Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Archives' started by Ray Jay, Mar 20, 2011.
"boah" is the sound your opponent makes when all his walls get wiped out by Tyranitar
technically honko is right, but jumpman is righter
Question for you guys: how to use "like" and "such as".
I've seen many analyses where both are used. It gets more and more difficult to discern which one should be used for each situation the more times it's mentioned also, as it makes the sentence structure repetitive. It also seems like everyone has their own opinion on which one to use. Some people will also try to reword an entire sentence to use "such as" when it could all be fixed by saying "like" instead.
'such as' should be used for examples 100% of the time. 'Like' should only be used for comparisons.
Example: There are many great Dragon-types in OU, such as Salamence and Dragonite.
'Like' should not be used here since it is an example.
Comparison Example: Hydreigon's Special Attack stat is very high, like Alakazam's.
This is a comparison, and as such, 'like' is used.
Ok. That clears it up.
With BW2 out now, and analyses being updated starting next Sunday, what are we going to call the fifth generation from now on? Are we going to continue to say BW OU, or start saying BW2 OU? This isn't something we've ever had to deal with before, but BW2 looks really bad compared to BW. Of course, we'll have to find an official way to say BW2, since I think it's formally B2W2.
Fifth generation to me is simply all the Pokemon and forms whose Dex number is between 494 and 649. Therefore, the only real change for me is the tier name: BW or BW2. Of course, that with time, the only metagame would be BW2, but just like DP and HGSS (the addition of move tutors), they were seperate for a while as we studied the metagame. And BW2 sounds just as well as B2W2, maybe even better. Double-two's is dumb, lol.
If referring to just the generation as a whole, I'd prefer just BW like in BW OU. DP didn't have Rotom formes and new tutors etc though it's called DPP. There isn't really a need to distinguish BW from BW2 I think :/ Unless you're talking about the tutors or something. There hasn't been a need to distinguish the games in each gen. Fourth generation is known as DPP instead of having DP and HGSS. Though I have no idea why the third generation is ADV instead of RSE ?_? (probably because of those XD games or something idk). Unless there's a generation difference, there shouldn't be a need to differentiate them. I can imagine BW2 being used only when saying something along the lines of "Moxie Salamence can now use Dragon Dance and Outrage due to the latter becoming a tutor move in BW2."
Also, can we avoid the use of the word advent? BW2 is new but next time it won't be new anymore just like BW, as brought up a couple of pages back by NixHex etc. >.>
Couple of things:
It'll still be called the BW generation when talking about the 5th generation in general. If talking about Pokemon Black 2 and White 2, use BW2.
Also, yes, if you see anyone use "with the advent of blah blah", delete the sentence. You are allowed to use general terms like "Butterfree is finally usable in BW thanks to its access to Quiver Dance," because it isn't referring to any game in particular.
Fate sent me here >.>
Anyway, I'd like to overturn the whole "Pokemon which resist Bug-type attacks" being preferred over "Bug resist" or "Bug-type resist" found here.
The former is just long and leads to unnecessary fluff. "X resist" is quite conventional, and it's used everywhere else besides GP. If you say "Teams that lack a Bug-type resist", everyone knows what you mean; it's not like there's any confusion there. It's a phrase that comes up often enough that a coined term for it is probably necessary. I know it's not the proper use of the word "resist", but there's no reason not to add it as a coined term.
I think the new formes needs to be added.
Tornadus-T, Thundurus-T, Landorus-T, Kyurem-W, and Kyurem-B, if I'm correct.
And I've seen people calling Landorus, the Incarnate forme, Landorus-I in several skeletons. Goes for the other two as well. We're not going to change that right? Considering we don't call Shaymin, Shaymin-L or Giratina, Giratina-A.
Here's an example: http://www.smogon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3469231
ADV iirc has to do with how it completely revolutionized Pokemon with abilities and natures and Choice Band.
The original formes shouldn't have a hyphenated name. So the Incarnate forme of Landorus should just be Landorus.
gave this a much needed update, and the two most notable changes I made are:
-Use BW as an abbreviation for the Black / White / Black 2 / White 2 generation.
-Do not write an analysis in a form that puts emphasis on changes by generation. This includes avoiding phrases such as "With the advent of BW...".
IMO, saying "resist" is OK is silly. Instead of saying "your team needs a Bug-type resist" why not just say "your team needs a Pokemon with a Bug-type resistance" or even "your team needs a Bug-type resistance". Unless I'm missing something and you're all really adamant on this
this one can be done away with
the latter is much better
Should pokemon be called "its" or "hes" and "shes"? The OP has a little bit of information on it, and I know calling something like chansey or togekiss a she makes sense, but what about other times? I've ran into some writers who blindly call things by gender, even when every other analysis has genderless. There should be more of an established precedent for gender site-wide.
Nope, it's actually at a very good system right now. Any Pokemon may be called "it". Gender specific Pokemon should be "he" or "she". Finally, if the author deems that stylistically it makes sense to refer to his or her Pokemon as "he" or "she", even if it is not a gender specific Pokemon, this can be done. The caveat is that whatever is chosen must stay consistent throughout the analysis.
What if a different analysis on-site is already referring to something else? I mean in the case of something used in UU and OU. If the UU is genderless, should the OU one remain so for continuity throughout the site?
Technically yes, but it's a lofty and ultimately superfluous goal. As long as it's consistent throughout the single tier analysis, it's good.
On like vs. such as
I want the GPers to take a look at this link.
Using "like" in our analyses is not against the law, even though some of you have been treating it as such. "Like" can be used when using a non-specific example. "Pokemon like Jellicent and Vaporeon are good teammates. Using a wall like Chansey is a good idea. etc." From the article: "Doctor Coughlin dreads seeing patients like Mrs. Carbuncle. (The “like” tells us there are other patients as difficult as Mrs. Carbuncle and Doctor Coughlin doesn't enjoy seeing them either.)"
"Such as" is used for specific examples.
In most cases "such as" will fit better, there is no denying that. But, it does not have to be used every single time in our analyses, sometimes "like" will fit better.
You guys should also read up on the punctuation to use with "such as" in that article too.
I'd like to add to Oglemi's post that it's the same with "since vs because."
Hi guys! Here are some things we need to go over because they're pretty important. Honko posted a little while back about the (miss)use of the word infamous all throughout c&c and on-site. You can read all about it here: http://bit.ly/RyK81i
This next part has to do with stating REALLY obvious stuff like "if played correctly" and "once its counters are removed." Any Pokemon played correctly is going to win you a match. Any special sweeper can bust through a team with Chansey as long as Chansey has been taken down. There's no reason to explicitly say it. Exceptions to this are in bold.
This is something you must look out for, especially in amateur checks because it may not be completely obvious to new checkers. Got it?
For multiple boosts, do you say something like +2/+2 or +2 / +2. If it's the same boosts eg Cloyster Shell Smash, can you just lump them and say a +2 Cloyster? ?_?
You can just say +2 Cloyster if you're only talking about one of the boosts (which is the case in most instances). Otherwise just use +2/+2 Cloyster without the spaces.
Should "super-effectively" be used, and if so with hyphen/no hyphen, and if not then just reword to "for super effective damage"?