-
Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!
-
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.
np: UU - Can't Touch This
- Thread starter reachzero
- Start date
- Status
Hmm. I think I might dislike Chansey more than Cress at this point :S
Started an alt to try to earn voting rights. I had no idea CRE didn't matter, I thought I'd never be able to vote...
Started an alt to try to earn voting rights. I had no idea CRE didn't matter, I thought I'd never be able to vote...
I really am not sure, and even though I believe that it won't go down that fast, you should constantly check this. Regarding the "going from 48 to 51" part, you need to have less than 55, not 50. I've just checked my ratings, and I believe it's been 1825-1914 for the last two days, if not it must've suffered a change of 1-2 points, so yeah, I believe that it won't get you under the line, but check anyway.
I don't understand the formula well enough to comment on that either, but you're probably fine. If not, only a win or two to get into the safe zone...
Additionally I've always found Chansey to be pretty disappointing. It's a really nice pivot for stall, but I haven't found it to be too troubling for most teams in the last three periods... it's not even as good as Blissey is in OU.
Additionally I've always found Chansey to be pretty disappointing. It's a really nice pivot for stall, but I haven't found it to be too troubling for most teams in the last three periods... it's not even as good as Blissey is in OU.
Sad day for me. I made an alt, got to 1602 with 48 deviation, then lost five in a row when I went for another game for ratings insurance. I'm now sitting at 1479 with 74 deviation.
Getting a rating of 1600 is easy. Just make an alt and find or make a good team.
My deviation just went from 60 to 62 after a win just now. The range from your rating to the numbers it gives you is one standard deviation, which should predict your skill 68% of the time. So if you have a predictable win/loss ratio based off of a sliding scale, your deviation will be small. However, if you do something that is basically anomalous, like losing five times in a row, that falls well outside the predicted range. To keep up whatever confidence interval Shoddy uses (95%, I'd assume), it has to adapt to your record. For example, Shoddy is 95% (or however much) confident that, say I'd win at least two out of five matches against someone with a given rating. But if I lose four of the five, the uncertainty inherent in the calculations rises - to take into account my sudden failure at Pokémon, it might adjust itself to say that 95% of the time, I'd win 1.5 out of five or whatever matches against the same person.
I think I suck at explaining it, but the TL;DR is that a small deviation means you're consistent. I was inconsistent, so it shot up.
[/threadjack]
Anyways, I think that while the metagame has adapted somewhat to the presence of Cresselia, Porygon-Z just keeps getting more dangerous as people really figure out how to use it. I've had a couple matches recently where I was absolutely devastated by a scarfed set hitting and running. Boltbeam + Tri Attack (+trick/hp fighting) is a stellar moveset, and even a Timid P-Z is fast enough with the scarf to outrun and OHKO Chlorophyll Tangrowth and Exeggutor. It's reminiscient of a scarfed Typhlosion, except it has perfect (I think) coverage and can OHKO back after taking a priority move to the face, unlike Typhlosion, who peters out and has to resort to Overheat or taking one for the team. Combine that with its great abilities, and P-Z is looking very much like BL material right now.
Yeah, same here until Sleep Powder/Focus Blast/Stone Edge/(insert game changing hax here) cost me 12 matches in a row. Anyone else ever had 10 hax in a single match go against them??? 4 crits straight for 4 OHKOs? Fucking bullshit losses to absolute shit ass randoms.
end rant.
Missing with inaccurate moves does not count as hax against you. You used them knowing full well that they could miss, so nobody should have any sympathy for you if you lose because of that. Stuff you have no control over like continuous crits or random status inflictions do count as hax in this sense.
However, inaccurate moves should hit a certain percent of the time. You should land 4 Stone Edges out of 5, and 7 Focus Blasts out of 10. Missing 2-5 of such moves in a row IS hax, just like getting paralyzed 3 turns in a row is hax.
Just so you guys know, you have to play at least one battle in order for your correct, updated rating stats to show up. This is the cause of CRE / mean rating seeming to go down when you win your first match of the day. At least, I think that that's what's going on.
Also this.
Also I'm going to have to try to get a few more battles in to ensure that I'm within 55 deviation. Unfortunately, my wireless doesn't seem to work anymore and we have only two Ethernet cables used by my parents (I'm visiting them until this weekend). To pour salt on the wound, the network I've borrowed right now is the only one I can access and it's banned from Shoddy D:
Also this.
Also I'm going to have to try to get a few more battles in to ensure that I'm within 55 deviation. Unfortunately, my wireless doesn't seem to work anymore and we have only two Ethernet cables used by my parents (I'm visiting them until this weekend). To pour salt on the wound, the network I've borrowed right now is the only one I can access and it's banned from Shoddy D:
As mentioned in Capefeather's link, an example was posted for much your CRE will go down if you don't play in a day. The example was that if you have a CRE of 1449, it will decrease to 1443 if you don't play for a day. So it is definitely possible for your CRE to go down 7 in three days.
The CRE is derived from the rating and the deviation, so...
Well there is a difference between Stone Edge missing 1 attack out of 5 attacks and Stone Edge missing 4 times out of 5 attacks. The first scenario is clearly not hax, in fact it is the exact amount the move should miss, however the second scenario is absolutely hax.
Also @ CRE thing:
The numbers you care about are your RANGE, not your CRE. So for example, let's say I had a range of 1700-1800 and a CRE of 1560. So from my understanding, my rating would be:
(1700 + 1800)/2 = 1750 which is far above the 1600 required. Additionally, I would have:
(1800-1700)/2 = 50 Deviation.
I think people are confusing the CRE and rating?
Lonewolf said:
Well we don't need to write an essay (paragraph is not what you should think of it as) to nominate a suspect, but if we reach the rating requirements you will need to submit an essay explaining your position on each Pokemon that you want to vote on.
Yep. I was feeling that shit all last night when I dropped 25 points due to various hax losses. It's getting to the point where I don't even want to risk losing half my health before I recover.
For the most part, none of my team relies on inaccurate moves, but my opponent has a field day with status and critical hits. It's all good, though. I've been playing this game for a while and a losing streak means I either need to find a different strategy or keep playing and earn the points back.
As far as voting is concerned, I'm good to go and I trust that my fellow UU players have been using the suspects enough to make accurate and well-informed decisions.
Yeah, hax has been running rampant lately. About the CRE, I know it doesn't matter when qualifying, but they are related, so if your CRE goes down, your rating does as well, and vice-versa. Smurf, I totally feel you, my team uses a few inaccurate moves as well and they seem to be missing a lot more than they should. For example, Moltres missed Fire Blast 5 times in a row against a Venusaur while it Sludge Bombed me to death =/. But I'm sure you'll get your rating up before the deadline.
- Status