All Gens Past Gens Research Thread

[Marty]

View attachment 176128
In this ADV battle Heal Bell didn't cure the status of a pokemon with Soundproof which means either the !dt description is wrong or the current simulator mechanics. It would be nice if someone can provide evidence for how it should work.

Soundproof's interaction with Heal Bell is implemented in Heal Bell, so it's inheriting Gen 5's code which includes the description. The only difference is Abilities still work while the Pokemon is inactive in Gen 3 and 4, and starting in Gen 5 are only effective if the Pokemon is active. I assume Game Freak made a mistake implementing the specific targeting mechanism used by Aromatherapy and Heal Bell in Gen 5, because they don't interact at all with Sap Sipper or Soundproof, respectively. Starting in Gen 6, they again correctly block the effect if the Sap Sipper or Soundproof Pokemon is active, but let it be cured if inactive. This is all mentioned in the Smogdex Heal Bell descriptions as well. I'll add a Soundproof description to Gen 4 on PS.

 

[Seven Thunders]

I was playing DPP on Showdown, and I selected Healing Wish the turn my opponent Phazed me, which resulted in the mon I sent out being healed, as well as the one phazed in. Can anyone verify if this is the correct behavior?

 

[DavidChansey]

Wow Crystal_ thanks for your detailed explanation of how damage is calculated. Could you or someone else tell me precisely how a Pokemon's stats are calculated? The formula here on Bulbapedia has confused me particularly when it comes to rounding. I'm updating a simple but effective damage calculator I made so I would be very grateful for someone to explain it precisely to me. The RBY metagame sure has changed since I last played...

 

[DrPumpkinz]

In gens 2 and 3, what category (physical or special) are moves with the ??? type? As far as I know, this can only legitimately be tested in XD with Shadow Sky Weather Ball, but it's entirely possible for it to not be consistent.

 

[Lego]

In gens 2 and 3, what category (physical or special) are moves with the ??? type? As far as I know, this can only legitimately be tested in XD with Shadow Sky Weather Ball, but it's entirely possible for it to not be consistent.

Haven’t had the chance to test in XD yet or look into Gen 2, but according to the Pokémon Emerald disassembly they are neither Physical nor Special, and will always deal zero damage.

 

[Enigami]

I made a discovery involving Counter. I was trying to answer whether Showdown's Counter mechanics were correct on cartridge, or whether Crystal_ was correct about his findings that he posted here: http://pokemon-online.eu/threads/31807/#post-449328

This is the aftermath of a paralyzed Alakazam using Psychic, then Alakazam attempting to use Seismic Toss but fully paralyzing and Chansey using Counter. The Chansey player that used Counter saw the attack fail and do nothing to Alakazam, while the Alakazam player that attempted to use Seismic Toss took massive damage despite its last used move being Psychic.

In testing, the exact inverse scenario occurred as expected when Alakazam used Seismic Toss, then attempted to use Psychic but was fully paralyzed, then Chansey used Counter. The Chansey player saw Alakazam take massive damage, while the Alakazam player saw Counter fail.

Turned out, the answer was "yes", or more accurately, it desyncs and each player sees the other result. The Counter user sees it the way Showdown sees it, with the last used move being checked by Counter. The Countered user sees it the way Crystal_ indicated, with the last selected move being checked by Counter. This presents us with a problem, there's no 'proper' behavior for Counter in this scenario.

Way I see it, we have 4 options:
A) Ban Counter due to the various desyncs it already causes in addition to this new one.
B) Clause Counter to work as the Counter User handles it. This involves no change to Showdown beyond adding a Counter Clause to acknowledge Counter does not behave as it does on cartridge.
C) Clause Counter to work as the Countered User handles it. This requires changes to Showdown's Gen 1 Counter mechanics, and is less intuitive as it counters the last selected move instead of last used move.
D) Clause Counter to work as Stadium handles it, by making the last damage = 0 when a Pokemon fully paralyzes and thus making Counter always fail in this scenario.
E) Drop Cartridge RBY for Stadium RBY

 

[Ortheore]

I made a discovery involving Counter. I was trying to answer whether Showdown's Counter mechanics were correct on cartridge, or whether Crystal_ was correct about his findings that he posted here: http://pokemon-online.eu/threads/31807/#post-449328

View attachment 218849

This is the aftermath of a paralyzed Alakazam using Psychic, then Alakazam attempting to use Seismic Toss but fully paralyzing and Chansey using Counter. The Chansey player that used Counter saw the attack fail and do nothing to Alakazam, while the Alakazam player that attempted to use Seismic Toss took massive damage despite its last used move being Psychic.

In testing, the exact inverse scenario occurred as expected when Alakazam used Seismic Toss, then attempted to use Psychic but was fully paralyzed, then Chansey used Counter. The Chansey player saw Alakazam take massive damage, while the Alakazam player saw Counter fail.

Turned out, the answer was "yes", or more accurately, it desyncs and each player sees the other result. The Counter user sees it the way Showdown sees it, with the last used move being checked by Counter. The Countered user sees it the way Crystal_ indicated, with the last selected move being checked by Counter. This presents us with a problem, there's no 'proper' behavior for Counter in this scenario.

Way I see it, we have 4 options:
A) Ban Counter due to the various desyncs it already causes in addition to this new one.
B) Clause Counter to work as the Counter User handles it. This involves no change to Showdown beyond adding a Counter Clause to acknowledge Counter does not behave as it does on cartridge.
C) Clause Counter to work as the Countered User handles it. This requires changes to Showdown's Gen 1 Counter mechanics, and is less intuitive as it counters the last selected move instead of last used move.
D) Clause Counter to work as Stadium handles it, by making the last damage = 0 when a Pokemon fully paralyzes and thus making Counter always fail in this scenario.
E) Drop Cartridge RBY for Stadium RBY

Damn, I always wondered this, but when I discussed it with other people the general response was that there were no Counter desyncs that were outside player control. Just goes to show I should've pursued the issue rather than just going with the flow.

Anyway, anyone who's familiar with my opinions on tiering and rulesets can probably guess that I'd be in favour of banning Counter outright, rather than modding cartridge mechanics. We should absolutely be sticking to cart mechanics to stay true to the actual game, given that it's a simulator, not a stand-alone game

Edit: I'm now really mad that I didn't pursue this earlier

 

[Enigami]

Found this selection desync with Counter extends to fainting Pokemon. I started a new battle, had Chansey and paralyzed Zam use Seismic Toss on eachother until Zam was at 13 HP, then I had Zam try to use Psychic but get KO'd by Chansey's Seismic Toss. I brought in the next Pokemon on the Zam side and switched to Snorlax, and had Chansey use Counter. From Chansey's perspective, Chansey countered its own 13 damage Seismic Toss because the last used move from Alakazam was Seismic Toss, while from Snorlax's perspective Chansey failed to use Counter at all because the last selected move from Alakazam was Psychic.

 

[Ortheore]

I'll actually be so pissed if people decide to mod this out. Either accurately simulate the pokemon games or play a mod like Violet or something. Don't fucking claim to simulate the actual games if you're going to pick and choose which mechanics you care about. And don't spout bullshit about how modding in order to avoid banning something is true to how the game's played, or some other nonsense that amounts to an inability to cope with change. People seem to want to change the mechanics to preserve some imagined idea of what the metagame is supposed to look like, which is some tail-wagging-the-dog rubbish if ever I've seen it. This is idea is pure fiction. There is no obligation whatsoever for the metagame to look a certain way. A metagame evolves naturally from a game's mechanics, and if those mechanics change (in this case due to imperfect understanding of the mechanics), then the metagame must subsequently change in response. However it seems every time we learn something about RBY's mechanics people want to stick their head in the sand and insist that the mechanics they play by change to accommodate their desire for things to stay as they have been before, because heaven forbid something change!

Stop dancing around the appropriate course of action because you're scared you might actually alter things. Ban Counter, since that's what's replicable on cart. While we're at it, implement rules to deal with other possible desyncs as well (e.g. thawing), instead of pretending these glitches don't exist. Stop ignoring the fact that numerous pokemon are incapable of gaining max DVs.

And if you're not interested in sticking to cart mechanics, can I ask why you're sticking to RBY at all? It's really easy to see numerous ways RBY could be done better, both in terms of enjoyment and also competitiveness and strategic depth (e.g. changing how Wrap works), so why not play a mod that actually addresses those aspects?

edit: sorry, this was a little aggressive. I get really frustrated about these things sometimes

 

[Yung Dramps]

I'll actually be so pissed if people decide to mod this out. Either accurately simulate the pokemon games or play a mod like Violet or something. Don't fucking claim to simulate the actual games if you're going to pick and choose which mechanics you care about. And don't spout bullshit about how modding in order to avoid banning something is true to how the game's played, or some other nonsense that amounts to an inability to cope with change. People seem to want to change the mechanics to preserve some imagined idea of what the metagame is supposed to look like, which is some tail-wagging-the-dog rubbish if ever I've seen it. This is idea is pure fiction. There is no obligation whatsoever for the metagame to look a certain way. A metagame evolves naturally from a game's mechanics, and if those mechanics change (in this case due to imperfect understanding of the mechanics), then the metagame must subsequently change in response. However it seems every time we learn something about RBY's mechanics people want to stick their head in the sand and insist that the mechanics they play by change to accommodate their desire for things to stay as they have been before, because heaven forbid something change!

Stop dancing around the appropriate course of action because you're scared you might actually alter things. Ban Counter, since that's what's replicable on cart. While we're at it, implement rules to deal with other possible desyncs as well (e.g. thawing), instead of pretending these glitches don't exist. Stop ignoring the fact that numerous pokemon are incapable of gaining max DVs.

And if you're not interested in sticking to cart mechanics, can I ask why you're sticking to RBY at all? It's really easy to see numerous ways RBY could be done better, both in terms of enjoyment and also competitiveness and strategic depth (e.g. changing how Wrap works), so why not play a mod that actually addresses those aspects?

Would you be cool with me posting this on the RBY Counter PR thread on your behalf? I fully agree with what you're saying here it's very well-written

 

[Deleted User 229847]

I still fail to comprehend why after all the discussions we have had months ago in the Amaranth's RBy thread, tradebacks have not been enabled in RBY despite being the legal and right way to play the tier.
A similar issue comes with this counter-mechanics discovery. We are strive to play pokemon as closer as possible as it is on cartridge, I have no idea why there' so much discussion around banning the move or modding it in a way that is not authentic to the game code. If you can't make it work as it does on cartridge, it should be disabled for being acutally made-up.

 

[Ortheore]

Would you be cool with me posting this on the RBY Counter PR thread on your behalf? I fully agree with what you're saying here it's very well-written

Sure, I guess, though maybe the first few sentences of the post were maybe a little too aggressive- my post was as much a rant to get that off my chest as anything, which isn't the best in terms of presenting an argument

 

[xJoelituh]

Sure, I guess, though maybe the first few sentences of the post were maybe a little too aggressive- my post was as much a rant to get that off my chest as anything, which isn't the best in terms of presenting an argument

"Please do not post for people who do not have this ability in Policy Review. If they wish to contribute, they can contact the relevant leader of the topic at hand, such as the OU council for OU-related issues or TDs for anything to do with Smogon Tournaments. If these people wish to, they are allowed to post for outsiders. Everyone else should avoid doing so."
https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/policy-review-posting-guidelines.3614129/

And Amaranth linked the post there anyway

Yung Dramps

 

[sumwun]

When a flying Pokemon is affected by ingrain, smack down, thousand arrows, or iron ball, does that let sky drop hit the flying Pokemon?

 

[juoean]

I'll actually be so pissed if people decide to mod this out. Either accurately simulate the pokemon games or play a mod like Violet or something. Don't fucking claim to simulate the actual games if you're going to pick and choose which mechanics you care about. And don't spout bullshit about how modding in order to avoid banning something is true to how the game's played, or some other nonsense that amounts to an inability to cope with change. People seem to want to change the mechanics to preserve some imagined idea of what the metagame is supposed to look like, which is some tail-wagging-the-dog rubbish if ever I've seen it. This is idea is pure fiction. There is no obligation whatsoever for the metagame to look a certain way. A metagame evolves naturally from a game's mechanics, and if those mechanics change (in this case due to imperfect understanding of the mechanics), then the metagame must subsequently change in response. However it seems every time we learn something about RBY's mechanics people want to stick their head in the sand and insist that the mechanics they play by change to accommodate their desire for things to stay as they have been before, because heaven forbid something change!

Stop dancing around the appropriate course of action because you're scared you might actually alter things. Ban Counter, since that's what's replicable on cart. While we're at it, implement rules to deal with other possible desyncs as well (e.g. thawing), instead of pretending these glitches don't exist. Stop ignoring the fact that numerous pokemon are incapable of gaining max DVs.

And if you're not interested in sticking to cart mechanics, can I ask why you're sticking to RBY at all? It's really easy to see numerous ways RBY could be done better, both in terms of enjoyment and also competitiveness and strategic depth (e.g. changing how Wrap works), so why not play a mod that actually addresses those aspects?

edit: sorry, this was a little aggressive. I get really frustrated about these things sometimes

simulator rby is really not cartridge adherent regardless due to the lack of a fight button and cursor, which significantly changes wrap but iirc some other things are affected by clicking fight and then going back.
maybe its a different kind of departure from cartridge (changing the options available to a player vs changing the effect of a move) but theyre both departures from cartridge.

if ppl wanted to make a rule change to counter that was the second ‘kind’ of departure instead, it could be to j not allow a player to select the move counter if that could potentially cause a desync. however i think itd be very confusing and it also could have very weird/unintended consequences of giving the counter user information such as whether an opposing paralyzed alakazam is carrying seismic toss (since as long as the previous move used was not normal or fighting, counter could potentially desync vs stoss zam but otherwise zam has no move that could possibly be countered and therefore theres no chance for desync.) since zam is never clicking stoss against (eg) chansey nor is chansey ever clicking counter vs zam itd be unfair and nonsensical for the counter chansey player to receive this info about zam’s moveset. and i guess itd also reveal if a paralyzed starmie is carrying the rare hyper beam and im sure other absurd scenarios.

ultimately its a departure from cartridge either way but i think this shows that the option that could be considered a lesser departure technically, is really a more severe departure by uncompetitively providing information (only to one player).

u brought up @ DVs but also @ stat experience it is obv not actually possible to get a chansey with 0 attack stat exp but max stat exp in every other stat. but how would one go about calculating chanseys minimum possible attack stat exp.

simulator rby isnt cartridge adherent unless it adds a fight button and cursor equivalent. banning moves is also a ‘departure from cartridge’, and that is part of why ppl prefer not to do that. banning every move that has any scenario of causing desyncs (u indicated there are others besides counter and psywave eg related to thawing?) would be a drastic change from cartridge bc moveset is key and esp in a gen with so few competitively viable moves to begin with. banning players from selecting counter in a scenario where theres a risk of desync would also be a drastic departure for the (v different) reasons above. a ’mod’ for changing the effect of counter in a relatively rare scenario is much less of a departure from cartridge than either giving counter chansey players random information about opposing special attackers movesets or banning all freezing moves due to a thaw glitch when blizzard is one of the most threatening moves in rby. (much like banning hyper beam, which in practice would be equivalent to removing the recharge turn ‘glitch’ since the glitch is the only reason hbeam is used, is mostly disliked bc itd be severely changing the original game).
they are all ‘departures from cartridge’ and there are real reasons why ppl consider a mod to be the least bad option here, not bc of “not wanting to change” or the other non-reasons that u listed (which i have not seen any evidence of on any of the threads abt this)

 

[Ortheore]

simulator rby is really not cartridge adherent regardless due to the lack of a fight button and cursor, which significantly changes wrap but iirc some other things are affected by clicking fight and then going back.
maybe its a different kind of departure from cartridge (changing the options available to a player vs changing the effect of a move) but theyre both departures from cartridge.

if ppl wanted to make a rule change to counter that was the second ‘kind’ of departure instead, it could be to j not allow a player to select the move counter if that could potentially cause a desync. however i think itd be very confusing and it also could have very weird/unintended consequences of giving the counter user information such as whether an opposing paralyzed alakazam is carrying seismic toss (since as long as the previous move used was not normal or fighting, counter could potentially desync vs stoss zam but otherwise zam has no move that could possibly be countered and therefore theres no chance for desync.) since zam is never clicking stoss against (eg) chansey nor is chansey ever clicking counter vs zam itd be unfair and nonsensical for the counter chansey player to receive this info about zam’s moveset. and i guess itd also reveal if a paralyzed starmie is carrying the rare hyper beam and im sure other absurd scenarios.

ultimately its a departure from cartridge either way but i think this shows that the option that could be considered a lesser departure technically, is really a more severe departure by uncompetitively providing information (only to one player).

u brought up @ DVs but also @ stat experience it is obv not actually possible to get a chansey with 0 attack stat exp but max stat exp in every other stat. but how would one go about calculating chanseys minimum possible attack stat exp.

simulator rby isnt cartridge adherent unless it adds a fight button and cursor equivalent. banning moves is also a ‘departure from cartridge’, and that is part of why ppl prefer not to do that. banning every move that has any scenario of causing desyncs (u indicated there are others besides counter and psywave eg related to thawing?) would be a drastic change from cartridge bc moveset is key and esp in a gen with so few competitively viable moves to begin with. banning players from selecting counter in a scenario where theres a risk of desync would also be a drastic departure for the (v different) reasons above. a ’mod’ for changing the effect of counter in a relatively rare scenario is much less of a departure from cartridge than either giving counter chansey players random information about opposing special attackers movesets or banning all freezing moves due to a thaw glitch when blizzard is one of the most threatening moves in rby. (much like banning hyper beam, which in practice would be equivalent to removing the recharge turn ‘glitch’ since the glitch is the only reason hbeam is used, is mostly disliked bc itd be severely changing the original game).
they are all ‘departures from cartridge’ and there are real reasons why ppl consider a mod to be the least bad option here, not bc of “not wanting to change” or the other non-reasons that u listed (which i have not seen any evidence of on any of the threads abt this)

I fully agree, the simulator's implementation of Wrap is a departure from cart mechanics, which is why further changes need to be implemented for the simulator. This should in no way hold any weight as an argument for preserving Counter because it is also something that needs to be changed.

I mean sure, if you want to raise stat experience as an issue go ahead, but it's so irrelevant that not even I would make an issue out of it. As it stands I don't think anyone really minimises Attack stats in g1/2 since it's honestly not worth the effort. Also it may still be theoretically possible to minimise Atk exp, here's a couple relevant threads: thread 1, thread 2.

Banning moves is also a departure from cartridge

please don't conflate player-imposed rules which are totally replicable on cartridge with modifications to the game code. There's nothing wrong with imposing rules to create a more enjoyable competitive experience, however when you modify game mechanics such that it is no longer replicable on cart, you're playing something that is fundamentally different to the actual games, which is just wrong

"a ’mod’ for changing the effect of counter in a relatively rare scenario is much less of a departure from cartridge than either giving counter chansey players random information about opposing special attackers movesets or banning all freezing moves due to a thaw glitch when blizzard is one of the most threatening moves in rby. (much like banning hyper beam, which in practice would be equivalent to removing the recharge turn ‘glitch’ since the glitch is the only reason hbeam is used, is mostly disliked bc itd be severely changing the original game).

Tbh this seems like a troll, but I'll bite anyway. I've read this post a couple times and I'm still not 100% certain on what you're saying regarding Counter Chansey- are you proposing preventing the selection of Counter in situations where a desync would be possible? Between that and banning freeze moves when a far better solution exists (not deliberately thawing opposing pokemon), it seems to me that you're trying to think of the worst possible solutions to the issue and representing them as the positions that I'm arguing for

I'm sorry, but discussing banning Hyper Beam is just absurd- literally no-one has ever proposed that, and it has no relevance in this discussion because the recharge glitch does not break the game in any way. Glitches in general are not the problem, it's game-breaking glitches that are the problem at hand

they are all ‘departures from cartridge’ and there are real reasons why ppl consider a mod to be the least bad option here, not bc of “not wanting to change” or the other non-reasons that u listed (which i have not seen any evidence of on any of the threads abt this).

Hmmm, I suppose it's a fair critique to say I jump to the conclusion that people "don't want change" too readily. However, it's hard not to jump to that conclusion based on how these things tend to play out in this community. Every time some issue regarding cart accuracy gets raised there's always a kneejerk reaction from some people who automatically assume that a given change will make the meta worse or something, based on nothing but theory, and who refuse to even consider actually testing their assumptions. In such discussions I present my arguments and defend them, and I think I do a reasonable job of it, however my arguments make no headway because most of the people disagreeing with me value different things. There's a lot of back and forth, no consensus is reached, and nothing gets done about the issue. In such an environment, it's tempting to default to the "don't want change" line I guess.

=========================

I am curious though- given that we implemented Crystal's mechanic discoveries, why should modding Counter be treated differently?

 

[sumwun]

simulator rby is really not cartridge adherent regardless due to the lack of a fight button and cursor, which significantly changes wrap but iirc some other things are affected by clicking fight and then going back.
maybe its a different kind of departure from cartridge (changing the options available to a player vs changing the effect of a move) but theyre both departures from cartridge.

if ppl wanted to make a rule change to counter that was the second ‘kind’ of departure instead, it could be to j not allow a player to select the move counter if that could potentially cause a desync. however i think itd be very confusing and it also could have very weird/unintended consequences of giving the counter user information such as whether an opposing paralyzed alakazam is carrying seismic toss (since as long as the previous move used was not normal or fighting, counter could potentially desync vs stoss zam but otherwise zam has no move that could possibly be countered and therefore theres no chance for desync.) since zam is never clicking stoss against (eg) chansey nor is chansey ever clicking counter vs zam itd be unfair and nonsensical for the counter chansey player to receive this info about zam’s moveset. and i guess itd also reveal if a paralyzed starmie is carrying the rare hyper beam and im sure other absurd scenarios.

ultimately its a departure from cartridge either way but i think this shows that the option that could be considered a lesser departure technically, is really a more severe departure by uncompetitively providing information (only to one player).

u brought up @ DVs but also @ stat experience it is obv not actually possible to get a chansey with 0 attack stat exp but max stat exp in every other stat. but how would one go about calculating chanseys minimum possible attack stat exp.

simulator rby isnt cartridge adherent unless it adds a fight button and cursor equivalent. banning moves is also a ‘departure from cartridge’, and that is part of why ppl prefer not to do that. banning every move that has any scenario of causing desyncs (u indicated there are others besides counter and psywave eg related to thawing?) would be a drastic change from cartridge bc moveset is key and esp in a gen with so few competitively viable moves to begin with. banning players from selecting counter in a scenario where theres a risk of desync would also be a drastic departure for the (v different) reasons above. a ’mod’ for changing the effect of counter in a relatively rare scenario is much less of a departure from cartridge than either giving counter chansey players random information about opposing special attackers movesets or banning all freezing moves due to a thaw glitch when blizzard is one of the most threatening moves in rby. (much like banning hyper beam, which in practice would be equivalent to removing the recharge turn ‘glitch’ since the glitch is the only reason hbeam is used, is mostly disliked bc itd be severely changing the original game).
they are all ‘departures from cartridge’ and there are real reasons why ppl consider a mod to be the least bad option here, not bc of “not wanting to change” or the other non-reasons that u listed (which i have not seen any evidence of on any of the threads abt this)

I fully agree, the simulator's implementation of Wrap is a departure from cart mechanics, which is why further changes need to be implemented for the simulator. This should in no way hold any weight as an argument for preserving Counter because it is also something that needs to be changed.

I mean sure, if you want to raise stat experience as an issue go ahead, but it's so irrelevant that not even I would make an issue out of it. As it stands I don't think anyone really minimises Attack stats in g1/2 since it's honestly not worth the effort. Also it may still be theoretically possible to minimise Atk exp, here's a couple relevant threads: thread 1, thread 2.

please don't conflate player-imposed rules which are totally replicable on cartridge with modifications to the game code. There's nothing wrong with imposing rules to create a more enjoyable competitive experience, however when you modify game mechanics such that it is no longer replicable on cart, you're playing something that is fundamentally different to the actual games, which is just wrong

Tbh this seems like a troll, but I'll bite anyway. I've read this post a couple times and I'm still not 100% certain on what you're saying regarding Counter Chansey- are you proposing preventing the selection of Counter in situations where a desync would be possible? Between that and banning freeze moves when a far better solution exists (not deliberately thawing opposing pokemon), it seems to me that you're trying to think of the worst possible solutions to the issue and representing them as the positions that I'm arguing for

I'm sorry, but discussing banning Hyper Beam is just absurd- literally no-one has ever proposed that, and it has no relevance in this discussion because the recharge glitch does not break the game in any way. Glitches in general are not the problem, it's game-breaking glitches that are the problem at hand


Hmmm, I suppose it's a fair critique to say I jump to the conclusion that people "don't want change" too readily. However, it's hard not to jump to that conclusion based on how these things tend to play out in this community. Every time some issue regarding cart accuracy gets raised there's always a kneejerk reaction from some people who automatically assume that a given change will make the meta worse or something, based on nothing but theory, and who refuse to even consider actually testing their assumptions. In such discussions I present my arguments and defend them, and I think I do a reasonable job of it, however my arguments make no headway because most of the people disagreeing with me value different things. There's a lot of back and forth, no consensus is reached, and nothing gets done about the issue. In such an environment, it's tempting to default to the "don't want change" line I guess.

=========================

I am curious though- given that we implemented Crystal's mechanic discoveries, why should modding Counter be treated differently?

Why are you guys discussing opinions and policy in a research thread?

 

[DaWoblefet]

In Gen 4, Struggle recoil always floors. This is different from Generations past Gen 5, which round up their Struggle recoil on 0.5 or higher. So for example:

Gen 4:
Max HP: 241; takes 60 damage of Struggle recoil
Max HP: 242; takes 60 damage of Struggle recoil
Max HP: 243; takes 60 damage of Struggle recoil

Gen 5:
Max HP: 241; takes 60 damage of Struggle recoil
Max HP: 242; takes 61 damage of Struggle recoil
Max HP: 243; takes 61 damage of Struggle recoil

Testing was done on English SoulSilver for Gen 4, and English White 2 for Gen 5.

 

[doipy hooves]

Present can restore the health of ghosts in at least FRLG and Emerald. According to gamefreak, it was bugged in RS by not healing. I tried this a ton of times in Sword and none of my Presents healed, so gamefreak may have unfixed this at some point. I do wonder what happens if you fight with different games with conflicting mechanics. Maybe based on the host?
Video: https://streamable.com/pj5gvt
Source: gamefreak's server.c / https://github.com/pret/pokeemerald...714e/src/battle_script_commands.c#L8820-L8824 - removes ineffectiveness when healing

 

[sumwun]

Do victory star and wide lens stack in every generation where they both exist?

When a flying Pokemon is affected by ingrain, smack down, thousand arrows, or iron ball, does that let sky drop hit the flying Pokemon?

 

[Tmi489]

https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Micle_Berry
bulba says that gen 4 micle berry allows the next move to ignore all acc checks (and activate the protect glitch in jp dp), yet showdown implements the 20%+ acc it is in the rest of the games. serebii gives the item desc without effect
idt theres any reliable source for such a niche and rare item so i'm requesting research (over a bug report, sry if wrong thread)
but there are 2 applications i can think of using it
gen 4 ag: dugtro endure/sub -> micle fissure to trap and ohko any grounded wall
gen 4 ph: mold breaker ohko

 

[Marty]

https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Micle_Berry
bulba says that gen 4 micle berry allows the next move to ignore all acc checks (and activate the protect glitch in jp dp), yet showdown implements the 20%+ acc it is in the rest of the games. serebii gives the item desc without effect
idt theres any reliable source for such a niche and rare item so i'm requesting research (over a bug report, sry if wrong thread)
but there are 2 applications i can think of using it
gen 4 ag: dugtro endure/sub -> micle fissure to trap and ohko any grounded wall
gen 4 ph: mold breaker ohko

That's funny because I just pulled the DP accuracy calculation out of the source code the other day.
Here's the Micle Berry check:

    if(micleUsed){
        hit=hit*120/100;
    }

(hit being the total accuracy up to this point)

 

[SEA]

Recently, I have been playing around with gen 3 doubles on PS and noticed that the damage calc does not line up with the actual PS implementation in some aspects. For those unaware, gen 3 spread moves function differently than in other generations; moves that target both opponents receive a 50% damage decrease and moves that target the entire field receive a 0% damage decrease. In every other generation, all moves that target multiple opponents receive a 25% damage decrease. With that out of the way, I decided to test the mechanics using an emulator of Pokemon Emerald, and these were my results.

I had a walrein use surf against 2 opposing pokemon, as in this game, it does not target your partner, one being a sceptile, one being a bellossom. Here are their stats:

And the amount of damage they took afterwards:

Let's check the calcs.

0 SpA Walrein Surf vs. 0 HP / 40- SpD Bellossom: 25-30 (8.5 - 10.3%) -- possibly the worst move ever Possible damage amounts: (25, 25, 26, 26, 26, 27, 27, 27, 27, 28, 28, 28, 29, 29, 29, 30)

0 SpA Walrein Surf vs. 0 HP / 12 SpD Sceptile: 28-33 (9.9 - 11.7%) -- possible 9HKO Possible damage amounts: (28, 28, 28, 29, 29, 29, 30, 30, 30, 31, 31, 31, 32, 32, 32, 33)

That lines up.

Now, let's check PS. I had my friend assist me in recreating this scenario, mimicking the original Pokemon's stats exactly. If you would like to check the full replay, here it is: https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen3doublescustomgame-1139583618

I had Walrein use surf, and this was the outcome:
Walrein used Surf!
[DEBUG] Spread modifier: 0.75.
It's not very effective on the opposing Sceptile.
(The opposing Sceptile lost 17.9% of its health!)
[DEBUG] Spread modifier: 0.75.
It's not very effective on the opposing Bellossom.
(The opposing Bellossom lost 15.3% of its health!)

☆SuperEpicAmpharos: what HP damage did you take
☆tortuga desnuda: 47 scept
☆tortuga desnuda: 44 bell

Which does not line up with the damage calc. You can also see (thanks to the neat debug text) that it applies the standard spread modifier of .75, which as we've already established, is not correct. As for the other spread moves (those being moves such as Earthquake, which target all Pokemon on the field) I have not fully tested them on cart, however, in this game my opponent explodes with his metagross on turn 7, and I post a damage calc in the chat that does not line up with the damage that actually occurs, and if we are to believe the calc, then this is also not correct implementation on PS.

 

[DavidChansey]

According to the PS RBY damage calc it's possible to do 0 damage against a Pokemon with x2 resistance. This shouldn't be possible because the minimum possible damage against a x2 resistance Pokemon before applying random factor is 1, and in this case the random factor is not applied.

I also noticed that if a recoil move does 1 damage then the recoil is 1, similar to how a 1 damage drain move recovers 1. However, I didn't think recoil moves got bumped like drain moves do.

Trivial I know, but there you go.

 

[Jorgen]

In RBY it is very much possible that a move does 0 damage (i.e., "misses"), as the damage is actually floored prior to applying weakness or resistance, and the floor (2) only accounts for a single resistance. I even recall being personally very salty about this on original hardware, as I wanted to poison Brock's Onix to death but my poison stings kept missing >:(

A Crystal_ youtube video on the topic

That said, maybe somebody can point to a difference in link battle calculations (as opposed to in-game) that indeed floors damage properly.