Balancing Scald - New Mechanics (see post #125)

Status
Not open for further replies.

QueenOfLuvdiscs

Tier 3 Audino sub
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
Well, I guess in a tier full of fat water types, I can see why people would be crying over Scald. But seriously? A chance to faint? Changing game mechanics bcuz you got burnt a couple times is completely ridiculous. Also, did you think about the late game? 'My fat water type wins, but wait, I have to sack just in case I knock myself out bcuz it's gonna be my last poke'
(inb4 you can use surf on it instead)

All this is gonna do is make people cry even more about RNG.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does the formula for fainting when using Scald take into account using Scald on a switch? Say Empoleon comes in on a Forretress and the player using Foretress decides to switch out to his Shaymin. If Empoleon uses Scald on Shaymin, will that look like "fishing for a burn" seeing as how it does very little damage to Shaymin and a player could have predicted such a switch? Just curious as to what "fishing for a burn" looks like in practice.
 
After much deliberation with Hikari and the UU Council, we have come to a conclusion that should effectively balance Scald in UU. From now on, Scald has a chance to faint the user. We have implemented this change on Pokemon Showdown for UU only. An example of this mechanic can be found here.

The chance of the user fainting is not constant. Instead, we have contracted a company to create a formula to determine how much a user is 'fishing for a burn'. The more likely you are fishing for a burn, the more likely you are to faint. For example, Scalding against an Entei is a good play and has almost zero chance to faint the user. However, if two Tentacruels stay in against each other and Scald, they will both have a high chance to faint. As you can see, this mechanic was added in order to encourage more thought in battling and add a little risk to Scald.

We hope this fixes everyone's problems and creates a better meta. Think twice before clicking Scald!
in the words of yourself "haha"
 

ManOfMany

I can make anything real
is a Tiering Contributor
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but will scald still have a chance to faint the user if the opponent is already afflicted with a status condition?
 
this is just too good to be true
you trying to tell me this is the best thing anybody on the smogon staff came up with?
So why does my heart flutter so as I build a UU team?
 
Personally, I feel this is an exciting step in the right direction for Pokemon competitive play. I believe we should expand this mechanic to other commonly spammed moves and tactics, such as Knock Off (run Night Slash instead), Ice Beam (Run Blizzard); Will-O-Wisp (do you really need three mons burned? The more things you burn, the higher the chance it is of a faint), Thunder Wave (thunder waving slow Pokemon will trigger the faint; at that point you just want the hax); and perhaps even Voltturn (Instead of getting a U-Turn after a Volt Switch, the user just faints).
Good job, UU!
 
The next step: Knock Off will not remove the target's item or receive a boost if the item starts with A, F, I, L, O, P, or R. This is narrowly tailored to like Leftovers, Life Orb, Rocky Helmets, and Apcot, Colbur, and Oran Berries cannot be Knocked Off. Crucially, this rebalancing would still allow Eviolite to be removed from Chansey, as well as still working on Choice items. It's very balanced.
 
Why dont you guys just decrease Scald's accuracy?
For example, if it were decreased to 80%, the burn chance would be 24%. This is nicer and less cheap, as it forces you to decide between accuracy X utility, like it was with Surf X Hydro Pump. And, last but not least, it would make a more useful, less powerful version of HP. This would bring lot more balance than just setting a faint chance based in arbitrary formulas.
 

tehy

Banned deucer.
i think; instead of ban scald or kill self or w ever, its more fair to just ban users of scald

like if someone wants to use scald. ban them instead. haha losers go hax on some other place
 
My dad smoked his whole life. One day my mom told him, "If you want to see your children graduate, you have to stop." Three years later he died of lung cancer. My mom told me, "Don't smoke; don't put your family through this." At 24, I have never touched a cigarette. I must say, I feel a sense of regret, because reading this thread gave me cancer anyway.
i love you
 
Ignoring all of the preposterous accusations that this is a joke, I feel like this is an excellent addition to the meta!

In fact we should EXPAND on the idea by giving all "cheap" tactics more risk or even completely eradicate them!

As we all know the first playthrough of a pokemon is the PUREST way we will ever experience the game. So we should adapt the meta to match the extremely strategic manner of battling that we all used. From now on all pokemon should be required to have 3 moves of the same type, have EV spreads based on the battles that you would do after obtaining said pokemon, and (most importantly) ban any move that isn't a direct attacking move. Get your weak ass out of here amoongus, no one should have to deal with 100% sleep moves!

I don't know about the rest of you but I am extremely excited to see the rise of a truly skill based meta!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Top