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

Data Substitution Rules

Discussion in 'ASB' started by Orcinus Duo, Nov 5, 2012.

  1. Orcinus Duo

    Orcinus Duo

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,869
    So it’s become clear that sub rules aren’t getting solved anytime soon. So what I’ve done here is create a set of rules that we can build upon. I am a strong believer that nothing is ever going to get done by theorying all day, so hopefully this ruleset could spawn some talking points.

    The main gripe I have with sub rules right now is that it relies on sort of an honour code for people not to abuse a pretty glaring loophole. Here we have the substitution rules in the Referee Resource Thread:

    As it stands, there have been several debatable keywords used in substitutions today (AND NOT, UNLESS, NON-CONSECUTIVELY, cascading everything, etc.), but I’ll set them aside for now. This thread aims to codify what is legal in attack substitutions.

    Attack substitutions aim to allow battlers to substitute for a single situation.

    And immediately we see a problem—the problem that defines most sub arguments. What is “a single situation”? And to what extent can battlers “substitute”?

    I think the crux of the debate boils down to that. We see that the basic formula for a substitution is IF X THEN Y. So, quite simply, all we have to do is codify what is legal for X and what is legal for Y. Right?

    X will now be termed as the trigger, Y as the response.

    Trigger
    Triggers must only be one specific instance. Keywords such as AND may be allowed to specify the trigger to a narrower instance. They can be a substitution for an Attack, Command, a Substitution Class (see above), the presence of status, Chance/KO Substitutions, or the presence of an existing condition to a Pokemon (has a substitute, has screens, etc.) (these may apply to the user or the opponent).

    -It may be specified on which action the trigger may activate.
    -It may be specified on in what specific circumstances the trigger may activate. However, this specific circumstance must be the presence of another legal trigger.
    -Derivatives of Attacks, Commands, or Substitution Class may be used, unless it inclues a move which is part of a sub class that is included in the trigger.
    -Pokemon have prior knowledge of what actions the opponent ordered.
    -You cannot use more than one individual move from the same move class to be used for the same action by the same pokemon in the same substitution.

    IF Fire Punch AND you do not have a substitute up: Legal.
    IF Fire Punch ON action 1 or 3: Legal
    IF Fire Punch is ordered on any action: Legal
    IF damaging Fire type move is ordered on any action AND another damaging fire type move is ordered on any action: Legal
    IF NOT Fire Punch: Legal

    IF Fire Punch on A1 AND Protect on A2: Legal
    IF Fire Punch on A1 AND NOT Protect on A2: Legal
    IF Fire Punch on A2 AND you used Protect on A1: Legal
    IF damaging Fire Type move AND NOT Fire Punch: Illegal

    IF less than 12 en: Illegal

    Response
    Response must be a direct reaction to the trigger. The response may not include any further conditional clauses. Hence, responses such as:

    Pushback WHEN X is replaced

    Is illegal because ‘WHEN’ is conditional.

    -Responses must be universal for all instances of the trigger, with two exceptions: You may choose to add exceptions for consecutive instances of the trigger.
    -Responses may include action strings.

    THEN replace with action string X~Y~Z upon consecutive uses: Legal
    THEN alternate X~Y upon consecutive uses and pushback: Legal
    THEN alternate X~Y upon consecutive uses and pushback on replacement of protect: Illegal
    THEN protect and pushback, but not consecutively: Legal

    Discuss.
  2. TIO

    TIO

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    742
    What about saying IF below X hp, THEN Y?
    This would be useful for stuff like Dman-Z and Eruption.
  3. Objection

    Objection

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    Messages:
    5,695
    This is why I would like to see another substitution category called situation sub or something like that. Chance subs could be merged with this category.
  4. Pwnemon

    Pwnemon judges silently
    is a Tutoris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
    Doubles Co-Lead

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    3,722
    why the hell is "And not" not legal

    It is perfectly legal provided it is not used to "chip away" at a substitution class

    for example what if i wanted to say:

    "IF Dragonite uses Protect a1 AND NOT Fire blast a2 then chill a1"

    that's a perfectly logical, unabusive sub and should be legal. The only type of AND NOT that's illegal is "IF Damaging Evasive move AND NOT Dive" which can be cleared up by saying that if you sub for a substitution class, every move in that class triggers the sub, no matter what
  5. Box

    Box

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2010
    Messages:
    2,121
    Regarding Pwnemon's point, consider that the above Sub substitutes for 2 sub classes of attacks on two different actions (Protective and Fire Damaging).

    In my opinion this either makes it illegal or consumes 2 Subs in one.

    I quote: "For each of their Pokemon, a Player acting first may create a Substitution based on one or more specific Attack or Command the opponent can issue and Substitute their called Actions."

    This of course would include also the Substitution Classes. To that effect, I can see why AND NOT subs could be disallowed.
  6. Pwnemon

    Pwnemon judges silently
    is a Tutoris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
    Doubles Co-Lead

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    3,722
    wait, you're saying it would have to be written as "if protect a1 then chill" "if fire blast a2 then ignore the above sub and use substitute"?

    i think and not is perfectly legal in the given scenario
  7. Orcinus Duo

    Orcinus Duo

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,869
    AND NOT subs are abusable. I intend to make all legal subs cascadable. Here is how they are abused:

    IF Damaging Water Type Move AND NOT Waterfall AND NOT Aqua Jet AND NOT (list all the physical water type moves opponent has)

    Effectively allows you to substitute for special water type moves, which contradicts the spirit of substitutions.


    I do not comprehend why people like IAR is refusing to see this.
  8. Pwnemon

    Pwnemon judges silently
    is a Tutoris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
    Doubles Co-Lead

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    3,722
    i dont see why people like orcinus are refusing to read

    derp
  9. Orcinus Duo

    Orcinus Duo

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,869
    EDIT: OP fixed.
  10. Objection

    Objection

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    Messages:
    5,695
    I'd have to side with Pwnemon on this one. I do not see the problem with making a particular kind of substitution clause "conditionally legal". If the problem is it conflicts with the idea of making all legal subs cascadable, I'd say the problem is with that idea.

    EDIT: How does Pwnemon's suggestion make "if Fire Blast a1 and Protect a2" illegal? Protect is not in the Fire Blast category of subs.
  11. Box

    Box

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2010
    Messages:
    2,121
    No, my understanding of it is simply that the former AND NOT Sub contains situational substitutions based on two Substitution Classes, hence in the very least it should be classified as the equivalent of two Subs.
  12. Its_A_Random

    Its_A_Random Solves issues recursively
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributor
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,308
    Since I appear to have been called out, I might as well respond to this.

    Basically, under the current rules, your example is illegal anyway, given it basically counts for a gazillion substitutions. You are Substituting for:

    • Damaging Water Move
    • NOT Aqua Jet on the same action
    • NOT Waterfall on the same action
    • NOT <Physical Water Move> on the same action
    Basically, the substitution is not exactly what you would call "sequential", so it would be classed as a gazillion substitutions.

    Compare it to this sub I used against Yarnus of Bethany:

    [BOX]IF Pow! uses Fake Out (Utilitand) A1, AND Zap! does NOT use (Protective/Evasive move) A2, THEN use Tailwind A1, pushing actions back.[/BOX]
    One could agree that it is a little shaky & pushing the rules a bit, but it is basically substituting for a specific action sequence. Of course, the OP declares such a sub to be legal, so I will not go into details. Then you get something far more suspect like the Substitutions I made in my match vs. Objection in the Team Tourney, but that is another story for another day, given such a substitution would likely be codified to be illegal when this is done?
    As long as it is semi-sequential like my above example, it would be fine to class AND NOT as one substitution. Something like "IF (Damaging Fire Move) is issued, AND Flame Charge is NOT issued..." on the other hand, would be classified as two, according to my logic, since it is not exactly sequential in nature, if you get what I mean, which I doubt anyone does, but w/e.

    Basically, AND NOT should be legal/count as one sub if it is "sequential", that is, you are not subbing for multiple moves/categories from one particular opposing Pokemon on the same action.
  13. Yarnus of Bethany

    Yarnus of Bethany

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,065
    The OP is perfect the way it is. Let's move on to whether out not there should be situation subs.

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