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

Discussion Switch = OK Rulings

Discussion in 'Policy Center' started by Its_A_Random, Apr 20, 2013.

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

    Its_A_Random Returns true
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributor
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,277
    This thread will be moderated to keep discussion focused.

    ITT: We decide to review the Switch = OK rules, because it 1. Needs to be updated, & 2. There are a few niggling aspects with the rules that need to be clarified. The purpose of this discussion is to basically, find a set of Switch = OK rulings we can all agree on or something, idk. Here are the current Switch = OK Rules as they stand:
    [BOX]Switch = OK: At the end of each round, a trainer may switch their Pokemon. If they do, the Pokemon they send out must issue attacks first. The same trainer cannot switch on consecutive rounds unless an Attack like U-turn, Volt Change, or Teleport is used. Trainers whose Pokemon are returned through the effects of moves like Dragon Tail, Circle Throw, Roar, and Whirlwind do not have to move first the next round.

    Voluntary switches occur only during a switching phase.

    A Switching phase may only be initiated by the trainer moving first that round. Instead of issuing commands, the trainer may instead initiate a switch and offer their opponent a chance to switch their Pokemon. If the opposing trainer accepts and switches their Pokemon, that trainer forfeits the advantage of moving second that round.

    A Switching phase has only two possible outcomes:

    1. Player A Switch > Player B Declines Switch > Player A Orders > Player B Orders.

    2. Player A Switch > Player B Counterswitch and Orders > Player A Orders.

    Tag Team Battles operate the same with both team members on the same team switching their Pokemon first. The team which performs the most switches in the switch phase moves first. (e.g. if both trainers on a two person tag team switch, but only one of their opponents does, their opponents still move second)

    Melee battles go through each trainer next in the order. Attack Order is then determined in the reverse order of trainers who switched. (eg. Trainer A initiates switch phase. Trainer B makes a switch, Trainer C declines to switch, then Trainer D makes a switch. The attack order would now be D > B > A > C. Because D was able to see the decisions of all other players, D is punished the most for deciding to switch after B switched and C declined.

    Any Battle large enough to require orders via PM will automatically be set to Switch=KO[/BOX]
    I proposed a potential solution to the issues that I felt needed to be fixed with the updates & shit. The post was:
    The solution was supported, but there was an overwhelming consensus that a discussion was necessary in order to come up with a set of rules we can agree on.

    Discussion should focus on the following questions:

    • "The same trainer cannot switch on consecutive rounds..." is an obscure ruling that nobody tends to follow. Should this be removed? Why?
    • There are several things that were clarified in the quoted proposal, including the whole "Attack first if you use an auto-switch move" thing, & the whole "If you switch and the opponent has no reserve, the counter-switch offer is automatically ignored" thing. Are these clarifications acceptable? Why?
    • Switch Phases involving trapping moves/abilities/whatever: There are a few rulings around involving them, but none are "written", so to speak. How do you feel these should be resolved? Is the proposed solution in the quoted post the best way to go about this, or is there a better way? Why?
    • Any other issues concerning the current Switch = OK rulings do you feel need to be addressed? Why?
    Keep it civil folks. Remember to stay on topic, & well, time to just discuss Switch = OK Rulings, I guess...
  2. zarator

    zarator Credits to Mos-Quitoxe for the cute sprite^^
    is a Community Contributoris a Contributor Alumnus

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,975
    While your stance about trapping effects makes sense (sorta), I'm worried about Shadow Tag and co. becoming even more pointless than they currently are. I used Chandelure in over a year, for example, and the only reason I generally use Shadow Tag (in Switch = OK) is that the other two abilities are worthless in general:
    - Flash Fire is obvious, none would use Fire-type attacks on Chandy anyway.
    - Flame Body seems better but, if you think about it, the majority of attacks coming at Chandy won't be contact moves. Almost all Water-type, Ground-type, Ghost-type, and Rock-type moves are non-contact. Unless you're facing a physically oriented Dark-type mon, I guess, you won't need this ability.

    The same can be said for most other trappers.
  3. Pwnemon

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

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    3,449
    IAR's position makes no sense logically; it is simply the largest nerf available to Shadow Tag, but it is inconsistent and the scrambling to justify it makes this obvious. As zarator said, Shadow Tag really isn't all that strong and doesn't require a nerf. I'm fine with using the game-version ST both ways, in that you can switch out when the ST user comes in but not when they go out. This removes the only possible broken application of the ability (perishtrapping) because really apart from that, big whoop.
  4. ZhengTann

    ZhengTann Nargacuga
    is a Pre-Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,157
    Since nobody follows it, then we might as well abolish it - takes much less effort than re-enforcing the rule, even when doing so does nothing much to the game balance. Go with the flow, why not?

    The "Order first if you use a self-switch / phaze move" clarification should be added, as well as "If you switch and the opponent has no reserve, the counter-switch offer is automatically ignored" part. The reason I nitpicked "Order" over "Attack" is that you could (according to forum trends) self-switch or phaze, then initiate a Switch phase (since you're moving first) even though doing so totally nullifies your self-switch / phazing tactics.

    In Switch-Trapping, I am in support for in-anime precedence. Basically, Trapping Abilities come into effect as soon as the trapper switches in, and is removed as soon as the trapper switches out. Think about this: [box]

    • With you ordering first, your Chandelure switches in, Shadow Tag takes effect, trapping a Ghost-weak or Fire-weak Pokemon and proceeds to KO it.
    • Your opponent sends in Dugtrio against the weakened Chandelure to trap and finish it off, since he orders first this rounds.
    • His/her Dugtrio survives until he orders first again, where he switches out Dugtrio and you are now free to counterswitch.
    [/box]
    So in practice, this allows trappers to KO those Pokemons they hard counter, while at the same time giving both sides enough leeway to play with switching should the trapper ends up in an unfavourable match-up. Flavour-wise, this makes sense too - you are actually going to see that Chandelure popping out of its Pokeball before you think, "Oh shit, my Meganium would stand no chance, and now I can't switch!"

    I don't think we should mix between in-catridge and in-anime precedence, since doing so either nerfs trappers the way IAR prescribes, or boost them to the point where doomsayers from the opposing camp will jump in as well. As to why I'd follow in-anime precedence over in-catridge - this is Anime-Style Battling, no?
  5. Texas Cloverleaf

    Texas Cloverleaf meh
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Battle Server Moderatoris a Contributor Alumnus
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Messages:
    7,572
    We need to abolish initiating a switch phase after your mon is KO'd and you send out a new mon while ordering first. It's kind of really dumb.
  6. Deck Knight

    Deck Knight Well-shuffled and flush
    is a Forum Moderatoris a CAP Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributor
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,491
    As far as trapping and anti-trapping MOVES:

    Volt Switch, Baton Pass, and U-turn users should clarify which Pokemon they are going to switch to in the attack. That Pokemon will switch in at the end of the round, and then hazard damage etc. will be recorded. This effect will occur AFTER all residual damage effects, status, etc.

    Trapping moves will remain in effect as long as the Pokemon that used them is on the field at the end of the round.

    Lets use Flygon for some examples of how this plays out, focusing on U-turn, Dragon Tail, and Sand Tomb.

    Scenario 1: If Flygon uses U-turn, I have to specify which Pokemon I'm going to switch to, and will attack first next round.
    Scenario 2: If Flygon uses Dragon Tail then I will attack first next round.
    Scenario 3: If Flygon uses Sand Tomb and is still active at the end of a round where it goes second, Flygon can switch and the opponent cannot respond with a counterswitch, because at the time of Flygon's switching their pokemon is trapped.
    Scenario 4: If Flygon uses U-turn on a round where Sand Tomb is in effect, on action 3 Sand Tomb will do its passive damage, Flygon will take Poison/Burn/whatever damage, then the new Pokemon will be switched in and take any hazard damage, but not any status/other damage.
    Scenario 5: If Flygon uses U-turn and Dragon Tail, I still have to specify the Pokemon I'm going to switch to, even if I *don't know* what the result of Dragon Tail will be. Since I will be going first, I get a chance to switch out, but my opponent will have a chance to counterswitch.
    Scenario 6: If Flygon uses Dragon Tail and Dragon Tail drags in a Shadow Tag Pokemon to trap it, I will not be able to switch next round because my opponent's trapping effect is in place before the start of the next round.

    Lets say Flygon is in a Doubles Match with Chandelure, or in Scenario 3 singles, U-turns to a Chandelure - here is how each of these scenarios is changed:
    Scenarios 1-2 and 6 are unchanged.
    In Scenario 3 because Flygon U-turned to Chandelure and Chandelure is the active Pokemon at the end of the round, the opponent cannot switch even if I choose to switch out Chandelure because Shadow Tag is in effect at the end of the round.
    In Scenario 4-5 the opponent cannot switch because of Chandelure's Shadow Tag - UNLESS Chandelure is removed from the field via a phazing move. Chandelure will be switched out at the end of Action 3, the new Pokemon will take hazard damage, and the switch phaze will be decided by whatever the normal order would be since both scenarios require a switch or phazing move from either side.

    Side note: The origin of the non-consecutive switching rule was actually designed to be a self-limiting tactic. Since I'm a hazards nut, I easily envisioned a scenario where I would set a hazard, phaze, then switch to another phazer, phaze again, then do another switch. I would be acting first in the latter two rounds barring a counter-phaze, and if my opponent did counterswitch an additional one of their Pokemon would take hazard damage *and* I would get to attack second.
  7. zarator

    zarator Credits to Mos-Quitoxe for the cute sprite^^
    is a Community Contributoris a Contributor Alumnus

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,975
    There hasn't been a lot of talk about the "consecutive switch" rule, yet. To be honest, I don't really understand why people think this rule is useless. Yeah, maybe it could be not used a lot, I don't really know, but without it the player who goes first can just keep switching back and forth to force the opponent to choose between going first or take a bad matchup, every damn time. I understand you can punish this strategy with hazards, but much like we all recognized you shouldn't be forced to have Taunt/Encore to beat Perish Song back then, I shouldn't have to resort to Stealth Rock just to prevent the opponent from brutalizing me with repeated switches.
  8. Gerard

    Gerard

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    4,329
    to be fair you only need to take the bad matchup once, and you go second, then you can switch yourself next round when you're first and see if the opponent counters, the only reason you would need to switch repeatedly would be if you counter-switched every time you opponent switched
  9. Objection

    Objection

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    Messages:
    5,695
    Firstly, if at any point you make the choice of taking a bad matchup (or the closest to a bad matchup your opponent is able to give you) then in the next round, you get to initiate a switch phase of your own thus potentially allowing you to be the guy who can just keep switching back and forth to force the opponent to choose between going first or taking a bad matchup.

    Secondly, going first isn't all bad. When going first, you get to make substitutions to prevent your opponent from using their best strategies while you get to use your own best strategies. This makes more of a difference when you're subbing against disruptive non-damaging moves than when you're subbing against strong damaging moves.

    If you want to argue for the rule being a necessity today, a scenario like the one Deck posted is a more convincing argument.
  10. Its_A_Random

    Its_A_Random Returns true
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributor
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,277
    Bumping this because it has been nearly a month since the last response. If anyone has anything to add, please do so.
  11. Flamestrike

    Flamestrike

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Messages:
    835
    I agree with ZT here, for what it's worth. Because of the way switching works in ASB (Player A switches then offers the counterswitch) as opposed to in-game (Both players switch simultaneously), it just doesn't make sense to use in-game precedent here unless not using it severely breaks the game, and while it makes Chandelure et al slightly better, I hardly think it's worth ignoring the logical option.
  12. kingmidas

    kingmidas

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    781
    Why don't we just settle switching through PMs, both players whether they are switching or not that round pm that to the ref and then the ref says it in a post in the thread and then both players order as normally.
  13. Texas Cloverleaf

    Texas Cloverleaf meh
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Battle Server Moderatoris a Contributor Alumnus
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Messages:
    7,572
  14. SimonSays

    SimonSays

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    143
    kingmitus, although the idea is in good intentions, it's too tedious and another thing for refs to track, slowing down everything so much more.

    Just to expand on Tex's kerb-stomp.
  15. Frosty

    Frosty
    is a Community Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Messages:
    731
    48h warning before the booth. Unless someone has anything to add.

    The ballots I have are:

    Should a player be allowed to start a switch phase on consecutive rounds?
    a) Yes
    b) No

    How should Shadow Tag/Arena Trap/Magnet Pull be considered as far as counterswitching is concerned?
    a) If the player switches in a Trapper, the opposing player can't counterswitch
    b) If the player switches out a Trapper, the opposing player can't counterswitch
    c) Both a and b
    d) Neither a nor b

    When the pokemon that used a traping move (mean look, spider web, whirlpool, clamp etc) switch out, can the opposing player counterswitch?
    a) Yes
    b) No

    Should the player be forced to specify who will switch in when Volt Switch/U-turn/Teleport is used?
    a) Yes
    b) No



    Rewriting isn't here as I think we should first decide the rulings and then write it out.

    Not sure if I missed stuff, so let me know if yes, k?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

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