1. Welcome to Smogon Forums! Please take a minute to read the rules.
  2. Please refer to this thread for the current Smogon Tier Lists.
  3. New to the forums? Check out our Mentorship Program!
    Our mentors will answer your questions and help you become a part of the community!

Pokémon+ Luck-free metagame : Server up and running !

Discussion in 'Other Metagames' started by Innocent Criminal, Jun 29, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Innocent Criminal

    Innocent Criminal

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    155
    Wow, please don't turn this thread into a flamewar... Especially by using the U word...
    Luck is part of what makes pokemon what it is, and a part that many enjoy. If you want to rant about it, please do so in a dedicated thread, as this is far from what I had in mind when I made this. I'm making what you're asking for, after all ;)
  2. Thorhammer

    Thorhammer

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,967
    While there are some great ideas here, I feel like all the Attack-lowering effects are more drastic and unnecessary changes than necessary. For Outrage, Thrash, and Petal Dance, what might work better would be to make them confuse as usual after the attack ends, but to make confusion result in the Pokemon hitting itself 100% of the time and lasting a fixed 3 turns. As confusion wouldn't happen with anything else, this seems doable. To balance this out, the moves could be set to last 3 turns rather than 2.

    Also, the effect of Serene Grace seems to be ignored, even though it would change certain chances. Perhaps for effects that are kept, it would work better to determine what happens based on the final chance of the effect, something like this?

    0-29: Never occurs
    30-49: Happens on the second use out of every 3
    50-69: Happens on the first use out of every 2
    70-84: Happens on the first and third uses out of every 3
    85+: Always occurs

    Or whatever would work best. That's probably not the best way of doing it, but it seems like a step towards holding onto game mechanics that would be lost this way. For example, Serene Grace Iron Head would still be able to flinch, just not consecutively. This sort of thing could also be applied to replace accuracy for moves like Focus Blast, rather than adding a completely different drawback.
  3. Darusare

    Darusare

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    140
    luck is a part of the game
    if you dont like it play another game
    or i guess on this server now
    but there is no way this should ever be implimented for standard
  4. waterwarrior

    waterwarrior

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,526
    Well the 50-69% rate is much more frequent in regular competitive than it should be (see Iron Head Jirachi), but I suppose that is one of the better ways to do it...
  5. EEVEE3

    EEVEE3

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    Messages:
    109
    If you hate the luck factor, you can leave. Luck is what makes some games what it is. Random factors can happen, and so it is part of the game. Sure massive hax can make the game sway to the worse player, but the better player will still win more matches than the worse one.

    This is creative, but I still think that this is idiotic.
  6. Byrn Dragonstone

    Byrn Dragonstone

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    232
    I would just like to say that luck is a part of everygame out there, and is part of the reason so many people play games. Sure strategy is important, but taking away all luck is completely and utterly ridiculous. As it is every team on this server can just spam a sleep move Attack, attack, then sleep again. With no luck involved it turns into Team A is the only competitive team in the game, and Team B through XYZ are all crap.

    If you really want to look at competitive games take a look at Card games. The entire premise of those games is based on Luck, yet they are the most distributed and most played competitive games around. The point of a game is to make the Luck work for you, not to remove it completely.
  7. waterwarrior

    waterwarrior

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,526
    Honestly, I think this thing can be simplified to one thing: no crits. Everyone can agree on not having crits, as they're just annoying (or lulzy, depending on when they happen). All these other arguments about accuracy and side effects can be avoided by just not going that complex. If this was just like regular matches, but without crits, it would recieve a lot less criticism.
  8. mien

    mien
    is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Researcher Alumnus

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    Messages:
    691
    Nobody is forcing you to play it, therefore there is no reason for you to come here to post and bash the project. The only thing you are doing is creating a flamewar and insulting the person who started this with the best intentions.


    That being said i did a test battle and a have a few nitpicks
    I assume this should be 'always inflict status on the second succesfull consecutive attempt on the same target.'

    It appears that Focus Blast is bugged and drops the SpAtt of the opponent rather than the user's. Hydro Pump worked like it should however.
  9. Thorhammer

    Thorhammer

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,967
    The creation of a new server is, in a sense, for the leaving of the old one. There's nothing for you to complain about.

    That's a bit too much of a blanket statement; there were some serious issues and arguments when that was proposed in PR some time ago. That said, it's not too inaccurate; I would probably prefer a server that just removed crits and chances less than 10-20%, but I think there's still merit in creating this one.
  10. Innocent Criminal

    Innocent Criminal

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    155
    I don't mind this criticism, as this isn't supposed to replace the standard metagame. Removing crits and freezes would be an "improved standard pokemon", but that's not what I'm aiming for. Like I said on the OP, this only targets the specific players who enjoys the uniques qualities of this game such as teambuilding and variety of options, but usually prefer deterministic games, where no external factor meddles with the game.

    You tell us to play another game, and that's what I'm trying to achieve : a deterministic game sharing pokemon's unique qualities.
  11. Ereborus Nyx

    Ereborus Nyx

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2011
    Messages:
    153
    im sorry, but i just loathe this idea and most of Smogon's general attitude to luck based effects. You think Focus Blast missing is unfair? You think Ice Beam freezing your mon is unfair? You think Eruption scoring crit is unfair? Get this, LIFE IS UNFAIR, DEAL WITH IT!!
  12. christos21

    christos21

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    433
    I don't really agree with the idea of banning hax.Pokemon is a game which includes luck and you shouldn't ban this since you like pokemon.If you're skilled enough then you'll be able to win with or without hax.Not to mention that there has to be something wrong with hax in Pokemon Online(the program) ; everyone who had played wi-fi can understand what am i saying.So,if you can do something to reduce hax,then tell the guys who made PO find their mistake and correct it.
  13. skitz0phrenic

    skitz0phrenic

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    425

    Card games cannot be altered to remove luck. Video games can. That alone makes the comparison entirely void. Look at any game used competitively on any league or circuit in the entire world of e-sports. All of them have luck factors in the default meta, and all of these games are improved for league play upon removing these factors.

    "It's part of the game" is nothing more than a cop out excuse.

    Halo 3 had random spread in it's primary starting weapon, the Battle Rifle. The gun was capable of killing in 4 precise bursts of 3 bullets to the head, however due to the random spread this was never consistent enough for league play (One stray bullet from the twelve required to hit was entirely too inconsistent).

    What happened when a massive league took up this game for competition? The damage settings were altered from the default to allow the random deviation in these 12 bullets to not matter as much, requiring only 11 bullets to hit the target as opposed to the default 12. This made the metagame more consistent tenfold. The more skilled players won their battles when they should have, and not when RNG decided they should.

    Am I saying default Pokemon is horrendous, or that the way things are now are just plain bad? No, I am not. However the game as of now is not maximized for full competitive potential, and a site such as this that claims to be dedicated to competition should not make this claim without actually following through.

    There is nothing wrong with enjoying things the way there are now, but to say that this is also how things should be when money is on the line in a tournament full of great players just makes no sense. If a game is going to be played in a fully competitive scenario, it should be pushed to its fullest potential for said circumstances. The best player should win come tournament time. Not the best and luckiest player.
  14. XienZo

    XienZo

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    746
    Choice Scarf Perversity Thrash Spinda FTW



    Well, it'd die before it'd get any decent boosts, but it's worth a shot :P

    Letsee, what else?

    -Iron Tail is best Steel STAB
    -Same for Dragon Rush
    -More Hi Jump Kicks
    -Sigilyph <3 no crits
    -Hustle Durant's gonna enjoy Stone Edge spam
  15. Bob_Squob

    Bob_Squob

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    207
    I have a question; why ban Beat Up? It doesn't seem to be luck based at all.
  16. Thorhammer

    Thorhammer

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,967
    That is absolutely no reason to not make things more fair where possible, reasonable, and desired.

    No one's talking about banning hax from the standard metagame. All that's being discussed is creating a separate metagame so that the people who take that much of an issue with any sort of hax can be satisfied. Can you really say there's anything wrong with that?

    Hm, this is more reason to take more care with how certain issues are handled.
  17. Innocent Criminal

    Innocent Criminal

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    155
    Everyone, please read the OP.*Thank you for you understanding ;)

    BeatUp crashed the server for no apparent reason. Since it basically has no uses in single player, I just disabled and banned it.

    Yes, Scald only burns when hitting twice the same target.

    About sleep moves, I actually put a blanket ban on any move with 60% accuracy or less, because they were basically coin flips that almost no one used. Then, there's also the need to stay close enough to BW*OU to keep the analyses relevant and not have to deal retarded stuff such as Gengar, Whimsicott and Blissey basically getting Spore.

    @ThorHammer : this is somewhat similar to what I did with Scald, Flame Body and Shed Skin, actually. However, balancing Serene Grace is something I'd rather make after a proper metagame has been made. Flinching was removed outside of Fake Out, and it probably won't come back (unless the need for it show up during playtesting).

    @WoodChuck : I didn't mention Moody as I said I follow Smogon's tiers, but it is obviously banned. This (and pokemon minus I assume) were named after the Brawl mods, and I think these names are actually pretty good matches. Brawl- made everyone broken, while Brawl+ removed randomness (but also greatly altered the game's mechanics beyond that, so the comparison ends here).


    EDIT : didn't know about Psywave, I just added it.
  18. XienZo

    XienZo

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    746
    You've also got guys like Altaria who can Outrage and then Power Swap away the -2Atk/SpAtk.

    Also, why is Psywave legal?
  19. waterwarrior

    waterwarrior

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,526
    Because no one uses it. Also, I disagree with banning freeze. In fact, I even disagree with Freeze Clause. IIRC, there are no moves that have more of a 20% chance to freeze (and that's including Serene Grace). Freezes just don't happen often, and a lot of the time you unthaw the first turn anyways, so its like the freeze didn't happen a lot of the time.
  20. reyscarface

    reyscarface
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Tiering Contributordefeated the Smogon Frontier
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    5,562
    are you jokin or what

    that its a low chance makes it "hax"

    and youre in a thread about a haxless server

    so please stop posting dumb stuff
  21. AceTrainerJason

    AceTrainerJason

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    66
    You have great luck there are many of examples of multiple turns getting a first turn thaw is lucky as fuck since correct if I'm wrong here only has a 20% chance per turn to thaw. Statistically it takes 5 turns to thaw on average and it usually takes more. Freeze is random and can turn the match over to the worst player, fuck it's even worse then crits if they freeze the right thing.

    @OP I like the idea of the server and will definitely check it out when it gets more underway as I get haxed every match out of wins and it's annoying as fuck.
  22. gabezj

    gabezj

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    195

    Furthermore, Liligant does not have this confusion drawback and therefore, is made worse as it is given a drawback it didnt have otherwise
  23. Innocent Criminal

    Innocent Criminal

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    155
    Focus Blast is fixed.

    @waterwarrior : as explained in the OP, this isn't meant to be an "improved Pokémon" for people complaining about hax. This server was made for people who enjoy some unique qualities of competitive Pokémon but usually prefer deterministic games such as chess, with absolutely no external factor affecting the game.

    This isn't "banning Freeze", but making the game deterministic, which is very different both in goal and in execution than simply dealing with hax complaints. Complete control over the game and full responsibility for the outcome are very important for some people, and when these same people enjoy both teambuilding and the extreme diversity of options Pokémons offer, they can't just "go play another game, then". I don't see anything wrong with some people shaping up the game as we like it, as long as it's done on a separate server.

    By the way, Pokemon Online is free software (as in freedom), so modification of the source code is not only legal, but encouraged by the creators.

    About Petal Dance, this kind of minute balancing will be done after a proper metagame has been created and studied, as all of this is very heavy theorymoning.
  24. Pocket

    Pocket Apo, the Astronaut's pet dog >:3
    is a member of the Site Staffis a Forum Moderatoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
    Doubles Co-Leader

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,555
    I like the concept of a luck-restricted ladder, but I don't like your take on it, because you have distorted the mechanics too much. Other changes seems unnecessary. This is what I think about the Mechanistic changes:

    1) Sleep counter should reset when you switch. I don't find the need to change this mechanism, when it is not even luck-oriented. 2 turns are good enough.

    2) Phazing - let it be random. I don't think I ever heard people complaining about phazing in a wrong Pokemon. This change seems unnecessary and exploitable.

    3) I personally feel that pokemon should be protected from critical hits for the first 10 hits, regardless of defense boosts or no defense boosts (stuff like Chansey or Blissey, Sub-Roost Zapdos, or Jellicent can still stall without defensive boosts), but after the 10th hit, a critical hit (negate boost & double damage) will happen every 10 hits. If the stalling pokemon switches, this count is reset to 0. I prefer this rather than "negating defense boosts after the 20th consecutive hit," because I feel that it doesn't solve the problem - the stalling pokemon would still successfully stall if it could stall for 20+ turns. This can also be exploited in ways that are not conventional to the traditional playstyle, and personally I would like to avoid introducing odd playstyles while minimizing luck.

    Ways that this could be exploited:
    The stalling pokemon can be simply switched out after the 20th hit and can come back to stall for another 20 turns some other time.

    In a CM vs CM war, it will simply be a race of who hits 20 times first, which to me sounds absurd

    Usually people complain about critical hits that happens in the first 1 or 2 hits. I think a 10-turn protection from critical hit, and then 1 critical hit / 10 turns to punish stalling Pokemon is the better way to go.

    4) I also prefer Thorhammer's suggestion about chances / accuracy. Moves such as Lava Plume and Discharge sacrifice power over a higher chance to cripple the opponent. In the other hand, moves such as Fire Blast and Hydro Pump sacrifices accuracy for power. Rather than making this all or nothing, I prefer Thorhammer's suggestion of the chance of a secondary effect or a miss every certain amount of turns.

    The one thing I don't like about Thorhammer's suggestion is that the opponent can anticipate when the status or miss is going to happen, and could exploit this to their advantage. This will severely undermine the reason to use Lava Plume over Flamethrower + Will-O-Wisp.

    This is my take:
    0-19: Don't expect this side effect to happen for the first 5 uses. However, following those 5 uses, expect it to happen once every 10 uses.

    20-29: Protection from side effect for the first 3 uses. However, following the 3 uses, expect the effect to activate once every 5 uses.

    30-49: Protection from the side effect for the first use, but expect the effect to activate once every 3 uses.

    50-69: Activates once for every 2 uses. This includes Confusion, such as from Outrage.

    70-79: The move or effect will happen upon first use, but expect a miss once every 3 uses afterwords.

    80-84: The move or effect will happen upon first use, but expect a miss once every 4 uses afterwards.

    85-89: The move or effect will happen upon the first 2 uses, but expect a miss once every 4 uses afterwards.

    90: The move or effect will happen upon first 2 uses, but expect a miss once every 5 uses.

    91-99: Never miss.


    This will prevent the first-turn misses / consecutive misses / early activation / consecutive activation that constitute hax. Your ladder has no hax, but it implements extraneous features that makes it too warped from the actual BW OU. And this could hinder the appeal of this otherwise cool project.
  25. Pocket

    Pocket Apo, the Astronaut's pet dog >:3
    is a member of the Site Staffis a Forum Moderatoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
    Doubles Co-Leader

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,555
    Sorry for double-posting, but I just read your latest post. My recommendations earlier probably is not suitable for this project then. Sorry for the wall of text.

    I still have a few suggestions:
    1) Do not reset the sleep counter. What does this have to do with deterministic play?

    2) Prevent status boosts on users with Contrary when utilizing formerly inaccurate moves (Hydro Pump, Iron Tail, etc).

    3) 30% chances happen after 2 hits (not necessarily consecutive hits).

    4) After 20 hits, it should be a critical hit (meaning negating defense boosts AND doubling damage).

    Definitely consider these changes after substantial play-testing, but these are just suggestions to consider. Thanks for your endeavor.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

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