• Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!

Whats a Hack and What Isn't

Actually the quick hatch doesn't leave any visible marks on the pokes it was used on I just merely stated that no matter what the poke was still exposed to a third party program irregardless whether you can actually check if it was indeed exposed. Do you get me? But as far as I know no it doesn't affect the pokemon in any way I just stated that because some people don't like an AR to ever touch their pokemon(they are in the minority but still).
 
Yeah...as I've said, I'd probably turn down an offer on a quick step hatched Pokemon, but I don't think the Pokemon should be considered hacked either.
 
@The Rider: Then Quick Hatch and Egg Check are kinda the same. You'll still indirectly expose the egg to the pokesav the same way as you indrectly exposed it to the AR when using the quick hatch cheat.
 
Not trying to be protective or anything but as the card is only read and nothing is saved then nothing can have been changed (sans perhaps if nintendo put some scammy device that noted that the card had been read which couldn't affect the individual pokemon either) which while fast hatching actually changes a game variable.
 
gabriel said:
@The Rider: Then Quick Hatch and Egg Check are kinda the same. You'll still indirectly expose the egg to the pokesav the same way as you indrectly exposed it to the AR when using the quick hatch cheat.
Click to expand...

wrong you see you can copy you save file from your flashcart to your computer without ever overwriting the save file you have on your flashcart. In that sense you have two separate save files so you check the eggs on the save file on your comp then write down on a piece of paper the eggs that are decent enough then hatch them on your save in your flashcart
 
negator, where did you bring upt he subject of pAC lol? pAC is pika's Anti Cheat program. We're talking about carts to upload stuff, etc.
 
So, if that's how it works, you got a point. But they're still similar.

On both methods parents and children won't be directly hacked or touched in any way, and their purpose is to make breeding easier and less tiring, tough it'll still be hard.

Which should be clear is that either quick hatched or egg checked pogeys are still legit. It's just a matter of opinion if you'll accept such pokemon on a trade. I personally don't care, because, as long as the pokemon is legit, I don't care how did you get it.

It'd be great if more people post, it looks like it's a me, The Rider, PoD and Yoko's conversation >_>
 
I dont own hacking devices, but if someone told me that their pokes had hacked parents or are quick hatched i would trade them as legits, this its also true if someone tried to trade me a sem-legit arceus, etc...
 
Hacking a Pokemon with 31 all (except possibly some 30s for Hidden Power) is just smarter than using the 6 steps egg hatch thing or whatever; it's not any more hacked.

Your only fooling yourself if you try to say "Oh, the quick hatch is just saving me time to get what I was going to get anyway" without applying that same logic to setting your Pokemon to 31 all IVs. If you breed / catch for long enough, you will, eventually, get 31 all. So really, all your doing is speeding up the process. It's something you would have gotten, anyway.
 
Zero.EXE said:
I would say that that's ok since you actually caught those Pokemon before. (Btw, what happened to the 2 originals then?)

I personally don't like hacked parents though. It's been taking like 2 months already to breed for a stupid 25+/x/20+/31/31/31 HP Ice Bulbasaur. It's not fair for hackers to be able to make like 2 31/31/31/31/31/31 parents (or whatever needed for HP Ice) in like 5 seconds when it takes normally like a few days to get good parents. >_>
Click to expand...

If you think it's so unfair, get an AR and do it yourself. If you don't believe in that sort of thing, then don't. It's not really a matter of fairness, you're just choosing not to hack.
Also, probably the only way the child could be considered hacked because the parents are hacked (for the purpose of events and such) is if the parents had some unobtainable IVs, like 32/32/32/32/32/32.
 
Obi said:
Hacking a Pokemon with 31 all (except possibly some 30s for Hidden Power) is just smarter than using the 6 steps egg hatch thing or whatever; it's not any more hacked.

Your only fooling yourself if you try to say "Oh, the quick hatch is just saving me time to get what I was going to get anyway" without applying that same logic to setting your Pokemon to 31 all IVs. If you breed / catch for long enough, you will, eventually, get 31 all. So really, all your doing is speeding up the process. It's something you would have gotten, anyway.
Click to expand...

I don't think so because that way you're increasing your chance of getting good IVs much more than any quick hatch would. Also, you're hacking the parents, and the child may be considered hacked too if tested.

When quick hatching/egg checking, both parents and children are legit, so it's just a matter of personal of personal opinion if you'd take a quick hatched/egg checked, because they're legit.
 
Well, if you didn't touch the pokemon in any way, and nobody can say it was checked/quick hatch, it IS legit.

If you're saying it isn't, then cloned pokemon aren't legit either. They were touched by an AR, but the AR didn't changed any IV or any data, just like the quick hatched/checked ones.
 
Yoko Rains said:
Is this Considered a Hack or not?​





Yes, I've decided to make this thread to inform everyone of my opinion on the matter. I've seen the question above pop up a lot. I've seen bunches of people asking "does hacking this make this hacked" etc, and I've decided to put up my view-point of the situation, as well as give good reasons why.

I have no clue where this would belong, so decided to post it here.

I would also like to see your own opinions up. Well, here goes:



Using Hacked Parents: This, IMO is just as bad as hacking the Pokemon itself. You may argue that "I still went through the process of breeding the Pokemon", but that argument just won't be registered as valid. You have an unfair advantage over someone who does it fairly. Having a godly parent highly effects how the offspring will turn out. So hacking yourself a godly parent IMO would be considered an illegit Pokemon in my view. It is just an attempt at being clever at getting around the fact that you didn't hack the Pokemon itself.

What if you hacked the parent, but you only hacked that it appears in the wild, without touching its stats (Like say, for Pokedex completion purposes). Meaning statwise, the Pokemon is legit. Would offspring of that be considered legit?

Hacking Events/Re-triggering Events: An example of hacking an event, is for example, the Lugia island event. If you didn't attend the live event itself, you have no other way of obtaining the ticket (and getting to Lugia) except by hacking the ticket into your game. I think that this is completely legit. You might argue "Oh, but he hacked the item", but he still has the same chance of getting a good or bad one, unlike hacking a parent. Hacking a parent is increasing your chance, while hacking an event is just giving you a chance. By hacking the event, you're just giving yourself access to the event, not giving yourself a higher chance of getting godly IV's. Therefore, I think hacking/re-triggering events still allows the Pokemon to be 100% legitimate.

Agree 100%

Quick hatch trick/step reduction: This trick basically cuts down the number of steps you have to take to hatch an egg from thousands to almost nothing (6, IIRC). This, in my opinion, does not ruin legitimacy. Yes, you are speeding up a process that would otherwise take much, much longer, but you are doing nothing more than speeding up the inevitable. You're going to get those eggs, whether you get them fast or slow. Yes, this indeed does give you an advantage over others. Though I don't think using this trick ruins legitimacy, I still think you should inform anyone you're trading with that you used this method to hatch your egg. Due to such repetitive controversy about this issue, let me clarify this in bold. This is ok IF the person you're trading with approves. I would personally not take a Pokemon quick hatched, just saying this for others sake.

I don't see why the recipitent needs approval. I mean, if the egg would've hatched anyway, what's the difference?

Putting weird/not normal moves on a Pokemon: An example of this would be putting WonderGuard, an ability only available to Shedinja, to Spiritomb, for example. Giving that ability to a Spiritomb would make it practically invincible, as no attack can hit it super-effectively. Therefore, the only way to take something like this down is via status inflicter's, like Toxic, or Will-O-Wisp. Therefore, I don't think its alright to hack moves onto Pokemon that would normally be unable of learning them.

In total agreement here.

Hacking moves onto a Pokemon period: Forgot to give your Bold Feebas Hypnosis as an Egg Move? No worries, lets just hack it onto it using our trusty AR! I don't think thats right. I personally think that hacking moves onto Pokemon is very lame. I mean, why not breed it onto it yourself? Personally, I don't think that hacking moves onto Pokemon (even if they can learn them) is alright.

What if you DID breed the Feebas with Hypnosis, evolve it, then accidentially make it forget it for a worthless move? Since the move maniac doesn't reteach forgotten egg moves, would hacking Hypnosis BACK onto the Milotic be OK, since it knew hypnosis in the first place?

Well, those are all the common hacks I could think of. If theres anything else, remind me of it people, and I will write down what I personally think about it. Remember, this is just my opinion!
Click to expand...

My comments in bold and italics.
 
And I can safely say every single trader on Smogon has cloned.

And as for the guy above me, usually when people hack parents, they hack the parent and give it good IV's, not just make it appear in the wild.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top