Block

ZhengTann

ZhengTann

Nargacuga
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top Community Contributor Alumnus
This thread will be moderated to keep discussion focused.​

Please read through Block discussion on page 49 and page 50 of Feedback thread to get some background.
Block - Normal | Other | Adjacent Target | -- BAP | -- Acc | 6 EN Cost | -- Eff% | Contact: No | 0 or +2 Prio | Z-BAP: -- | Combo Type: Passive | Snatch: No | Magic Coat: Yes

The user moves with unnatural speed to block off an opponent's exit. This move traps the target, preventing them from being switched out during Switch Phases. If the target attempts a non-damaging evasive action, or enter the evasive phase of a damaging evasive move, in the same action that user is about to use Block, the user will negate the evasive action and deal fixed damage to the target equal to twice the user's Weight Class, acting with boosted priority. Performing this effect makes contact with the target. Z-Move Effect: Raises the user's Defense by one (1) stage, adjusting the natural stage.
Click to expand...
So, based on the description text, Block in-ASB fulfils the in-catridge role of active, non-damage anti-switching, while adding on a second function that is to deal chip damage towards Damaging Evasive users. The question now is:
  • Do we still want Block to counter Damaging Evasive moves?
  • If so, in what capacity and method?
Reminder that unless you're Council in Voting thread, phrases to the effect of "I just like it", "gut feeling", and "precedence" should carry no weight at all - please give concrete reasoning and solid numbers if you want your (as specific as possible) option to make the slate. On the other hand if you are Council then I question the process that put you there in the first place.

I'll try to track discussion in the OP.

Fire away! ^_^
 
I like the idea of Chip damage to Damaging Evasive moves, since Block mons are traditionally slow, and it helps them out a lot. However, I do not think it should completely nullify the move, it should just prevent the evasion part of the move.

Reasoning: Pursuit is the closest comparison to Block imo, and Pursuit doesn't stop a Self-Switching move from doing damage, it just stops the enemy from switching out.
 
The switch-effects of U-Turn, Volt Switch, and Parting Shot happen after the damaging effect and the damage is not reliant upon switching.
The evasive effects of Fly, Dive, Dig, Shadow Force, and Phantom Force happen before the damaging effect and the damaging portion of the move requires the evasive portion to have finished. You can't surface under the opponent if you aren't underwater. It's also worth noting that the other moves that inhibit the evasive portion of Fly (Smack Down and Gravity) prevent the damaging portion, as well.
 
Since nobody bothered to propose a concrete solution or contribute futher, I'm just gonna slate a Pursuit clone:
Proposal said:
Block - Normal | Other | Adjacent Target | -- BAP | -- Acc | 6 EN Cost | -- Eff% | Contact: No | 0 or +2 Prio | Z-BAP: -- | Combo Type: Passive | Snatch: No | Magic Coat: Yes

The user moves with unnatural speed to block off an opponent's exit. This move traps the target, preventing them from being switched out during Switch Phases. If the target attempts a non-damaging evasive action, or enter the evasive phase of a damaging evasive move, in the same action that user is about to use Block, the user will negate the evasive action and always strike before the target uses its evasive action, dealing fixed damage to the target equal to twice the user's Weight Class, acting with boosted priority. Performing this effect makes contact with the target. Z-Move Effect: Raises the user's Defense by one (1) stage, adjusting the natural stage.
Click to expand...
What to do to clarify Block?
a) Adopt the proposed change
b) Do nothing
Click to expand...
I am not giving a "back to Discussion" solution, not when no one seems driven to solve this. Obligatory 24-hour before Voting - Council please do this when time is up.
 
Just so we have no further confusion on the topic, may we append a clarification statement confirming that damage is not negated? That seems to be the whole point of the proposal in the first place.
Proposal said:
Block - Normal | Other | Adjacent Target | -- BAP | -- Acc | 6 EN Cost | -- Eff% | Contact: No | 0 or +2 Prio | Z-BAP: -- | Combo Type: Passive | Snatch: No | Magic Coat: Yes

The user moves with unnatural speed to block off an opponent's exit. This move traps the target, preventing them from being switched out during Switch Phases. If the target attempts a non-damaging evasive action, or enter the evasive phase of a damaging evasive move, in the same action that user is about to use Block, the user will negate the evasive action and always strike before the target uses its evasive action, dealing fixed damage to the target equal to twice the user's Weight Class, acting with boosted priority. Performing this effect makes contact with the target. This action does not negate damage from damaging evasive moves performed by the target. Z-Move Effect: Raises the user's Defense by one (1) stage, adjusting the natural stage.
Click to expand...
 
Was the intention of this proposal to remove the nullifcation of the evasive properties of d/e moves? or is that just a consequence of the wording of the new proposal?

I'm mainly thinking in terms of doubles+, where if you use Block on an opponent attempting to d/e, previously your ally would be able to hit the opponent as well, but now it seems like they would not.


Sorry for not noticing/asking before this went to vote. also sorry for posting in a locked discussion thread (not rly)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top