1. Remember to check the Simple Questions/Simple Answers , Suggestions , Bug Reports and Technical Support threads before posting. If you have something that warrants extended discussion then post a thread, but when in doubt, please use an already existing thread
  2. The moderators of this forum are the PS! Leaders (&) and Admins (~).
  3. Welcome to Smogon Forums! Please take a minute to read the rules.
  4. Click here to ensure that you never miss a new SmogonU video upload!

Replay Last Turn Button (If both players agree) To get rid of hax

Discussion in 'Pokémon Showdown!' started by tehy, Mar 27, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Chaoswalker


    Mar 20, 2010
    Oh boy, I love this kind of stuff. Maybe I'll learn a few things. :3

    Zarel's post
    Show Hide

    I hope this isn't bad, but I LIKE the sound of that. In fact, it's the result I'd be hoping for. In my world, I'd like if the following situations arrose:
    "Oh, I missed. Next one will hit for sure."
    "Uh oh, he used Scald. Next one will probably burn."
    "Two flinches in a row. My next move will get through."
    As I said, I prefer to lean to the side of determinism. This way, your opponent is the primary unpredictable factor. In other words, making more predictable elements allows for strategy instead of gambling. (Though Pokemon isn't that unpredictable.)
    The other day a friend sat me down to play dominoes with his new girlfriend (who I dislike.) It took me a few minutes to understand the rules through her accent, but after a while I got the idea of things. After the first confusing round, we started playing a sort of handicap mode for teaching purposes with hands shown up so she could point out possible moves. I started to realize that as things were, I could see the opponent's options as well as mine, much like in chess. No longer was I blindly applying pieces, but also taking into account whether I left openings for the other players, or just straight up blocking them when I had no better moves.

    As for the calculation, that's why we have computers. When I do pen and paper Rps, every value is single digit (double for really strong stuff), and all calculations are simple arithmetic. When I have something doing the job for me, (and quickly at that) I have no problem letting there be a bit of convolution.
    Apparantly it's nothing new to pokemon, and I'd say the damage a move does is about as important as whether it even hits at all.

    On your second point though, I've got nothing. Pokemon is what is. If I were planning it from the ground up, I'd lower the damage of criticals to 1.5x, and change misses to grazes of 0.5x so as to minimize the rewards and punishments of luck. Not my game though, so the most I can do is complain.

    I once sat down and planned out a fishing system in such a way that every one of the 100 fish that was spawned was kept track of until the end of the day so that while they were spawned randomly they would still exist where you found them if you returned to the areas. Every type of fish had a maximum number of times they can spawn depending on rarity. In this way, you still had the experience of looking for fish, and trying to find that really difficult one, but it was impossible to check every areas and just not find it due to sheer rarity. Of course one could make the fish less rare, but then it is easier to find. My point? I like to find ways around randomness when the player's success or enjoyment ride on it. I can't say luck is bad, because it's actually a hugely enjoyable factor in many games. It's just that I feel luck is a "casual" element, and the more competitive something gets the less I like it. The luck in board games allows for sudden, hilarious upsets, which is great when playing with my little sisters or goofing off with friends, but not so much when things get serious.

    I think I argued for the sake of arguing. Like I said, I just like this stuff. I'd never seriously suggest to change Pokemon's luck system (especially in a simulator) but I spend a good deal of my day theorizing how one thing or another might work differently.
  2. Raichoice


    Jan 7, 2013
    I see this making more fights then it will fix

    like lets say player 1 got a crit that really mattered

    player1: Yess! a crit!!!

    player2: can we please use the replay turn button?

    Player1: nope, I wanna win

    and then player2 will get mad and stall curse and be annoying

    there is the problem
  3. Queen of Randoms

    Queen of Randoms Queen.
    is a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus

    Sep 23, 2012
    It's another excuse for people to bitch and moan and talk to me. I wish I could turn the in-battle chat off; I don't want to add another reason for people to rage at me.

    At least when hax happens you can just be like, "That's the game, sorry." With this your opponent can target you as an asshole for not replaying the turn. We get enough flaming and poor sportsmanship and "______ user is an asshole" on PS as is - we don't need to give people another reason to bitch.

    Also, if something good happened for me, I would not replay the turn. Ever. As such I can't expect other people to do so for me, so I cannot support this idea anyway.
  4. tehy

    tehy Banned deucer.

    Aug 16, 2010
    I've heard this argument before;my best solution is either the button itself threatening Mute/ban for massive rage and explaining that it's not your right but your opp's generosity.

    Or you can only do it every, say, 5 ladder matches, so players would have an excuse, and that would alo prevent a lot of cheap stuff.

    I think a good amount of people would let you redo the turn, personally. I might, depending on the circumstances.
  5. V4Victini

    V4Victini 再起不能
    is a Battle Server Admin Alumnusis a Programmer Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Researcher Alumnus

    Apr 20, 2011
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

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