I mean the easy alternative is simply to create a spreadsheet formatted appropriately and pop it in the Hall op on place of the current one. Still accomplishes your goal methinks
-
The leader of this forum is LouisCyphre. The moderators of this forum are JJayyFeather, Mowtom, nightblitz42, and TMan87.
-
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.
Data ASB Feedback & Game Issues Thread - Mk III
- Thread starter Dogfish44
- Start date
- Status
*sigh*
Reffing RNG Policy:
In the event that you manage to fudge up your rolls (For instance, rolling Crit vs Shell Armour, or by forgetting to roll a hit), then MAKE A NEW ROLL FOR EACH INSTANCE. Do not move any RNG rolls from the spot in which they were originally posted.
Since it's commonly related, whenever you ref, please post each RNG roll next to what was rolled for, and not just in a single line at the top - and ideally, trim the single line so it only shows all rolls used. This single-line-at-top also oftn gives a false impression that rolls would cascade, when they do not. It's also something I've seen which has lead to incredibly lazy reffings.
Reffing RNG Policy:
In the event that you manage to fudge up your rolls (For instance, rolling Crit vs Shell Armour, or by forgetting to roll a hit), then MAKE A NEW ROLL FOR EACH INSTANCE. Do not move any RNG rolls from the spot in which they were originally posted.
Since it's commonly related, whenever you ref, please post each RNG roll next to what was rolled for, and not just in a single line at the top - and ideally, trim the single line so it only shows all rolls used. This single-line-at-top also oftn gives a false impression that rolls would cascade, when they do not. It's also something I've seen which has lead to incredibly lazy reffings.
This is fine.
This is acceptable.
This is more annoying than anything, and contributes to several misconceptions.
This will make me murder you, and if I see it when approving I will veto the approval.
And I will find a way to permaban you if I see this
This is acceptable.
This is more annoying than anything, and contributes to several misconceptions.
This will make me murder you, and if I see it when approving I will veto the approval.
And I will find a way to permaban you if I see this
Last edited:
I will give every person in Scotland a shovel, tell them it's to bury Thatcher, and personally deliver you to Satan himself.
---
Calculations should be shown clearly, and in long-form. The BAP should be shown as the BAP in the NDA, modifications must be clearly shown, as must STAB, Rank Difference, etc.
---
Calculations should be shown clearly, and in long-form. The BAP should be shown as the BAP in the NDA, modifications must be clearly shown, as must STAB, Rank Difference, etc.
I get why you want consistency and don't want people to cascade rolls if they havent posted a list of rolls, but I think we shouldn't discourage people from posting "@rolls" from IRC. Not that I think public rolls should be mandatory, but imo they are best practice. That's a separate topic of discussion though.
I also think it makes sense to cascade rolls if a line of them has been posted, although I can understand why not everyone would agree with that view. But to me, that line of rolls really represents what should happen for the round. I also think it defeats part of the purpose of posting rolls like that if you don't cascade.
Perhaps have it mandated/suggested that:
a) If you have posted a line of rolls, you should cascade in the case of errors.
b) If you did not post a line of rolls, definitely don't cascade errors because that's shady af.
I also think it makes sense to cascade rolls if a line of them has been posted, although I can understand why not everyone would agree with that view. But to me, that line of rolls really represents what should happen for the round. I also think it defeats part of the purpose of posting rolls like that if you don't cascade.
Perhaps have it mandated/suggested that:
a) If you have posted a line of rolls, you should cascade in the case of errors.
b) If you did not post a line of rolls, definitely don't cascade errors because that's shady af.
Can we change Iron Tail from CT: Passive to CT: Elemental? It's an important coverage move for lots of mons now thanks to Fairies and the fact that it can't be combined with Giga Impact to make a Steel typed move is a little silly IMO.
How does Eject Button's dodging react to spread moves like Rock Slide and Earthquake?
Do they react the same way as the Dodge command reacts?
Do they react the same way as the Dodge command reacts?
It should avoid those moves entirely irrespective of whether you use dodge or not.
Though the description saying "Be guaranteed a successful dodge against the opposing Pokemon's next action" is just... ergh why can we not just say "Be guaranteed to avoid the opposing Pokemon's next action" as it has much better meaning and avoids the confusion that you have pointed out though i could just edit the nda now but that is kinda bad form.
Unless of course for some reason, Eject Button is supposed to apply to Dodge, in which case... ._.
Before anyone comes and yells at me: i know this wont affect ongoing matches.
Fly Bounce and Sky drop put you into the same state of being, and should be subbable for in 1 clause via "IF opponent is in the air" or something similar.
They both make you take extra damage from thunder/hurricane/etc, get the move cancelled if you get hit by smack down, make you take fall damage from smack down/gravity, etc etc.
Also, I just asked and you can sub for IF thunder would have 22 BAP, THEN z, arguably is basically a rewording of the same statement.
Fly Bounce and Sky drop put you into the same state of being, and should be subbable for in 1 clause via "IF opponent is in the air" or something similar.
They both make you take extra damage from thunder/hurricane/etc, get the move cancelled if you get hit by smack down, make you take fall damage from smack down/gravity, etc etc.
Also, I just asked and you can sub for IF thunder would have 22 BAP, THEN z, arguably is basically a rewording of the same statement.
With regard to decay of Taunt, Torment, Imprison, Light Screen/Reflect, and other things:
Meanwhile, Taunt and Torment last for 6a regardless of speed, which is how it is normally reffed.
Can we decide on a clarification for when various effects decay and how long they last? If we want to keep the status quo and let slow Pokemon get screwed over when using Imprison or dual screens, fine, but we should make it explicit. Or, we can leave the system as is. Or maybe some other thing I haven't thought of yet.
According to this, Imprison, Light Screen, and Reflect should all decay after the user acts on any given action. This specifically means all should last for 5 actions, regardless of the speed of the user (it is used, status is gained for 6a, turn immediately ends, status drops to 5a). This is not how I have ever seen it reffed, with each of those decaying at the end of the action, effectively letting them last for 6a iff the user is faster.Handbook said:
Meanwhile, Taunt and Torment last for 6a regardless of speed, which is how it is normally reffed.
Can we decide on a clarification for when various effects decay and how long they last? If we want to keep the status quo and let slow Pokemon get screwed over when using Imprison or dual screens, fine, but we should make it explicit. Or, we can leave the system as is. Or maybe some other thing I haven't thought of yet.
Light Screen and Reflect say "the effect lasts for six actions after use," which I took to mean that the counter doesn't drop the action it is used, but drops at the end of the user's turn every action after that. Not sure about Imprison, though.
Screens are basically in effect for 6 actions worth of opponents attacks. If you act first then it will decay at the end of the current round after the opponent attacks. If you act second, it will decay at the end of the next round, after the opponent attacks.
Nice and simple. Anything contrary to that is outdated, unintended stuff that was written poorly and has been carried over for years; aka stuff that literally no one follows regardless.
Nice and simple. Anything contrary to that is outdated, unintended stuff that was written poorly and has been carried over for years; aka stuff that literally no one follows regardless.
Just to note that I just made a thread for proposals like these so if you want to do this, go there. We will probably accept this (neither of us have displayed any objections to it on IRC) at any rate but yeah.
Regarding Sky Drop and Damaging Evasive Move Clause: The reason behind Sky Drop not being included lies in its discrepancy between battle formats. In Singles, it functions the same as a Sky Attack most of the time, but in Multiples it's redirecting effect on its target alongside a evasive phase against non-targeted opponents buffs it through the roof. And yet, the inconsistency means it cannot be lumped into the move clause alongside Dig and co.
So I'm proposing that "Sky Drop OR Damaging Evasive moves" are allowed as a single Move Clause the way we allow "Protective/Evasive moves". If you think this is not a non-issue and deserves at least a Discussion thread, please like the post.
Thank you, and have a nice day.
So I'm proposing that "Sky Drop OR Damaging Evasive moves" are allowed as a single Move Clause the way we allow "Protective/Evasive moves". If you think this is not a non-issue and deserves at least a Discussion thread, please like the post.
Thank you, and have a nice day.
Sky Drop functionally is not an evasive move. If you pick up an opponent that opponent is hitting you with a move. It's nonsensical to include it with Fly et al.
In doubles/triples, it serves as an evasive move wrt to the other mons. Also the mon you pick up cant hit your own allies.
meaning, it has an entirely different effect from fly/bounce/etc.
meaning, it should not be included in the sub clause
Stop trying to kill sky drop. It already has been nerfed on two different occasions (only allowing single-target moves against the dropper -> allowing single target, self-target, and field effect moves -> also allowing spread moves and automatically targetting the dropper).
meaning, it should not be included in the sub clause
Stop trying to kill sky drop. It already has been nerfed on two different occasions (only allowing single-target moves against the dropper -> allowing single target, self-target, and field effect moves -> also allowing spread moves and automatically targetting the dropper).
Completely irrelevant. It's interaction to the mon it isn't targetting does not change the function of the move. During the course of it's action at no point is it evading the attacks of the mon it is targeting QED it cannot be classed as damaging evasive.
edit: also what Leethoof said
What's the difference between subbing for "airborne" to include sky drop and subbing for Thunder having 22 bap?
3:19 PM<Rainman> Exclaimer: we have not enforced the "maintain contact" of any trapping moves in like 2 years
3:20 PM<Exclaimer> then why is it still there? ._.
3:20 PM<FortColors> good question
3:20 PM<Rainman> Because we're too lazy to change it
Can we edit this out so I don't have to debate about how Sand Tomb works?
3:20 PM<Exclaimer> then why is it still there? ._.
3:20 PM<FortColors> good question
3:20 PM<Rainman> Because we're too lazy to change it
Can we edit this out so I don't have to debate about how Sand Tomb works?
I'm a bit unclear: You're saying that screens should last for 6a, regardless of the speed of the user? I agree that that makes the most sense, but is neither how it is currently written or usually reffed.
No. They didn't let me go rogue when I had editing powers, it won't happen now that I don't have editing powers.
It might not be how it's currently written but it is always how it's reffed. Every time someone has tried to say "you acted last so your screens only affect me for 5 turns because it decays" thye get shouted down and told "no, that's retarded".
As you can see by the above convo on trapping moves, it's simply an outdated discrepancy from very old text.
Alright since nobody went to the handbook for this one about Screens, here ya go:
This is found under the End of Turn section in the handbook.Handbook said:
technician said:
Question: how does technician interact with stuff like
Fake out + doubleslap, where each hit on the multihit is below 6 but the whole combo is above 6
pin missile ^2, where the combo is obviously above 6 bap but the original move is also above 6 bap
doubleslap ^2, where the same applies, BUT each hit (even when combo'd) is under 6 bap, so what does "initial hit" refer to?
IRC seems to be split between "initial hit means 1st hit of the multihit" and "i have no idea whatsoever" and "the end bap is what counts, regardless of if its multihit or not"
However, I find the latter to be strange since non-combo'd BAP is already above 6 ._.
Last edited:
- Status