But if Garchomp had merely Subbed, you would now have a 0% chance of OHKOing it and a 20% chance of not even breaking the Sub, all while the Chomp is guaranteed the SD. So I can't really say DT is that much better...
-
Follow our Instagram!
-
Curious about what we're currently doing about bots? Check out the latest updates from staff in this thread.
-
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.
Evasion: Test or Ban?
- Thread starter kamikaen
- Start date
But if Garchomp had merely Subbed, you would now have a 0% chance of OHKOing it and a 20% chance of not even breaking the Sub, all while the Chomp is guaranteed the SD. So I can't really say DT is that much better...
I said it would be annoying as hell. I said nothing about it being effective.
I don't remember seeing a poll on this. I consider myself a moderately skilled player, and managing probability is what got me so interested in Pokémon in the first place. A lot of others in this thread seem to feel the same way.
Yes, I definitely see your point. There must be psychologically more frustrating about "missing" (or more generally, about probability) and I suppose that is why most people do not want to deal with it.
But IMO, SubGarchomp would be much more "annoying" than DTGarchomp because SubGarchomp is more effective--I am more annoyed when I lose, and I lose more often when a set is more effective. I would imagine that's why nobody uses "annoyers" like Thunder Wave/Confuse Ray/Stomp/Attract Stantler@Brightpowder--they're more annoying, but less effective.
SubGarchomp is more effective most of the time. Of course, DT Garchomp is more effective some of the time.
I don't feel like actually calculating the probabilities... so I'll just pull numberse out of my ass for now. I'd estimate maybe 60% to 80% of the time, SubGarchomp would have been better than DT Garchomp. Maybe more than that... because Sub Blocks status 100% of the time while DT only blocks status 25% of the time...
Anyway, I predict that DT Garchomp hits the point of diminishing returns. Garchomp already has 20% evasion in a sandstorm, meaning that 5% of the time... both Double Team AND Sandveil activate... meaning that Double Team is really only "effective" some 20% of the time instead of its typical 25% of the time. Why buff your evasion higher when it is already relatively high?
When did I say there was a poll on this? I was just referring to the players I happen to speak to and are also skilled. Managing probability, while "exciting" (o the sarcasm), is definitely the least appreciated between itself, team building and in-battle prediction, at least for the players I have spoken to.
Anyway, do you actually want to go for a poll, lol? I'm 100% fine with having a poll, as I know what the majority of players want (no evasion).
Besides, before we even get to this poll, we have to decide if Colin's claim regarding the simplification of rules and the least decentralization holds any bearing, as I'm not sure how the upper management on this site views it. Jumpman16 and Mekkah seemed to support an "objectifying" of the metagame in regards to determining tiers, and therefore accepted this decentralization argument, but I'm not sure if this applies to Evasion as well.
And even if the simplification of the rules and the whole decentralization bit is preferred, we have to determine if the inarguable (and inevitable) shift of increasing the necessity to manage probability is even a desired result.
I'll tell you one thing, it isn't for this user.
You know what? I'd love to participate in an evasion tournament, I think it would be a blast. Just don't make it single elimination (or if you do, have each match between two players be best out of three).
Ninjask can't really use Double Team efficiently. It either needs to be behind an intact Substitute to DT without being hit, or it needs to get really lucky. Focus Sash can help, but against a Pokemon that can OHKO it while a Sandstorm or Hail is up, Ninjask will fall without accomplishing anything. Any Ninjask set with DT will HAVE to give up either Swords Dance or Substitute; otherwise, Ninjask will be left with no attacks and any Pokemon with Taunt can shut it down completely.
Zapdos also doesn't want to rely on just Thunderbolt for its main attack, and there are several ground-types that would force it to switch. Gliscor, for example, is an OU Pokemon that can be utilized for that purpose, and because Taunt is such a useful move in and of itself, I don't think that's overcentralizing. Steelix can learn Taunt, too. So can Electivire. All these Pokemon can completely shut down Zapdos and remain effective against other Pokemon.
And that's just taunt.
EDIT: How many potential double teamers aren't adversely affected by Sandstorm or hail? How many are immune or resistant to Thunder? What about Solarbeam? Blizzard?
Zapdos also doesn't want to rely on just Thunderbolt for its main attack, and there are several ground-types that would force it to switch. Gliscor, for example, is an OU Pokemon that can be utilized for that purpose, and because Taunt is such a useful move in and of itself, I don't think that's overcentralizing. Steelix can learn Taunt, too. So can Electivire. All these Pokemon can completely shut down Zapdos and remain effective against other Pokemon.
And that's just taunt.
EDIT: How many potential double teamers aren't adversely affected by Sandstorm or hail? How many are immune or resistant to Thunder? What about Solarbeam? Blizzard?
From my perspective, however, things will not change. I already use the most accurate moves possible. I once used Hidden Power Bug Heracross (in ADV) because Megahorn missed too much.
What did you miss out on OHKOing in ADV with 32 less base power? (120*.85 versus 70). I could understand not wanting to use low-accuracy moves during single-elimination tournaments, but not on the Shoddy ladder, where a higher win percentage is more important than winning the game you're currently playing. For occasions where one move strictly outdamages the other in the long run, I'd find it difficult to pick the more accurate one (Flamethrower v. Fireblast).
The only exception to this is of course when you don't NEED the extra base power, like Flamethrower against Forretress or something.
i fear simple bibarel
If you want to minimize luck, you should just create a modified version of the game that is non-probabilistic. I think the arguments about "skill vs luck" are mostly not being honest about what Pokemon really is. It's really right up the same alley of Poker: a jumble of randomness wherein the player makes plays to increase his odds. I don't think that makes it a bad game (I rather like Pokemon), but I think it means you have to stop looking at it like chess. No, the better player doesn't always win. It's a part of the game, and it won't change no matter what rules you adapt. It's not even a negative; it's just a fundamental principle of the game's design (and of all probabilistic games).
This is why I think the argument about minimizing luck by banning Double Team is bunk. The only legitimate reason to ban something is because it's overpowered, and I'm not convinced that Double Team is overpowered at all.
I really think most people just shoot themselves in the foot when they use Flamethower; you have only a 6.25% chance against many things that Fire Blast would have an 85% chance against.
About Brightpowder, I'm just going to point out that it and Wide Lens have essentially the same effect (10% modifier to when an attack could hit). Any rules governing these items should be symmetric (that is, if one is banned, the other should be too).
This is why I think the argument about minimizing luck by banning Double Team is bunk. The only legitimate reason to ban something is because it's overpowered, and I'm not convinced that Double Team is overpowered at all.
I really think most people just shoot themselves in the foot when they use Flamethower; you have only a 6.25% chance against many things that Fire Blast would have an 85% chance against.
About Brightpowder, I'm just going to point out that it and Wide Lens have essentially the same effect (10% modifier to when an attack could hit). Any rules governing these items should be symmetric (that is, if one is banned, the other should be too).
Sorry, but I have a fundamental problem with this statement. Wide Lens decreases luck while BrightPowder increases it.
I see the argument you're making and respect it, but I respectfully disagree. The way I see it, minimizing luck whenever possible achieves the goal of promoting skill in a game, especially in a competitive game.
That said, I would still like to see if Double Team is overpowered (which I'm questioning, as well). If its presence still allows the most skilled players to win more often in the long run, then I have no problem with it.
Who knows? The allowance of evasion moves might even result in a metagame where more strategies are viable. However, we won't know whether that will happen until we test it.
I find it incredibly difficult to imagine a scenario in which the more skilled player wouldn't win "in the long run". The only way I can think of to get the less skilled player winning more is to have some sort of program estimate the player's skill and create circumstances that make those who rank higher win less, and the only way to make them equal is to have the game be such that what you do has no impact on the result.
We don't have to ban Wide Lens if we ban BrightPowder any more than we have to ban Sweet Scent because we've banned Double Team.
Luck is ambiguous. However, I see what you're trying to say. Wide Lens decreases Variance while BrightPowder increases it. (Statistically speaking, the variance of the system is p*(1-p)*trials). Variance is... erm... lets just say a way to measure the average distance away from the average. (So {1, 5, 9} has the same average as {4.5, 5, 5.5} but the latter has a much lower variance)
Evasion moves are summarized in one word: annoy. i used to run a DT team in the old Netbattle, it owned me a lot of wins, but almost the half of the victories i did not won because i set upped a DT, i won because skill and switching wisely more than batton passing DT, also i lost many times because no strategy is perfect and i can tell you that many times an earthquake hit my raikou after 6 DT, so if we include that now there are more ways to counter evasion, it wont be banned. To point my initial sentence, many of the times my opponents saw me performing the first DT they just forfeited the battle, a one turn victory for me, clearly a proof of how much annoying DT can be, my opponents may thought "it gonna be a pain in the ass trying to hit his pokes" or "my team has no counter for evasion, just run". Also if there is a lot of controversy about DT and apparently no conclusion can be reached, why dont test evasion?, i think by testing it we would get irrefutable data and a conclusion.
i think it is not really an argument to conclude that DT is not a threat and can be unbanned easily, my DT strategy doesnt consist in DT and sweep with the same poke, i DTed with umbreon and then baton passed the boost to the sweeper i chose, so not exactly you need to counter two moves, and i think that most of the DT users run a baton pass team.
i think it is not really an argument to conclude that DT is not a threat and can be unbanned easily, my DT strategy doesnt consist in DT and sweep with the same poke, i DTed with umbreon and then baton passed the boost to the sweeper i chose, so not exactly you need to counter two moves, and i think that most of the DT users run a baton pass team.
The main difference philosophically between Sweet Scent and Double Team is that you can negate Sweet Scent by switching. If there were a move that boosted the user's accuracy, I'd consider it in the same boat as Double Team.
I highly doubt that Double Team could do such a thing, either, so I have no problem with testing it.
Oh, Dragontamer, thanks for clarifying my BP v. Wide Lens argument.
I feel that this is a really good point that AA makes here, especially if you look at it in terms of setting Smogon up to be the best at Pokemon, not what we make of Pokemon. Fish said it best in this thread:
Test it test it test!!! "Oh no, I just might have to use 60 BP never miss moves!..." well then, what the heck are stat - boosting moves for? Do not be afraid of going back to or going into an old or new era of battling. No I do not use Evasion in my teams, but still, without evasion, low defenders and low special defenders are screwed, and now they need to rely on massive physical/special attack and speed to make one or two kill(s). Think of Alakazam, think of Ninjask! Double Teams are essential to help out those who have crap defenses. If a Pokemon will last almost no hits, or the Substitute will go to waste (that is, unless you predict a switch), then stop the Pokemon from getting hit at all with a Sub or DT!
......Taunt. Any complaints any more?
......Taunt. Any complaints any more?
Are you shitting me? Those pokemon AREN'T supposed to take a hit, they are supposed to do what you said they should be doing. If they can't the programers invented this miracle calld switching.
Edit: Yes, because Taunt is temporary, not everything can use it, Taunt can be Taunted, and I can still get a Double Team off before you Taunt.
Yes, but the taunt would keep the opposing Pokemon out of action long enough to have a DT free game, and when the DTer comes back in, especially if it is the last Pokemon it gets screwed up by the Taunter again, and let's face it, MOST Pokemon with DT are pretty frail.
About DT requires no skill:
If there is a Taunter on your team, and somebody else had a DTer on their team, they use DT, you use Taunt, they POSSIBLY switch out, and devise a way to get rid of the Taunter without Status inflicting or Stat - Boosting moves, does that not require just a tincy wincy bincy puny little amount of skill?