How about we just make each AND or OR or whatever in a substitution count as an additional substitution? I mean, I know I'm new here, but it just seems like a simpler way of getting around the problem posed in the OP. Great big strings of ANDs and ORs and so forth might conform to the letter of the law (and we're not even sure about that), but they're definitely against the spirit. At least, that's my interpretation. Feel free to point and laugh if I've missed something obvious that makes this unworkable. Comme j'ai dit, I'm new.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Substitutions Overhaul
- Thread starter Frosty
- Start date
I'm new here too, but I share Geodude's and Texa's point of view: using NOT itself should not be illegal, since things like "If you are not behind a substitute/you are not paralyzed/Magnet Rise is not in effect" seem ok, because it allows you to take in account a lot of things that can really screw you up, but are not very complicated/abusable. But using it to remove items from a class should not be legal.
Food for thought:
Counter > Counter > Counter
IF (Damaging Fighting Move) is not issued, THEN use High Jump Kick that action.
Is basically the same as:
High Jump Kick > High Jump Kick > High Jump Kick
IF (Damaging Fighting Move) is issued, THEN use Counter that action.
So allowing IF NOT X is fine.
In terms of AND NOT Move; I think that can be resolved in a way, a way that prohibits AND NOT in terms of Substituting for two or more moves/classes from the same Pokémon in the same action, that is, you cannot say:
IF (Damaging Grass Move) is issued, AND Seed Bomb is not issued, AND Wood Hammer is not issued, THEN use Counter that action.
But you can say:
IF Knock Off is issued, AND Encore is not issued the following action, THEN use Protect on the first instance.
Likewise, you can say:
IF Fidgit uses Trick Room, AND Clefable does not use Encore, THEN use Taunt (Fidgit) on the first instance.
Basically the only (imo) solution for this AND NOT thing should be:
OR Should never be considered legal for substitutions, bar the Protective/Evasive substitutions. OR is a poor attempt to disguise two substitutions as one to the inexperienced player, & I am of the opinion that substitutions should never be on the same line as each other for readability & identification reasons. OR is also "lazy".
Also the substitution classes need to be updated for the new generation. For example, Water Shuriken for Damaging Priority Move, Spiky Shield for Protective Move, etc.
Counter > Counter > Counter
IF (Damaging Fighting Move) is not issued, THEN use High Jump Kick that action.
Is basically the same as:
High Jump Kick > High Jump Kick > High Jump Kick
IF (Damaging Fighting Move) is issued, THEN use Counter that action.
So allowing IF NOT X is fine.
In terms of AND NOT Move; I think that can be resolved in a way, a way that prohibits AND NOT in terms of Substituting for two or more moves/classes from the same Pokémon in the same action, that is, you cannot say:
IF (Damaging Grass Move) is issued, AND Seed Bomb is not issued, AND Wood Hammer is not issued, THEN use Counter that action.
But you can say:
IF Knock Off is issued, AND Encore is not issued the following action, THEN use Protect on the first instance.
Likewise, you can say:
IF Fidgit uses Trick Room, AND Clefable does not use Encore, THEN use Taunt (Fidgit) on the first instance.
Basically the only (imo) solution for this AND NOT thing should be:
- IF (Pokémon X) (Substitution) AND NOT (Chance-based Substitution) is legal.
- IF (Pokémon X) (Move Substitution) AND NOT (Pokémon X) (Move Substitution) (Different Action) action is legal.
- IF (Pokémon X) (Move Substitution) AND NOT (Pokémon Y) (Move Substitution) is legal.
- IF (Pokémon X) (Move Substitution) AND NOT (Pokémon X) (Move Substitution) is illegal.
OR Should never be considered legal for substitutions, bar the Protective/Evasive substitutions. OR is a poor attempt to disguise two substitutions as one to the inexperienced player, & I am of the opinion that substitutions should never be on the same line as each other for readability & identification reasons. OR is also "lazy".
Also the substitution classes need to be updated for the new generation. For example, Water Shuriken for Damaging Priority Move, Spiky Shield for Protective Move, etc.
do we consider the following substitution legal?
"IF (Move X is used) AND (Move Y is NOT used) THEN (Use Move Z instead)"
this really only applies in Doubles+ battles, where not specifying a user has a distinctly different meaning, but I think it's a valid point to bring up considering its meaning changes depending on the users of X and (not) Y. personally I'd lean towards this being illegal but idk
as a related addendum I'd like to suggest adding two things somewhere to my original post which conveniently has no place to put them though maybe it can go in attack clause section:
(1) <Attack Clause> by <Pokemon X>
(2) <Attack Clause> on <Pokemon X>
just like above these are more or less implied in Singles battles but adding them in for Doubles battles would clarify these mechanics a bit more. perhaps also a note that "if neither a by nor an on is used in an Attack Clause any Pokemon's using a move contained in the Attack Clause will trigger that clause" or something?
also with this we can deal with situations like the first sub more easily
"IF (Move X is used) AND (Move Y is NOT used) THEN (Use Move Z instead)"
this really only applies in Doubles+ battles, where not specifying a user has a distinctly different meaning, but I think it's a valid point to bring up considering its meaning changes depending on the users of X and (not) Y. personally I'd lean towards this being illegal but idk
as a related addendum I'd like to suggest adding two things somewhere to my original post which conveniently has no place to put them though maybe it can go in attack clause section:
(1) <Attack Clause> by <Pokemon X>
(2) <Attack Clause> on <Pokemon X>
just like above these are more or less implied in Singles battles but adding them in for Doubles battles would clarify these mechanics a bit more. perhaps also a note that "if neither a by nor an on is used in an Attack Clause any Pokemon's using a move contained in the Attack Clause will trigger that clause" or something?
also with this we can deal with situations like the first sub more easily
RE Above: As long as it does not make it to be that you are substituting for at least two moves/categories from the same Pokémon from the same action. That is a problem though as there is a grey area involved. One possible way to fix this is to only allow the use of NOT after the first AND once per substitution, but that can lead to some other issues (e.g. outlawing something like substituting for one mon using Trick Room, another mon not using Encore the same action, and the Trick Room user not using Encore the next action).
In other news, I took it on myself to update the Substitution Categories for the new generation:
Basically the additions are:
Also still, opinions are needed with the AND NOT thing.
In other news, I took it on myself to update the Substitution Categories for the new generation:
- Protective Moves: Protect, Detect, King's Shield, Spiky Shield
- Evasive Moves: Agility [Evasive], Teleport [Evasive]
- Protective / Evasive Move: Protect, Detect, Agility [Evasive], Teleport [Evasive], King's Shield, Spiky Shield
- Damaging Evasive Moves: Dig, Fly, Dive, Bounce, Shadow Force, Phantom Force
- Damaging Priority Moves: Aqua Jet, Bullet Punch, Extremespeed, Fake Out, Feint, Ice Shard, Mach Punch, Quick Attack, Shadow Sneak, Sucker Punch, Vacuum Wave, Water Shuriken
- Multi-Hit Moves: Arm Thrust, Barrage, Bone Rush, Bullet Seed, Comet Punch, Double Slap, Fury Attack, Fury Swipes, Icicle Spear, Pin Missile, Rock Blast, Spike Cannon, Tail Slap, Bonemerang, Double Hit, Double Kick, Dual Chop, Gear Grind, Twineedle, Triple Kick, Water Shuriken
- Damaging [Type] Moves: Covers all of Flamethrower, Lava Plume, Fire Blast, Ember, etc. under the umbrella of "Damaging Fire-type Move." Covers all of Psychic, Psyshock, Confusion, Dream Eater, etc. under the umbrella of "Damaging Psychic-type Move." NOTE: This Substitution applies to all attacks of a certain type that have a BAP, so moves like Rapid Spin and Knock off will trigger "Damaging Normal-type Move" and "Damaging Dark-type Move," respectively.
- Damaging [Type] Combinations: All combinations that are of [Type] will activate the substitution. NOTE: A damaging [Type] combination activates a substitution for damaging [Type] moves.
- Paralysis-Inflicting Moves: Thunder Wave, Glare, Stun Spore, Nuzzle
- Poison-Inflicting Moves: Poison Gas, Poisonpowder, Toxic
- Sleep-Inflicting Moves: Spore, Hypnosis, Sleep Powder, Sing, Grasswhistle, Lovely Kiss, Dark Void, Yawn
- Confusion-Inflicting Moves: Confuse Ray, Supersonic, Sweet Kiss, Teeter Dance, Swagger
- Switch-Preventing Moves: Block, Mean Look, Spider Web, Fairy Lock
- Trapping Moves: Fire Spin, Sand Tomb, Whirlpool, Magma Storm, Bind, Wrap, Clamp
- Switch-Forcing Moves: Whirlwind, Roar, Circle Throw, Dragon Tail
- Self-Switching Moves: U-Turn, Volt Switch, Teleport (Switch), Parting Shot
- Healing Moves: Roost, Slack Off, Recover, Moonlight, Synthesis, Morning Sun, Softboiled, Heal Order, Milk Drink, Swallow
- Status-Healing Moves: Aromatherapy, Heal Bell, Refresh
- Lock-On Moves: Lock-On, Mind Reader
- Attack-Reducing Moves: Growl, Charm, Featherdance, Memento, Baby-doll Eyes, Noble Roar, Parting Shot, Play Nice, Venom Drench
- Defense-Reducing Moves: Leer, Tail Whip, Screech
- Special Attack-Reducing Moves: Captivate, Memento, Confide, Eerie Impulse, Mystical Fire, Noble Roar, Parting Shot, Venom Drench
- Special Defense-Reducing Moves: Fake Tears, Metal Sound
- Speed-Reducing Moves: String Shot, Cotton Spore, Scary Face, Bulldoze, Icy Wind, Mud Shot, Rock Tomb, Electroweb, Glaciate, Low Sweep, Venom Drench
- Accuracy-Reducing Moves: Flash, Kinesis, Sand-Attack, Smokescreen
Basically the additions are:
- Protective Moves: King's Shield, Spiky Shield
- Protective / Evasive Move: King's Shield, Spiky Shield
- Damaging Evasive Moves: Phantom Force
- Damaging Priority Moves: Water Shuriken
- Multi-Hit Moves: Water Shuriken
- Paralysis-Inflicting Moves: Nuzzle
- Switch-Preventing Moves: Fairy Lock
- Self-Switching Moves: Parting Shot
- Attack-Reducing Moves: Baby-doll Eyes, Noble Roar, Parting Shot, Play Nice, Venom Drench
- Special Attack-Reducing Moves: Confide, Eerie Impulse, Mystical Fire, Noble Roar, Parting Shot, Venom Drench
- Speed-Reducing Moves: Venom Drench
Also still, opinions are needed with the AND NOT thing.
Considering that the same argument could be made for Dodge being put in Evasive Moves and it didn't fly back then, I don't see the argument flying here either.
No, Dodge being a command was not the major reason for that; that was denied substitution category status primarily for viability reasons (i.e. Dodge being categorised as Evasive Move meant would result in it being useless and hopelessly outclassed by Agility (Evade) & Teleport (Evade)). Command status had a minor influence.
I never that said we should include Crafty Shield/Mat Block/etc. either, merely throwing the suggestion out there.
I never that said we should include Crafty Shield/Mat Block/etc. either, merely throwing the suggestion out there.
I'm seeming no objections to this. Let's get the council to comment: Frosty Dogfish44 Objection Pwnemon deadfox081
As a side note, council, we should try and meet on irc at some point to discuss replacing Lou on the council. His situation is unfortunate but the nature of the council necessitates replacement.
As a side note, council, we should try and meet on irc at some point to discuss replacing Lou on the council. His situation is unfortunate but the nature of the council necessitates replacement.
OK, with the emergence of abilities like Gale Wings and Aerilate that can change the attributes of moves in such ways that they would belong in different attack classes as well as arena effects that can do the same, I am seriously believing that we should define attack classes by the attributes of the moves rather than by a list of moves, except for those classes that are only supposed to apply to specific moves such as the Protective Moves and Evasive Moves ones.
In fact, I have whipped up some sample definitions for your viewing pleasure.
**I know that, with default rules, the Burn-inducing one only covers Will-O-Wisp and the Freeze-inducing one covers nothing. Think of these new attack classes as accounting for both possible arena effects and a potential 4 BAP 100% burn/freeze move from gen 7.
Feel free to critique them, as it is possible that I have overlooked something.
In fact, I have whipped up some sample definitions for your viewing pleasure.
- Protective Moves: Any move that nullifies all incoming effects of all moves, and King's Shield*.
- Protective Moves: Any move that, when its use is not specified as "Evasive", nullifies all incoming effects of all moves or a certain set of all moves*.
- Evasive Moves: Any move that, when its use is specified as "Evasive", nullifies all incoming effects of single-target moves except those with perfect accuracy or affected by No Guard.
- Protective / Evasive Move: Any move in the Protective Moves class or the Evasive Moves class.
- Damaging Evasive Moves: Any damage-dealing move that allows the user to avoid incoming attacks on the action it is used, except Sky Drop.
- Damaging Priority Moves: Any damage-dealing move with a (strike) priority greater than 0.
- Multi-Hit Moves: Any damage-dealing move whose Base Attack Power is expressed as "X per hit", except Beat Up.
- Damaging [Type] Moves: Any damage-dealing move or combo whose type (after all effects that modify the move's type) is [Type].
- Damaging [Type] Combinations: Any damage-dealing combo whose type (after all effects that modify the combo's type) is [Type].
- Paralysis-Inflicting Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of inflicting paralysis, except Zap Cannon.
- Poison-Inflicting Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of inflicting poison or bad poison.
- Sleep-Inflicting Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of inflicting sleep, and Yawn.
- Confusion-Inflicting Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of inflicting confusion, except Dynamic Punch.
- Burn-Inflicting Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of inflicting burn, except Inferno**.
- Freeze-Inflicting Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of inflicting freeze**.
- Switch-Preventing Moves: Any move that, on a hit, indefinitely prevents the target from switching out except with effects like U-turn and Roar.
- Trapping Moves: Any move that, on a hit, causes the target to take ongoing damage and prevents them from switching out while they do except with effects like U-turn and Roar.
- Switch-Forcing Moves: Any move that, on a hit, forces the target to switch out (or the equivalent in Switch=KO).
- Self-Switching Moves: Any move that, on a hit, forces the user to switch out (or the equivalent in Switch=KO).
- Healing Moves: Any self-targeting move that causes the user to regain HP only on the action it is used.
- Status-Healing Moves: Any move that removes certain major status effects from the user, except Rest.
- Lock-On Moves: Any move that guarantees that the user's next move will hit the target of this move.
- Attack-Reducing Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of lowering the target's attack by one or more stages.
- Defense-Reducing Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of lowering the target's defense by one or more stages.
- Special Attack-Reducing Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of lowering the target's special attack by one or more stages.
- Special Defense-Reducing Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of lowering the target's special defense by one or more stages.
- Speed-Reducing Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of lowering the target's speed by one or more stages.
- Accuracy-Reducing Moves: Any move that, on a hit, has a 100% chance of lowering the target's accuracy by one or more stages.
**I know that, with default rules, the Burn-inducing one only covers Will-O-Wisp and the Freeze-inducing one covers nothing. Think of these new attack classes as accounting for both possible arena effects and a potential 4 BAP 100% burn/freeze move from gen 7.
Feel free to critique them, as it is possible that I have overlooked something.
Was Nuzzle intentionally left out?
I would suggest adding more basic move effects (like targeting, possible effects, effectiveness on a given pokemon, etc.) to substitutions. Currently they are illegal, but they would make logical sense to add in (in my opinion), and would improve battles (again, my opinion).
Self-targeting moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will only affect the user.
Ally-targeting moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will mainly affect only allied pokemon (other than the user).
Foe-targeting moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will mainly affect only foes (from the move user's standpoint).
Field-targeting moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will affect the field (weather, room, terrain moves, hazards, etc.)
Spread-targeting moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will mainly affect multiple pokemon.
Sub user-directed moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will only mainly affect the pokemon unto whom this sub applies to.
Possible [status] inflicting move: Any move that, should it succeed, will have a chance between 0 and 1, exclusive, of inflicting the given status/condition onto the pokemon unto whom the substitution (or a specified other pokemon). Abilities that affect the user's moves can affect this, but not ones that affect moves used against it.
Super-effective move: Any move with a type multiplier greater than 1 when it does damage. Must have a specified pokemon to calculate effectiveness. If no specific pokemon is specified, it will be unto the move's target.
Neutral move: Any move with a type multiplier equal to 1 when it does damage. Must have a specified pokemon to calculate effectiveness. If no specific pokemon is specified, it will be unto the move's target.
Resisted move: Any move with a type multiplier less than 1 and not zero when it does damage. Must have a specified pokemon to calculate effectiveness. If no specific pokemon is specified, it will be unto the move's target.
Ineffective move: Any move with a type multiplier equal to 0 when it does damage. Must have a specified pokemon to calculate effectiveness. If no specific pokemon is specified, it will be unto the move's target.
Ally-targeting moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will mainly affect only allied pokemon (other than the user).
Foe-targeting moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will mainly affect only foes (from the move user's standpoint).
Field-targeting moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will affect the field (weather, room, terrain moves, hazards, etc.)
Spread-targeting moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will mainly affect multiple pokemon.
Sub user-directed moves: Any move that, should it succeed, will only mainly affect the pokemon unto whom this sub applies to.
Possible [status] inflicting move: Any move that, should it succeed, will have a chance between 0 and 1, exclusive, of inflicting the given status/condition onto the pokemon unto whom the substitution (or a specified other pokemon). Abilities that affect the user's moves can affect this, but not ones that affect moves used against it.
Super-effective move: Any move with a type multiplier greater than 1 when it does damage. Must have a specified pokemon to calculate effectiveness. If no specific pokemon is specified, it will be unto the move's target.
Neutral move: Any move with a type multiplier equal to 1 when it does damage. Must have a specified pokemon to calculate effectiveness. If no specific pokemon is specified, it will be unto the move's target.
Resisted move: Any move with a type multiplier less than 1 and not zero when it does damage. Must have a specified pokemon to calculate effectiveness. If no specific pokemon is specified, it will be unto the move's target.
Ineffective move: Any move with a type multiplier equal to 0 when it does damage. Must have a specified pokemon to calculate effectiveness. If no specific pokemon is specified, it will be unto the move's target.
Geodude6
Look at my shiny CT!
So I've got something that I'd like to bring up:
Distinguishing between physical and special moves in a single substitution. Obviously you can't just say "IF physical move, Counter; IF special move, Mirror Coat," but in my opinion it's completely retarded that you can't say "IF physical Rock-type move, Counter." That definitely used to be legal, and I am very surprised that it isn't currently legal. It's not "too broad" like "IF physical move, Counter" is. If anything, it makes the substitution even narrower.
Distinguishing between physical and special moves in a single substitution. Obviously you can't just say "IF physical move, Counter; IF special move, Mirror Coat," but in my opinion it's completely retarded that you can't say "IF physical Rock-type move, Counter." That definitely used to be legal, and I am very surprised that it isn't currently legal. It's not "too broad" like "IF physical move, Counter" is. If anything, it makes the substitution even narrower.
As far as I know "physical Rock-type attack" was never a legal trigger for a substitution, precisely for the reason you specified...?
It was definitely never legal
Please expand on why these should be included. I honestly see no reason to implement any (or most) of those categories. Most of these are too broad & too vague, & some can also be abused to give an unfair advantage to the user. See Super Effective move:
- Example 1: IF (Non-Combo) (Super Effective Move) is issued, THEN use Metal Burst that action.
- Example 2: You have a Weakness Policy Swoobat, while your opponent has a Conkeldurr or something. Both are fresh. You can just go IF (Super Effective Move) is issued, THEN replace all remaining actions with Stored Power (or something to that effect). You effectively scare your opponent off from using a Super Effective move, & even if they try to take advantage with Bide, you can just Protect that next round or something.
I would personally rather these not be implemented, imo. They are just too easily abused & a bit too vague for implementation.
As if Counter & Mirror Coat were not strong enough already... I would rather that this does not happen. Just because a substitution can be narrowed, does not mean it is a good thing. "IF (Damaging Grass Move) AND NOT Seed Bomb AND NOT Razor Leaf AND NOT <Every other Physical Grass Move>, THEN Mirror Coat." Narrows a substitution, yet we frown on it as illegal for abuse & splitting a substitution into several sub-substitutions. Yes this is basically the same thing as "IF (Special Grass Move), THEN Mirror Coat.", but as I said, as if Counter & Mirror Coat were not strong enough already...
Also, is there any ETA on the Substitution Classes being updated to the new generation, whether it be using the exact list of moves I listed earlier in this thread, or following Objection's "Definitions?"
I do not see how the first example is OP. It would simply deal a bit more damage, nothing overpowering.
I did not think about the example 2, though, but that could already be done.
If your Attack is at stage 2 or higher, use Stored Power and push back.
That would work as long as the Conkeldurr does not lower Swoobat's attack 2 stages and then hit super-effectively a3. Also, Conkeldurr can NOT learn a move that lowers the target's attack. So that sub would work perfectly fine.
Those categories would enable a wider range of areas that you can use a sub for. I was just suggesting them, so if the community does not like them, then I am fine with them being excluded or modified, or if some of them are excluded to make it fair.
Okay in the interests of getting stuff together for the tournament I'm flexing my Policy Leader muscles and ruling that the updated sub classes with gen 6 moves (see IAR's post) are now law.
So stuff like Venom Drench and Confide will activate Substitutions and shit.
In other news I'm in support of both IAR's defintion of the AND NOT sub class, in tentative support of Objection's definitions (they're good but move away from specifics), and in objection to pretty much everything else.
There's not been a whole lot of discussion so I'll try and rustle up a slate soon.
So stuff like Venom Drench and Confide will activate Substitutions and shit.
In other news I'm in support of both IAR's defintion of the AND NOT sub class, in tentative support of Objection's definitions (they're good but move away from specifics), and in objection to pretty much everything else.
There's not been a whole lot of discussion so I'll try and rustle up a slate soon.
Sorry if this shouldn't be here.
That example I just gave concerns turn order instead of movement speed. Which means the Substitution pretty much triggers on any moves with lower priority than the subber, plus turn order when it comes to Speed, plus Speed ties. IRC deemed it legal (I wasn't there, but smashlloyd and Geodude6 told me so), though I'd wish we can put this up for clarification.Example said: