np: Anti-Hax - It's your lucky day...

[Adoleo]

I havn't really had any problems with the Anti-Hax formula. Though while watching a battle, some guy lost a match due to his Super Luck Absol. Was the loss caused due to amount of Critical Hits w/ Night Slash?

 

[zorbees]

Darkie, remember that the formula takes into account all the damage rolls in the entire battle. So it's very possible that was the reason for the formula outcome. High or low damage calcs are not immediately obvious in the battle log, but they are a big part of the total luck in a match.

Everyone needs to remember this when reviewing their battle logs.

Shouldn't this be viewed as a flaw in the formula? 5-10% per hit adds up, but not as much as a series of misses and crits. Damage rolls are rarely consequential, whereas misses and crits are often costly.

 

[Mia [old]]

After playing with this for a while, I would like to congratulate Doug and everyone else involved in this project. This really does exactly what it is supposed to with startling accuracy. I am very impressed.

I do not understand where the complaints are coming from. The concept and basic math behind this change is cleanly outlined and Doug has given us multiple resources and his own hard effort to make this a working reality. The luck is largely removed, leaving a fair and competitive simulator for this community.

Again, miraculous work from the Smogon Staff. A truly commendable effort.

 

[Panthera]

After playing with this for a while, I would like to congratulate Doug and everyone else involved in this project. This really does exactly what it is supposed to with startling accuracy. I am very impressed.

I do not understand where the complaints are coming from. The concept and basic math behind this change is cleanly outlined and Doug has given us multiple resources and his own hard effort to make this a working reality. The luck is largely removed, leaving a fair and competitive simulator for this community.

Again, miraculous work from the Smogon Staff. A truly commendable effort.

One of the main problems lies not in whether the formula works or not (my personal experience hasn't seen anything overturned yet, and I haven't had a battle that was overly haxy, so it does seem to work properly), but whether applying such a formula is a good idea or not. There's ample debate to be had on that point but since this thread is apparently being treated purely for whether it works or not I won't bring anything up about that until someone says we can.

 

[alive]

I still think the threshold for a "haxxy" battle needs to be lowered a little. I just had this battle with Jimbo, with the clause on, where he had about 1 crit on me, and I haxxed him to death, yet I still got the win. (not that I'm complaining :p)

After playing a little more with this I have to agree, I remember facing one opponent in particular who was using a scarf rachi that that flinched two of my pokemon to death and I was only able to defeat it with my salamence finally able to get a DD in and I'm assuming won a speed tie but unfortunately had only ~11% left after that and due to life orb died the following turn. throughout the rest of the battle there was no obvious hax on either side and I lost 1-0 by about 2% on a machamp. I was hoping that the 11 or so fliches he got early game would ballance out and give me the win but unfortunatly it still calculated a loss for me. I wasn't paying attention to all the damage rolls and minor things like that throughout the battle but I am positive no amout of damage rolls he could have got in that game would have been near as destructive as the flinches. It was rather clear that I was the better player in that match but even with the new formula it was not recognized.

 

[reachzero]

So far I'm a little confused as to what people are complaining about. In every battle I've played so far, the player who played better has won every single time. Are you taking into account factors like the min/max damage done by each attack? Try going over each battle log, and I bet you'll see the issue with each battle that is overturned. I'm sure that Doug has found most of the problems already, and is working on the few kinks in the formula that are left!

 

[VashTheStampede]

IMO there's no such thing as "perfect," so I really wish people would use a better term for it. More like "accurate" or something..

But anyway, as stated time and time again, luck is part of the game, and people just need to live with the result.

 

[paramylodon]

Personally, I'd actually rather live with the extremely rare bad luck of having a game for me be declared a loss when it really wasn't then the relatively more frequent match that I may have lost due to bad luck but in which I may have played better.

Most of the criticisms so far are that it didn't change the outcome; it seems that the complaints here are that it isn't strong enough, not the previous complaints made by posters earlier that it would lead to people losing games they should have won due to it switching the result.
In that case, the criticisms in this thread appear to fly blatantly in the face of earlier criticisms.
I really want to start laddering again.

 

[panamaxis]

I got burned 4 times, and didn't get any noticable hax myself, yet i still lost. I really hate this whole idea of an anti-hax ladder.

 

[puffery]

What I want to know is if jirachi flinches a pokemon once who gets the benifit of the formula since its 60% wouldnt it be hax if it didnt happen

 

[PerfectBlue]

Haven't seen a battle overturned yet but ... Ok, I just want to say one thing. It should be a tie instead of a loss when this happens. I mean u can't control it if u get enough hax to win, and are punished for it. Who's to say u couldn't have won fairly? Just as an extreme example, let's say ur opp has a crappy team, and u manage to flinch hax every pokemon for a 6-0 win. It'd end up being a loss even though u'd have no control over it.

So ya... this should be a tie instead of a loss

 

[west ham sandwich]

I got burned 4 times, and didn't get any noticable hax myself, yet i still lost. I really hate this whole idea of an anti-hax ladder.

Isn't this how it's supposed to be? Getting burned isn't hax, you just get burned. Status effects are still in the game for a reason. The formula is clearly there for other reasons. You would have lost without anti-hax clause too, so I'm not seeing where your complaint comes from.

That being said,

This is really fun to play with casually with friends, just to have the luck factor kick in and tell you that you won after you got crushed by the RNG repeatedly.

Though I play UU pretty much exclusively and it's not an auto-clause since there's not really a UU ladder on shoddy right now.

 

[Relictivity]

Isn't this how it's supposed to be? Getting burned isn't hax, you just get burned. Status effects are still in the game for a reason. The formula is clearly there for other reasons. You would have lost without anti-hax clause too, so I'm not seeing where your complaint comes from.

He's talking about a burn from Flamethrower/Fire Blast. So yes, it's hax. Actually, depending on the length of the battle, these burns may be more "haxy" then Jirach Flinching you 10 times and the such. (in short battles it would count as numerous hax in a short period of time, in long battles it would count as critical hax to the match, due to how much it lowered HP) But we'd have to know the length of the battle in order to figure that out.

Still, Jirachi should be flinching you 60% of the time with no paralysis.

I've been thinking and - would it not be "hax" if your Jirachi did not flinch them successively? Because that has alot less of a chance of happening than the flinching.

 

[Erazor]

Ok, I played a few matches, and got one overturned. The problem is that I didn't hax him in any way! Just because his record his better than mine, the battle gets overturned? I don't get this.

Here's the log:

Rules: Ladder Match, Sleep Clause, Freeze Clause, OHKO Clause, Evasion Clause, Species Clause, Strict Damage Clause, Soul Dew Clause, Anti-Hax Clause
Leth sent out Azelf (lvl 100 Azelf).
Erazor sent out Azelf (lvl 100 Azelf).
Azelf used Stealth Rock.
Pointed stones float in the air around the foe's team!
Azelf used Taunt.
Azelf fell for the taunt!
---
Azelf used Flamethrower.
Azelf lost 51% of its health.
Azelf used Stealth Rock.
Pointed stones float in the air around the foe's team!
---
Leth switched in Heatran (lvl 100 Heatran ?).
Pointed stones dug into Heatran.
Heatran lost 12% of its health.
Azelf used Flamethrower.
Heatran's Flash Fire raised its fire power!
---
Heatran used Flamethrower.
Azelf lost 100% of its health.
Azelf hung on using its Focus Sash!
Azelf used Explosion.
It's not very effective...
Heatran lost 68% of its health.
Erazor's Azelf fainted.
---
Leth: here comes the explode...
Erazor switched in Blissey (lvl 100 Blissey ?).
Pointed stones dug into Blissey.
Blissey lost 12% of its health.
Leth switched in Azelf (lvl 100 Azelf).
Pointed stones dug into Azelf.
Azelf lost 12% of its health.
Blissey used Thunder Wave.
Azelf is paralysed! It may be unable to move!
Blissey's leftovers restored its health a little!
Blissey restored 6% of its health.
---
Blissey used Seismic Toss.
Azelf lost 34% of its health.
Azelf used Explosion.
Blissey lost 94% of its health.
Erazor's Blissey fainted.
Leth's Azelf fainted.
---
Leth switched in Absol (lvl 100 Absol ?).
Erazor switched in Zapdos (lvl 100 Zapdos).
Zapdos is exerting its pressure!
Pointed stones dug into Zapdos.
Zapdos lost 25% of its health.
Absol is exerting its pressure!
Pointed stones dug into Absol.
Absol lost 12% of its health.
Leth: I don't like Blissey. ;(
Absol used Sucker Punch.
Zapdos lost 73% of its health.
Zapdos used Thunderbolt.
Absol lost 88% of its health.
Leth's Absol fainted.
Zapdos lost 2% of its health.
Erazor's Zapdos fainted.
---
Leth switched in Vaporeon (lvl 100 Vaporeon ?).
Erazor switched in Dragonite (lvl 100 Dragonite ?).
Pointed stones dug into Dragonite.
Dragonite lost 25% of its health.
Pointed stones dug into Vaporeon.
Vaporeon lost 12% of its health.
Dragonite used Superpower.
Vaporeon lost 39% of its health.
Dragonite's attack was lowered.
Dragonite's defence was lowered.
Dragonite lost 10% of its health.
Vaporeon used Wish.
Vaporeon made a wish!
Vaporeon's leftovers restored its health a little!
Vaporeon restored 6% of its health.
---
Dragonite used Draco Meteor.
Vaporeon lost 55% of its health.
Leth's Vaporeon fainted.
Dragonite's special attack was harshly lowered.
Dragonite lost 10% of its health.
---
Leth switched in Heatran (lvl 100 Heatran ?).
Pointed stones dug into Heatran.
Heatran lost 12% of its health.
Heatran used Hidden Power.
It's super effective!
Dragonite lost 55% of its health.
Erazor's Dragonite fainted.
---
Erazor switched in Empoleon (lvl 100 Empoleon ?).
Pointed stones dug into Empoleon.
Empoleon lost 6% of its health.
Heatran used Hidden Power.
It's not very effective...
Empoleon lost 6% of its health.
Empoleon used Substitute.
Empoleon lost 25% of its health.
Empoleon made a substitute!
---
Heatran used Hidden Power.
It's not very effective...
A critical hit!
The substitute took damage for Empoleon!
Empoleon used Agility.
Empoleon's speed was sharply raised.
---
Empoleon used Agility.
Empoleon's speed was sharply raised.
Heatran used Hidden Power.
It's not very effective...
The substitute took damage for Empoleon!
---
Leth switched in Metagross (lvl 100 Metagross).
Pointed stones dug into Metagross.
Metagross lost 6% of its health.
Empoleon used Surf.
Metagross lost 51% of its health.
Metagross's leftovers restored its health a little!
Metagross restored 6% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Surf.
Metagross lost 48% of its health.
Metagross used Earthquake.
It's super effective!
The substitute took damage for Empoleon!
Empoleon's substitute faded!
Metagross's leftovers restored its health a little!
Metagross restored 6% of its health.
---
Leth switched in Cresselia (lvl 100 Cresselia ?).
Pointed stones dug into Cresselia.
Cresselia lost 12% of its health.
Empoleon used Surf.
Cresselia lost 24% of its health.
Cresselia's leftovers restored its health a little!
Cresselia restored 6% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Substitute.
Empoleon lost 25% of its health.
Empoleon made a substitute!
Cresselia used Rest.
Cresselia fell asleep!
Cresselia restored 30% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Surf.
Cresselia lost 27% of its health.
Cresselia is fast asleep!
Cresselia used Sleep Talk.
Cresselia used Ice Beam.
It's not very effective...
The substitute took damage for Empoleon!
Cresselia's leftovers restored its health a little!
Cresselia restored 6% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Surf.
Cresselia lost 27% of its health.
Cresselia is fast asleep!
Cresselia used Sleep Talk.
Cresselia used Ice Beam.
It's not very effective...
The substitute took damage for Empoleon!
Cresselia's leftovers restored its health a little!
Cresselia restored 6% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Surf.
Cresselia lost 28% of its health.
Cresselia woke up!
Cresselia used Rest.
Cresselia fell asleep!
Cresselia restored 70% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Agility.
Empoleon's speed was sharply raised.
Cresselia is fast asleep!
Cresselia used Sleep Talk.
Cresselia used Thunder Wave.
But it failed!
---
Empoleon used Surf.
Cresselia lost 28% of its health.
Cresselia is fast asleep!
Cresselia used Sleep Talk.
Cresselia used Ice Beam.
It's not very effective...
The substitute took damage for Empoleon!
Cresselia's leftovers restored its health a little!
Cresselia restored 6% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Surf.
Cresselia lost 28% of its health.
Cresselia woke up!
Cresselia used Sleep Talk.
But it failed!
Cresselia's leftovers restored its health a little!
Cresselia restored 6% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Surf.
Cresselia lost 28% of its health.
Cresselia used Rest.
Cresselia fell asleep!
Cresselia restored 73% of its health.
---
Erazor switched in Scizor (lvl 100 Scizor ?).
Pointed stones dug into Scizor.
Scizor lost 12% of its health.
Cresselia is fast asleep!
Cresselia used Sleep Talk.
Cresselia used Rest.
But it failed!
---
Cresselia is fast asleep!
Cresselia used Sleep Talk.
Cresselia used Rest.
But it failed!
Scizor used U-turn.
It's super effective!
Cresselia lost 62% of its health.
Erazor switched in Empoleon (lvl 100 Empoleon ?).
Pointed stones dug into Empoleon.
Empoleon lost 6% of its health.
Cresselia's leftovers restored its health a little!
Cresselia restored 6% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Substitute.
Empoleon lost 25% of its health.
Empoleon made a substitute!
Cresselia woke up!
Cresselia used Rest.
Cresselia fell asleep!
Cresselia restored 56% of its health.
Empoleon's Petaya Berry raised its special attack!
---
Empoleon used Agility.
Empoleon's speed was sharply raised.
Cresselia is fast asleep!
Cresselia used Sleep Talk.
Cresselia used Thunder Wave.
But it failed!
---
Empoleon used Surf.
Cresselia lost 55% of its health.
Cresselia is fast asleep!
Cresselia used Sleep Talk.
Cresselia used Thunder Wave.
But it failed!
Cresselia's leftovers restored its health a little!
Cresselia restored 6% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Surf.
Cresselia lost 51% of its health.
Leth's Cresselia fainted.
---
Leth switched in Metagross (lvl 100 Metagross).
Pointed stones dug into Metagross.
Metagross lost 6% of its health.
Empoleon used Agility.
Empoleon's speed was sharply raised.
Metagross used Earthquake.
It's super effective!
The substitute took damage for Empoleon!
Empoleon's substitute faded!
Metagross's leftovers restored its health a little!
Metagross restored 6% of its health.
---
Empoleon used Surf.
Metagross lost 7% of its health.
Leth's Metagross fainted.
---
Leth switched in Heatran (lvl 100 Heatran ?).
Pointed stones dug into Heatran.
Heatran lost 8% of its health.
Leth's Heatran fainted.
The battle has ended.
Analyzing battle data for luck factors...
Leth wins!

edit: and another match, my Empoleon could have easily finished off his Jirachi, but Iron Head flinched four times in a row, costing me the game. Yet it doesn't count for much? It was game changing hax.

 

[cim]

I don't have the log, so I'll have to battle again and hope it happens, but the formula actually overturned a loss that my April Fool's team had. The team consisted of a Sunkern lead and 5 other joke Pokémon (though honestly I'm surprised at how viable Ditto is!)

What kind of a formula can rate your team and decide if you "deserved to win"? How much hax is too much hax? How little is too little?

 

[CaptKirby]

I think this is the right idea. I quit playing Diamond/Pearl pokemon because of luck, so this represents a step forward. I have not looked at the contents of the formula yet, but it probably implements reasonable actions like penalizing critical hits.

 

[M Dragon]

Seriously WTF?
In 2 battles in a row i predict my opponent and i 3-0/5-0, he misses 2 FB against a bulky water or something like that and i lose the battle
And I win 3-0 with 5 iron heads flinches and i lose the battle o.o

 

[Tarquin]

This clause declared me the loser to a 3-0 battle after missing twice with 85% moves and suffering s critical hit, my only 'hax' being that I won a speed tie. I think it's currently not ready for the metagame and I also disagree with the whole concept, as it's as though this website feels it should improve the game that it's a support site of.

I think it's slightly arrogant and makes Wifi an option more faithful to pokemon.

 

[Gaborik]

If you define Smogon as a "fan site" then you have the wrong impression.

I have only had maybe ~10 battles and haven't had anything overturned. I don't know what to think yet, but I thought if you won by more than a 3-0 score it was almost impossible to get the game overturned? Maybe I skimmed the PR thread too quickly or just made it up in my own head.

Edit: Well nevermind I won a 3-0 (and then it got overturned to a loss), the only hax being pointless to finish the last pokemon off. Maybe I did "top end" damage the whole game, but my moves were 2HKO anyway, so does it matter if I did 79 instead of 70? He swaps Metagross into an obvious Fire Blast and maybe I do max damage at 94% to kill it, but either way its a 2HKO... maybe I'm interpreting the results in a biased way because I felt like there was no way I deserved to lose so I keep looking for it at my favor, Ill look at the log further later. I'll reskim the PR thread too to see if I can figure it out myself if you talked about this.

 

[MegaMewtwo]

You know what I don't get? With the weather glitch, it's all like "we need to be accurate to the games". Then this.

Am I the only person who finds that a bit contradictary? It's like "We need to be true to the games by keeping a glitch in. Now let's punish luck."

Somehow I don't think this post's going to be received well, but that was seriously bugging me.

 

[RBG]

You know what I don't get? With the weather glitch, it's all like "we need to be accurate to the games". Then this.

Am I the only person who finds that a bit contradictary? It's like "We need to be true to the games by keeping a glitch in. Now let's punish luck."

Somehow I don't think this post's going to be received well, but that was seriously bugging me.

You obviously have not been reading anything said about this. The Win Condition effects your ladder rating, which doesn't exist on Wi-fi. We can alter things that happen out of battle, like effecting your rating. We can't change what happens with in game battle mechanics.

 

[Veedrock]

RB-G's post is exactly why I encouraged people to watch ratings rather than try to keep a W/L record. If this is only in effect for ratings, it really shouldn't matter from a "simulation" standpoint (it would be so much clearer if this was a part of the CRE or GLIXARE rather than a clause). However, just HOW they affect the ratings is what will ultimately be the selling point (I would think).

 

[Influxum]

This is pathetic. Hax is part of the game so why are you ruining it...

Thats what makes it interesting. Now people will be praying not to get parahax and what not, whereas normally this is what you are wanting.

You might as take away all the 10% chance of para or 30% of flinch because if you do you will ultimately end up loosing.

What was wrong with the way it was. Its not like hax is one sided it happens to everyone.

Its part of the game.

You have ruined the shoddy server.

 

[fivexthethird]

This is pathetic. Hax is part of the game so why are you ruining it...

Thats what makes it interesting. Now people will be praying not to get parahax and what not, whereas normally this is what you are wanting.

You might as take away all the 10% chance of para or 30% of flinch because if you do you will ultimately end up loosing.

What was wrong with the way it was. Its not like hax is one sided it happens to everyone.

Its part of the game.

You have ruined the shoddy server.

That is sssomething I have to agree on.

 

[iKitsune]

I think im beginning to get the hang of this.

In my laddering so far today i was unitentionally using a haxxy team. By this i mean Scarf Jirachi lead and Machamp. Having played 6 games.
I won 5 lost 6. But more importantly due to the hax formula and that dreaded "analyzing battle data for luck factors..." i ended up losing 4, 4 battles over turned is too much ( i have one of the logs) it has become clear to me that the amount of Hax is one of the greater contributing factors in concern with the formula. I also feel cheated as against these people i was often the superior player it has to be said and many of the people i played against made some big mistakes and there were equal amounts of explicit hax occuring that lead me to believe the game was fair. But in some of the matches I still did do a good deal of haxing nevertheless. I changed my team to a team less reliant Hax and immediately i started to have what i felt was a greater chance of winning through the formula. So far i am greatly opposed to the Anti hax as it has slashed my win ratio particularly against people i know i should have won against regardless. Maybe i am just having an extremely lucky yet unlucky day as in i have had a large amount of hidden hax(max damage).

My main qualm with the Anti Hax formula is actually its uselessness. The likelihood is that over time as you battle on the ladder regardless of hax, unless you are ridiculously unlucky constantly, you will achieve a rating that is reflective of your ability as . For this reason the only good i can see the Anti Hax formula for is tournament play where losing one battle due to hax has an absolute effect.

I wonder what your thoughts and opinons are on this.