-
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.
Smogon Simple Questions Thread
- Thread starter Quite Quiet
- Start date
sounds like you wan this maybe https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/sv-ou-post-home-viability-ranking-thread.3723863/
This is super useful, thank you!
as someone said above if you regularly clear out your cookies then that's probably it, but also if you're using showdown on a different device then that's probably the issue as teams are stored on the device, not your account
Does unaware ignore boosts from Battle Bond Greninja?
Yes. It ignores anything that is in the sim as "+1 Attack / SpDef etc. etc.".
Depends on which battle bond, but if it is the non-transformation one, unaware does ignore those boosts, as they are visible boosts.
Points are a forum feature of Xenforo that we don’t use - administrators have the ability to give out Points though, and occasionally for fun will
Yes, teams are saved in browser cookies so anything that clears those will clear your teams.
see post above mine, but also if you use showdown on a different device (say you usually use it on your computer, but sometimes use it on your phone instead) that could also be the issue since teams are saved to browser cookies which are specific to the device
ah yes that makes sense, it started happening when i started playing on my phone. do i have to stop playing on other devices or is there another way to circumvent this problem?
you would have to port all of your teams manually to your phone unfortunately
Like Melt Gibson said, you can import teams to text, save them in a Google Doc or something, and open it on your phone, copy it, and get your teams. There's no other way though, unfortunately.
I honestly don't mean for this to come across as criticism or at all accusatory of anyone, but I was wondering, why were many of the Smogon dex entries so sparse for SS? I feel like Smogon's dex is easily one of the farthest reaching and potentially most important aspects of the site, in regard to how influential it is across the larger Pokemon fanbase; maybe I'm biased, but speaking from personal experience, I can remember being a young kid and often referring to Smogon's dex while planning my playthroughs throughout the games, without knowing anything about Smogon's forums, and I don't imagine that is an uncommon occurrence. While up through SM the dex entries seem pretty comprehensive and detailed for essentially all of the relevant mons in a tier (although the formatting of SM Ubers entries bothers me a little, the information is still good), the same can't be said for SS, or at least SS OU. Unless I'm misremembering, I believe that while SS was the current gen, the dex entries took a while to get going, which resulted in using the calc tending to be a little more cumbersome as well, but that's understandable for any newer generation. However, if you look at some of the dex entries now, they're still pretty incomplete. Melmetal is a top 5 mon in SS OU based on the current viability rankings but there aren't any descriptions for any of its sets in Melmetal's SS OU dex entry. Tapu Lele is an A+ mon but it also doesn't have any descriptions in its dex entry. I'm not sure if this is still the case, but Specially Defensive Landorus-Therian was the flagship set for the best mon in the tier, but there also isn't any elaboration on that set in Lando's dex entry either. I'm sure there are other examples as well, but those were three of the most prominent that I found.
Again, I don't want to come across as ungrateful or disparaging at all, since I understand that a ton of work (which is also obviously all volunteer work) goes into making the dex entries, and the SS OU dex does appear to be more complete than it use to be. It also seems to me like many of the SS tiers besides OU have more thoroughly completed dex entires, although I didn't really play many non-OU tiers in SS so I can't say that with complete certainty. Really, I'm just curious as to if anything happened with the dex entries in SS OU and if there are any plans on expanding some of the dex entries still? I understand that SS OU isn't a terribly well regarded or highly played tier, especially now that it is no longer the current gen, so that may hurt the likelihood of the dex being revisited as well. Also, I'm not going to raise similar questions about the SV OU dex at this point, since obviously its a new generation that is still undergoing major developments/has DLC looming, but I'd be curious as well if anyone had any input on how the creation of the SV OU dex appears to be going or how it projects out to be.
Again, I don't want to come across as ungrateful or disparaging at all, since I understand that a ton of work (which is also obviously all volunteer work) goes into making the dex entries, and the SS OU dex does appear to be more complete than it use to be. It also seems to me like many of the SS tiers besides OU have more thoroughly completed dex entires, although I didn't really play many non-OU tiers in SS so I can't say that with complete certainty. Really, I'm just curious as to if anything happened with the dex entries in SS OU and if there are any plans on expanding some of the dex entries still? I understand that SS OU isn't a terribly well regarded or highly played tier, especially now that it is no longer the current gen, so that may hurt the likelihood of the dex being revisited as well. Also, I'm not going to raise similar questions about the SV OU dex at this point, since obviously its a new generation that is still undergoing major developments/has DLC looming, but I'd be curious as well if anyone had any input on how the creation of the SV OU dex appears to be going or how it projects out to be.
Last edited:
lol
lmao, even.
OK enough shitting on the section I run. The tl;dr is that SS OU C&C was just in a bad spot for a real long time where good players wanted other good players to write analyses and check them for errors without wanting to engage themselves. Couple this elitist attitude with a lack of volunteers at the time AND the fact that staff at the time didn't push hard enough and you alternate between too many cooks in the kitchen or 0 cooks.
Lol, sorry if I came across poorly regarding the SM Ubers entries. I just remembered that they were different because they were bulleted, but obviously that isn’t a problem and I do truly appreciate all of the work that’s gone into them and all of the other dex entries; again, the dex feels in some ways to me like the best and most important part of Smogon. And thank you for the information regarding what happened with the SS OU entries!
Why do Smogon tournaments (official and unofficial) generally use a week to week schedule? Wouldn't things like the chatroom tours work better on average, esp. for certain formats?
Less ways to cheat, less time to scout, don't need to TO every day, and makes the spectator experience a lot easier. I've been lurking threads for different tournaments and it feels like 1/3rd matches are settled by activity, something that never happens when everyone is on board to play the entire tournament at a certain time, you only have to be available at one time block and you're good and as a TO there are way less moral decisions (especially subjective) you have to make.
For some tournaments, such as OU, there is an element of "How does the meta evolve each week?" but also tournaments such as Random Battles tournaments on forum I've seen also do this, and that has no prepping, or making a team, and basically no evolving format outside of the occasional changes to sets, or new Pokemon drops.
Less ways to cheat, less time to scout, don't need to TO every day, and makes the spectator experience a lot easier. I've been lurking threads for different tournaments and it feels like 1/3rd matches are settled by activity, something that never happens when everyone is on board to play the entire tournament at a certain time, you only have to be available at one time block and you're good and as a TO there are way less moral decisions (especially subjective) you have to make.
For some tournaments, such as OU, there is an element of "How does the meta evolve each week?" but also tournaments such as Random Battles tournaments on forum I've seen also do this, and that has no prepping, or making a team, and basically no evolving format outside of the occasional changes to sets, or new Pokemon drops.
A week-to-week schedule allows people who have busy lives to play tournaments, as well as being more accessible for those who live in varying timezones (you would hard pressed to see Australians participate in a 5pm EDT tournament, as seen with Smogon Tour).
Speaking on behalf of random battles, the reason all major tournaments are run on a weekly schedule on forums is for inclusivity. Top random battles players come from all around the world, so timezones make a live event have outright a lower standard of gameplay because many top players would be unable to attend, and also include lots of ages (but mainly older) which would further restrict this as people have real life responsibilities that restrict the time they can be available for. High level gameplay also takes a long time -- the average set takes at minimum 30 minutes and is usually more like 40-50 -- meaning that a live tournament of BO3 sets would be a whole-day event since there are many rounds. Not only does this limit inclusivity further, but actually sounds way less fun and enjoyable, and more tiring, to play in, which would further limit the competivity of the tournament.
I would imagine most of these reasons also apply to teambuilt formats.
WRT lots of matches being settled by activity, live tournaments wouldn't actually fix this because people will sign up to the tournaments and not attend. It is likelier to also have more dropouts and activity calls in later rounds, as lots of people will sign up to the tournament to play a few games while always intending to go to sleep part-way through, or actual emergencies could happen which require their attention more urgently than a for-fun tournament does. Live tournaments are harmful to games getting done, not beneficial. If people can't play a tournament set in a week, they're probably not committed enough to attend a live tournament and see it through. Scheduling isn't difficult.
I'd like to pick at your brain some more with more questions, if you don't mind; If you feel this is too argumentative, feel free to tell me and I will delete this post:
A lot of tournaments in most competitive videogames consider maintaining mental and being able to play a lot at a given time to be a serious competitive element to their games, and players that cannot play for hours without losing their luster are docked points by most people for this. VGC tournaments in-person for instance are all a long day affair, and in a lot of player's accounts of how they did, their mental throughout the day as a competitor is a big element of their performance.
For a personal example, I play competitive Splatoon, a 4v4 shooter. Even losing the tournament, it will likely take hours for our run as a team to finish. Keeping mental and not getting tired throughout the stretches of pools, loser's bracket, winners etc. is considered a big strength as a player, and actively coveted.
I can see the point of timezones though, especially as a player who has been unable to play in certain teams or events because of timezone conflicts. But as I mentioned, it seems that Smogon has a big issue with activity wins/losses? There is a Policy Review thread active about it, currently.
What makes Smogon tend to not care for this element in competitive tournaments?
I edited my post after posting and it covers some of this haha but :P
I think the reason just comes down to that Smogon prioritises skill at the game over any other factor. We still have the mental fortitude testing -- particularly as in many tournaments (and most rands tournaments) later rounds in single elim will become best of 5, and in team tournaments the main formats will have a best of 5 slot. Best of 3 is, in itself, a pretty time-consuming and tiring affair sometimes.
I don't actually think players in other tournaments perceive being able to play a lot on one big event day as an element of skill at the game. They do consider it an element of being good at that game competitively, because the only way for those games' events to run are as major in-person events. But that's not game skill, and shouldn't be misconstrued as such. If someone in a video game that usually runs in-person events had a 100% winrate against the best players in the world, but only played 1 series a day, no one would claim they were bad at the game. They'd recognise their skill while also understanding that the tournament structure is bad for them. EDIT: Also yeah it doesn't only refer to in-person; Splatoon and Pokémon Unite and such are online event days because you have to arrange to all play together as a team anyway. Pokémon doesn't have that problem either.
So Smogon doesn't run major live tournaments simply for the reason that it doesn't have to. Having the stamina to play for 10 hours a day isn't something that makes you better at the game Pokémon. It would make you better at 10 hour in-person Pokémon tournaments, but that's the only thing it would make you better at.
The activity wins thread in Tournament Policy isn't actually about activity wins or losses, really. It's about decorum regarding emergencies. It's kind of a stupid thread IMO because emergencies that happen 30 seconds or even during a series are still valid. If your house sets on fire in the finals of OST you shouldn't lose because you timed out in the game while putting it out. Pokémon has lots of activity wins and losses in the first round, and then a few hold-overs in the second round, of major tournaments. After that it dwindles a lot, and so in large tournaments like random battles usually has, activity wins and losses are basically not a thing from round 4 or on, and at that point there's still a huge number of players in it. Those players get to have fun and not be playing 9 hours into the tournament by the time they get to finals, which lets them show off their skill. I just have no idea why it would be desirable for that not to be the case when it doesn't have to be.
Why make the player experience worse just to test which players can best deal with it being worse?