a while and you have the potential to turn a problem into...another problem.

    The second because it's close to reality. A 80 speed mon with max EVs with +1speed is faster than a 120 mon with max EVs. I am too lazy to give actual calcs here, but if you just stick with raw 80*1.5=120 math, you will end up with an underpowered boost that isn't what happens in-game. Remember that, unlike in-game, you can't just sweep with extra speed. Its good, yeah, but not that good.

    As for just sticking the boost in the BAP, I am all for it, as long as you just make it +1.5 always, so it goes from +1 to +3.375. If you just say its an additional rank, there is a big chance you will pass through rank 5 and end up with an actually weaker boost ._. .
  2. Dogfish44

    Dogfish44 Banned from 22 Casinos
    is a Forum Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,032
    It's been quite a while since I've seen a Pokémon last more than 4 rounds to be frank. I don't think longetivity will be too much of an issue here - And I prefer a system where the rules don't appear to change every other week, or if the ref happens to be the path of a lunar eclipse next tuesday. I've been in ASB for quite a while and I don't fully understand the system, it's ridiculous to expect a newer person to do so.

    I'm confused here - the argument seems to be that it weakens speed, but I actually cannot figure out what you mean here.

    Speed boosts and drops are already the most powerful, and the power drop this would give (It's not a big drop in the power, and in time it becomes the more powerful). I only put up the speed change since I wanted consistency with the usual rank changes of 1.5/rank ¬_¬.

    Incidentally, this is the best resource for ASB Speed Tiers as far as I know.

    Again, I'm tossing out random numbers/ideas, to bring discussion forward. I'm not tying myself to any numbers here.
  3. TIO

    TIO

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    742
    Instead of altering ranks, which will actually be a nerf, it should be a multiplier of *(1+.1*Att)*(1-.1*Def) where Att is the offensive stat and Def is the defensive stat.
    Examples:
    +1 Mild Salamence Outrage vs. +0 Fidget:
    -(12+3+1.5)+1.75=18.25 hp (now)
    -(12+3+2.5)=17.5 hp (DF)
    -(12+3+1.5)*1.1=18.15 hp (Me)

    +0 Adamant Darmanitan Flare Blitz vs. +6 Whimsicott:
    -(12+3+3+4)*1.5-10.5=22.5 hp (now)
    -(12+3+3-4.5)*1.5=20.25 hp (DF)
    -(12+3+3+4)*1.5*.4=13.2 hp (me)

    +2 Modest Ninetales Fire Blast in sun vs. Tomohawk:
    -(12+3+3+1.5)+3.5=23 hp (now)
    -(12+3+3+4)=22 hp
    -(12+3+3+1.5)*1.2=23.4 hp

    -2 Adamant Flygon Earthquake vs. Mild Nidoking:
    -(10+3+4.5)*1.5-3.5=22.75 hp (now)
    -(10+3+1.5)*1.5=20.25 hp (DF)
    -(10+3+4.5)*1.5*.8= 21 hp

    +6 Adamant Snorlax Frustration (Lower hp) vs. Gallade
    -(10+3+3)+10.5=26.5 hp (now)
    -(10+3+9)=22 hp (DF)
    -(10+3+3)*1.6=25.6 hp (me)

    +2 Volcorona vs. -1 Alakazam
    -(9+3+3)*1.5+5.25=27.75 hp (now)
    -(9+3+6)*1.5=27 hp (DF)
    -(9+3+3)*1.5*1.2*1.1=29.7 hp (me)

    DF's proposal actually nerfs offensive stat boosts, while mine doesn't seem to do much until we start talking extremes (See Whimsicott) or layered bonuses (See Volcorona). Also, both proposals need SE to be better than the current one.
    Obviously, it needs work, but I feel like that's in the general range that it should be.
  4. Its_A_Random

    Its_A_Random The imitated
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributor
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,336
    Stat Boosters are still going to be so shitty, even if we try & buff them...

    That is, in order to get stat boosters to even become usable with regular frequency (i.e. worth using on any Pokémon), outside of taking advantage of some moves like Protect, you have to break the things, & that would be a terrible idea, especially when the only Pokémon that can use Stat Boosters viably under the current system (e.g. Swoobat, Volbeat w/ Power Lens) can become broken as fuck if we did decide to "break" them.

    So, in essence, if we are going to buff Stat Boosters, personally, I would just remove the decay, possibly increase the boost increment to 2 from 1.75, & be done with it. The only thing that confuses most users is the decay system, so just get ridding of it is an acceptable buff alone. Affecting Ranks is a pretty bad idea, since even w/o decay, all it does is reduce power, which kinda defeats the purpose of trying to buff them, since you are reducing their strength. Furthermore, most Pokémon do not tend to last long enough nowadays for something to fully decay, & if you are being haxxed with shit like accuracy drops & stuff, you can always just switch out, or use a phasing move.

    This leads to the biggest problems as to why Stat Boosters will always suck on 95% of Pokémon, even with a minor buff like no decay: Not only is the boost so little to the point that you have to hit multiple times to deal more damage in the long run, but you are also completely vulnerable to anything while using them.

    With the first point, basically, if you use something like Swords Dance with no items, you are wasting an action & 7 energy, just to deal an extra 3.5 Damage. 3.5. That means if you deal like 14 damage an action to an opponent normally, it will take you 4 actions of flat out dealing damage just to make up that lost action. And that is assuming no decay. The more damage you deal normally, the more actions you have to spend dealing damage to make up the lost action. The reverse is also true, but in reality, the lost action to boost, is generally not worth it, especially in a damage race.

    With the second point, when you are using that action to raise your stats, you are a complete sitting duck that leaves you wide open for your opponent to take advantage of, using shit like Taunt, Torment, a recovery move, or even worse, one of: Haze, Clear Smog, Roar, Whirlwind, Circle Throw, & Dragon Tail. These 5 moves in particular are killer to the stat boosting user, since they wipe out your boosts, resulting in all those actions wasted for nothing (At the end of the round in Switch=OK for the last 4), & worse yet, the stat reducing moves you use can be wiped out as well with shit like U-Turn, Volt Switch, Teleport, etc.

    All in all, Stat Boosters/Droppers are always going to be bad moves to use, unless you break them, & breaking them would be terrible for ASB Game Balance. So imo, just remove decay, possibly increase the boost increment to 2 from 1.75, & be done with the issue.
  5. Yarnus of Bethany

    Yarnus of Bethany

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,065
    I actually like df's proposal. Here's why.

    1) It's elegant and easy to understand. It's simple, and that makes it easier to remember and work with.
    2) It's useful. Swords Dance, for example, on my Lickilicky, brings it's attack up to 5, and in only 4 Attacks, the move has been worth it. Keep in mind that an item has approximately the same effect as this move.
    3) It leaves less room for abuse. Since after rank 5 the boost only goes up by 1, Swoobat and co are not simply able to Stored Power for a 3hko.
    4) Not decaying is both simpler and more true to the game.
  6. Engineer Pikachu

    Engineer Pikachu Good morning, you bastards!
    is a Contributor to Smogon

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,592
    To be honest I kind of like the decay system since it encourages strategic play with your stat-changing attacks. All removing decay would do is encourage using the attack in the first couple of actions and that's really it.

    I'd also like to note that stage-boosting attacks have become less useful as power creep has come into play (most notably items and our strange urge to make things better and better), since it's additive. For example, using Swords Dance on A2 gives you four actions of +2 Atk and three actions of +1 Atk, which comes out to 19.25 DMG over three rounds; the real payout, though, comes when you use it again later, which, due to the fact that stat changes only drop by one stage per round, means you can theoretically get up to 26.25 DMG purely from the second change, which is pretty good but not too great given Dogfish's point that ASB Pokemon don't tend to last for more than three rounds. Unfortunately I have to agree with IAR above here and say that they're really only going to be useful in pinch situations. Increasing the effect of each to +2 or -2 DMG could work, but then it might get a little out of hand for Simple users or Tail Glow; I haven't run calculations on these yet.

    I think Speed stat-changing is a different matter entirely, though. They're pretty convoluted as it stands now and the system makes absolutely no sense whatsoever (1x, 1.75x, 3.5x and /1, /1.75, /3.5 what) and really powerful actually. A system I've been thinking about is essentially the same as the accuracy and evasion system we have, except with numerator and denominators of 2 instead of 3. That is to say:

    • The Speed multiplier starts out with a fraction of 2/2.
    • Each positive Speed stage increases the numerator by 1.
    • Each negative Speed stage increases the denominator by 1.
    • The Speed stage is determined by the sum of the positive boosts with the negative boosts (that is to say, +2 and -1 results in +1, not +2-1.)
    It makes a lot of sense, and is more reasonable; in addition, it also emulates more closely the in-game Speed system. Below is a chart for the current system v my proposed system, given a Base Speed of 100.
    Code:
    Stage Boost | Current Sys | Proposed Sys | Proposed Sys 2
    -3          | 19 (.190)   | 40 (.4)      | 30 (.308)
    -2          | 28 (.285)   | 50 (.5)      | 40 (.4)
    -1          | 57 (.571)   | 66 (.67)     | 57 (.571)
    +0          | 100 (1)     | 100 (1)      | 100 (1)
    +1          | 175 (1.75)  | 150 (1.5)    | 175 (1.75)
    +2          | 350 (3.5)   | 200 (2)      | 250 (2.5)
    +3          | 525 (5.25)  | 250 (2.5)    | 325 (3.25)
    As you can see the proposed system is a lot less ridiculous, particularly as the stage boosts are increased. This also makes overcoming the Speed drop from paralysis more difficult than it is now, as it should be in my opinion (a Scary Face right now drops Speed almost as much as paralysis, while it would only go halfway under my proposal).

    tl;dr - Removing decay is bad. The current stat system for Atk / Def / SpA / SpD is probably as good as it's going to get. The current Speed system needs a change.

    EDIT: I've added a second proposition. Taking Deck's point that ASB stats don't use IVs or EVs and thus make Speed boosting slightly underpowered if we use the in-game structure, I've constructed a second system that is essentially the original one except we fix the messed up arithmetic between a +1 and +2 boost. Like the former two systems, the -Speed speed values are calculated using a reciprocal multiplier of their respective +Speed bonus.
  7. Gerard

    Gerard

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    4,389
    Even if the pokemon increases from Rank 3 to 5 the damage increases by a total of 3, which is lower than the current system (3.5), while a SE attack does come out on top with 4.5 damage it's still barely enough to justify the nerf on most other cases which would only increase their damage output by 2 or 2.5, with a SE hit doing an extra 3 / 3.75 (4x SE doesn come out on top but again the number of cases does not justify the nerf in a majority of mons)

    I'm in favor that Atk, Def, SpA & SpD increase/reduce total damage in 2 and to avoid the decay, this should boost them enough while avoiding breaking the mons that abuse them the most, also it could make some interesting strategies like boosting spread moves or making some powerful walls, considering that we have Focus Energy, Phazing Moves, Psych Up, etc... to control this moves I don't think we have to worry to much that such a boost will make them too good
  8. Objection

    Objection

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    Messages:
    5,695
    I admit that the decay system is confusing. However, it is currently the only thing that gives any incentive (lol incentive and stat boosts) to use a +1 move over a +2 move or +1/+1 move. If you remove it, moves like Howl will be completely outclassed by moves like Swords Dance and Bulk Up unless you buff the Howl-like moves in some way.

    I propose that, if we remove stat stage decay, that non-damaging +1 and non-damaging -1 moves will prevent the respective stat stage from being lowered or raised respectively for the rest of the round.

    The other thing about the attack, defence, special attack and special defence stages as to why they suck is because their boost is calculated after weakness and resistance. For the most part, unless your name is Haxorus, you will want to try to hit your opponent on a weakness. If the opponent has a single weakness to the move, a 1.75 boost in damage is equivalent to a 1.1666... boost to BAP, which is really rather weak. If the opponent has a double weakness, it's equivalent to a measly 0.777... boost to BAP. Having the damage be calculated after weakness and resistance is really only significantly benefitting neutral and NVE moves.

    Therefore, I propose that we keep the damage increase/decrease per stage at 1.75, but have it calculated before weakness/resistance. If you are worried about it getting out of hand for Simple users and Tail Glow users, you can simply increase the energy costs of Simple-boosted stat boosters and Tail Glow. I reckon 3 for Tail Glow and 2 or 3 per move's normal boost for Simple should do the trick.

    Note that these two things I have proposed are independent of each other.
  9. zarator

    zarator Credits to Mos-Quitoxe for the cute sprite^^
    is a Community Contributoris a Contributor Alumnus

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,977
    For the attack/defense/SpA/SpD boosts:

    I agree with most people here that at the moment they suck in an unacceptable way, but some of the solutions I saw proposed seem just excessive or convoluted to me. In my opinion, the most simple thing to do is:

    1) Bring the boost from 1.75 to 2
    2) Put it before weakness/resistance multiplier
    3) Remove decay

    This way, these moves should become fully viable. And to be honest, much of the concern about their "brokenness" is completely unwarranted. Ask yourselves: how many Pokemon don't learn at least one of: Psych Up, Roar, Dragon Tail, Storm Throw, Haze, Heart Swap, Perish Song... There are a lot of ways to counter stat-up moves that I doubt they will ever risk to become broken. Not to mention that most Pokemon, at worst, can stat up alongside the foes.


    As for Speed.... I was the main supporter of the change from 1.5 to 1.75, so let me explain. The idea was to try and reflect more closely the effect of in-game speed boosts, especially on +1 boosts. I gotta agree, though, that the progression is currently flawed. In my opinion, instead of 100, 175, 350, 525... it should've been 100, 175, 250, 325... and so on. This way you would possibly get the best approximation possible. As for negative boosts, I agree with everyone else in that they're too steep. In my opinion, it'd be better if, for the negative boosts, we returned to the old progression. So, what I'm advocating for is:

    Speed Boosts
    -6 0.25
    -5 0.285
    -4 0.33
    -3 0.4
    -2 0.5
    -1 0.66
    0 1
    +1 1.75
    +2 2.5
    +3 3.25
    +4 4
    +5 4.75
    +6 5.5

    This should solve most of our issues, without returning to a system that unjustifiably underpowers Speed boosts, compared to in-game.


    P.S.: I understand a lot of people are concerned about stat boosts, but I'd also like some comments on my crit proposal.
  10. Pwnemon

    Pwnemon Switching is a metagame trend
    is a Tutoris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Smogon Media Contributor
    Doubles Co-Lead

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    3,999
    Z, i really don't like your system for crits. First, it seems pretty convoluted (though that may just be wording) but more importantly - why would you make the ref calculate two different times just to take the lesser of the two? I have a much easier solution: Critical Hits on multi-hit moves are calculated separately from the other hits of the move. Stat boosts are scaled proportionately to how many hits were not crits.

    Using your example:

    A Hardy Syclant with no items and Technician uses Icicle Spear against a Hardy Mew behind Reflect and with +1 Defense. Icicle Spear hits 5 times, and crits twice:

    [(4+4+4)*.5 [three non-crits, reflect] + (4+4) [two crits] +3 (STAB)] - (1.75*.6) [stage boost times percent affected] = 15.95 dmg

    it's simple and accurate.
  11. zarator

    zarator Credits to Mos-Quitoxe for the cute sprite^^
    is a Community Contributoris a Contributor Alumnus

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,977
    I guess you didn't actually bother reading through my EDIT as well as Objection's post, right? In practice you don't need to run two different calcs everytime. I showed both systems just for the sake of explaination.
  12. Orcinus Duo

    Orcinus Duo

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,869
    Lets fix fake out

    I mean I've been theorymonning it in irc for a while but nobody seemed to believe me but you were wrong weren't you WRONG

    I suggest 1 fake out use per mon per switch in
  13. Yarnus of Bethany

    Yarnus of Bethany

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,065
    That would make it more powerful in one way and less in another. Why the change?
  14. TIO

    TIO

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    742
    ...Isn't that what Fake Out already is? O.o
  15. Pwnemon

    Pwnemon Switching is a metagame trend
    is a Tutoris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Smogon Media Contributor
    Doubles Co-Lead

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    3,999
    No, fake out currently is one per mon per mon per switch-in, i.e. i can fake out an infernape one action and a starmie the next. the change orc is proposing is that the user can only use it once per switch-in, no matter the target (yes it is the same in singles but very different in doubles and triples)
  16. Orcinus Duo

    Orcinus Duo

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,869
  17. Gerard

    Gerard

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    4,389
    Actually you can only get Flinched by a Fake Out once per switch in (as you can only be surprised by the technique once), this should be add to the data though
  18. Objection

    Objection

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    Messages:
    5,695
    "Fake Out fails to flinch the same pokemon twice after its initial use" and "Fake Out may flinch each opponent one time, but will not flinch the same target again" mean that each mon can, upon switching in, flinch each opponent once with Fake Out. Notice how the description never states that Fake Out only flinches on the first use on any target or cannot flinch different targets on subsequent uses.

    This is another case of "what it is" and "what it should be" being two significantly different things.

    EDIT: OK, so do we want Fake Out to only flinch on the first use or do we want Fake Out to only flinch mons that haven't already been faked out? The former would result in a wording like this:

    If we want the latter, the wording would end up something like this:

    So, pick a version, any version! Except the borked version.
  19. Seven Deadly Sins

    Seven Deadly Sins ~hallelujah~
    is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus

    Joined:
    May 29, 2008
    Messages:
    4,267
    We want the former.
  20. Pwnemon

    Pwnemon Switching is a metagame trend
    is a Tutoris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Smogon Media Contributor
    Doubles Co-Lead

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    3,999
  21. Gerard

    Gerard

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    4,389
    Double-Edge should be about te same power of Fae Blitz and co. since well, they're all clones of the same move so why is that Double-Edge is the weaker version? With all the talk about consistency I find it funny this slip through.

    It's pretty clear how Double-Edge get's the short end of the stick (in every pokemon with >2 WC) even when the others have the better power for a little extra energy so I wanted to bring it up
  22. zarator

    zarator Credits to Mos-Quitoxe for the cute sprite^^
    is a Community Contributoris a Contributor Alumnus

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,977
    I think a large part of the reason is that, while the "elemental" recoil moves have somewhat limited distribution, making the number of heavy Pokemon knowing these moves extremely slim (it's not a case Volt Tackle is even stronger than the likes of Flare Blitz), Double-edge is very widespread. Not only that, but the number of fat Pokemon learning Double-edge is impressive. Snorlax, Metagross, Aggron, etc. would become all the more threatening if Double-edge followed the same pattern of Flare Blitz and Brave Bird.

    Besides, if we buffed Double-edge, would we end up buffing Giga Impact as well? Not doing so would lead to kind of awkward results (Double-edge outdamaging Giga Impact on half the existing FE mons), but NOT doing so could prove to be gamebreaking, given Giga Impact's availability.
  23. UllarWarlord

    UllarWarlord

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,723
    Yo. I know I don't have too much respect here, but I think we need to make a change that's already unconsciously happened.

    The current description for Drought:

    Now, if it's not specified, some people treat weather-activating abilities as Can Be Enabled abilities. I won't mention any names, but I think that maybe that's the right choice. And maybe we should go a step further.

    My proposal for Drought (and all other weather-inducing abilities):


    Thoughts, guys? Note that one can only disable Drought when it is sunny, and the same goes for the other abilities. I think this makes more sense, personally, but I'd like to hear some feedback.
  24. TIO

    TIO

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    742
    Eh, I feel like it's better the way it is currently. No need to change, though I won't mind if it is changed.
  25. Its_A_Random

    Its_A_Random The imitated
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributor
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,336
    As per this thread, The new system for handling proposals is now in effect! This system is now viewable from the OP of this thread, so have at ye!

    Anyhow, the following need votes & shit:
    Arena Trap (open)
    Current
    [BOX]Arena Trap:

    Type: Innate

    This Pokemon has great knowledge of the field and can always remain close to an earthbound foe no matter where it runs, flying opponents and levitating Pokemon are unaffected.

    Pokemon with this ability: Diglett, Dugtrio, Trapinch.[/BOX]
    Proposed
    [BOX]Arena Trap:

    Type: Innate

    This Pokemon has great knowledge of the field and can always remain close to an earthbound foe no matter where it runs. All Pokemon that are not of the Flying-Type, or possess the Levitate Ability, may not be switched out of battle while this Pokemon is on the field. This Pokemon may still switch out of battle as normal, unless there is another Pokemon on the field with Arena Trap.

    Pokemon with this ability: Diglett, Dugtrio, Trapinch.[/BOX]
    Some links.
    Baton Pass (open)
    Current
    [BOX]Baton Pass: The Pokemon focuses all of its energies into a white aura that maintains its current state. This energy holds all of the information on the Pokemon's stat increases and decreases as well as whether it is in a state of confusion or other temporary ailments. If this Pokemon touches a teammate it can pass those bonuses and mental state onto them instantly.

    Attack Power: -- | Accuracy: -- | Energy Cost: 10 | Attack Type: Other | Effect Chance: -- | Contact: N/A | Typing: Normal | Priority: 0 | CT: Passive[/BOX]
    Proposed
    [BOX]Baton Pass: The Pokemon focuses all of its energies into a white aura that maintains its current state. This energy holds all of the information on the Pokemon's stat increases and decreases as well as whether it is in a state of confusion or other temporary ailments. This move has two distinctive uses:

    Baton Pass [Switch] (Switch=OK Only): The user is sent back to its trainer's Poke Ball at the end of the round. The Pokemon that is switched in to replace the user is chosen by the player from their remaining Pokemon, however the trainer that commanded Baton Pass [Switch] must attack first the next round. The replacement gains the same temporary status changes (Such as stat boosts/drops, confusion, etc.) that the user had upon entry.

    Baton Pass [Pass] (Doubles+ Only): The user can pass on all its temporary status changes (Such as stat boosts/drops, confusion, etc.) to an active teammate. The teammate will gain all temporary status changes that the user had, and all temporary status changes the user had are removed.

    Attack Power: -- | Accuracy: -- | Energy Cost: 10 | Attack Type: Other | Effect Chance: -- | Contact: N/A | Typing: Normal | Priority: 0 | CT: Passive[/BOX]
    Some links.
    Counter-farming! (open)
    Auto-Learn Universal Moves! (open)
    Change Training Items! (open)
    Critical Hits! (open)


    ...And the cluster-fuck of Stat Boosting Proposals, Fake Out Proposals, & the Double-Edge & Weather proposals. I cbf finding the votes though... :S

    EDIT: As far as the proposals not introduced by me that are mentioned in this post...

    • I support giving Project Mods & whatnot the power to "stop counter-farming", & think it can go to a vote immediately, but only veto in the blatantly obvious cases.
    • I support reducing the costs of some near-universal moves to 0 MC, but I think it needs some discussion, mainly whether all these moves are okay, whether MC should be refunded or not, etc.
    • I support the changes to the Training Items, mainly due to the fact that you must win to get their effects ingame, so yeah. I think it can go to a vote immediately, given there would not be much to discuss.
    • The Critical Hit proposal needs some more clarification imo. I definitely think that we should fix crits for multi-hit moves, but reckon it needs a bit more discussion—Many users tend to be confused as to how this works, & there is still a common belief that you would have to make 2 separate calculations. Something like "IF (#Crits × (Crit Bonus +1) < Burn + Screens + Stat Boosts/Drops), THEN Pierce = #Crits × (Crit Bonus +1). ELSE, Pierce = Burn + Screens + Stat Boosts/Drops" might work? idk.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)