I’m not really sure what you’re asking. Soul Heart specifically triggers when a Pokemon faints; what do switchins have to do with it? When is Soul Heart triggering, and how? When are Pokémon fainting for Soul Heart to trigger?
-
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.
Research Scarlet & Violet Battle Mechanics Research
- Thread starter Marty
- Start date
I'm sorry, let me explain better.
I'm not testing Soul Heart—I'm testing Mirror Herb. Mirror Herb activates after most switch-in effects have occurred. For example, if an Intimidate Pokémon enters the field and lowers the Attack of two Pokémon with Defiant, both Defiant abilities will activate first (each gaining +2 Attack), and then Mirror Herb will trigger, copying the stat changes—resulting in +4 Attack.
What I'm asking is: if a Pokémon faints during the switch-in effects, does Mirror Herb activate earlier, or does it still wait until all effects have resolved?
Last edited:
Hi. According to Bulbapedia, prior to Gen 8, -ate abilities override Electrify. This is currently implemented incorrectly on PS, and I'm working on fixing it. My question is: in SM, do Normalize and Liquid Voice also override Electrify?
Last edited:
Re: move type changes, this is how the games work from Gen 5 to present:
- set the move type to its type in the move data, and allow this value to be overwritten ONCE
- check Electrify, which overwrites the move type with Electric
- check every other move type change event handler that exists (except Ion Deluge) (move events always run before Ability events), overwriting the move type only if Electrify didn't already change it
- again, allow the move type to be overwritten ONCE
- check Ion Deluge, which overwrites the move type with Electric if it's Normal
There are zero differences in the order of the event flow described above between Gen 5 and Gen 9. So in reality Electrify happens first, and Normalize happens after Hidden Power/Judgment/Natural Gift/whatever other move. But it doesn't matter what happens after because the type already changed and further event calls other than Ion Deluge are simply locked out from changing a move's type again.
I am so tired of being gaslit by Bulbapedia to re-research things I tested firsthand... Someone very clearly read my descriptions for Pixilate-like effects "This effect comes after other effects that change a move's type, but before Ion Deluge and Electrify's effects." and without testing it themselves or understanding the sentence whatsoever, wrote "overrides Ion Deluge and Electrify" on all the Bulbapedia pages, which obviously completely changes the meaning. Bulbapedia is not reliable for battle mechanics, and nobody should be reading it, or linking it in research or bug reports, or attempting to implement anything written there unless it's been independently verified by someone on Smogon.
Wait, gen 5? But the only one of those that existed in gen 5 was Normalize. Electrify and Ion Deluge are gen 6 moves, as are the ates aside from Galvanize. Wouldn't the gen 5 one just be a check for Normalize?
In the quoted post, Marty outright stated some examples of moves that naturally can have a type change event (Hidden Power/Judgment/Natural Gift), note that there are more like Techno Blast and Weather Ball, which existed in Gen 5. This is why the specification that move events run before ability events is relevant even in Gen 5, because it handles the Normalize case in Gen 5 and -ate cases later on. This specific example is clear to see in Gen 5, where none of the moves that change type are affected by Normalize.
While the Electrify and Ion Deluge checks aren't relevant in Gen 5 (much like how a check for an event on Multi Attack wouldn't happen in Gen 6 and the -ate checks don't happen in Gen 5 either), their exact placement was determined later on. Saying that the event flow Marty listed out is the case for Gens 5-9 is accurate with the (implied) caveat that checks for things that don't exist yet don't happen, rather than having to create several different charts to address additions and removals.
Forgive me if I'm overstepping my boundaries here.
While I understand your frustration with whoever misinterpreted your initial research and put that incorrect conclusion as fact on Bulbapedia, I doubt the edit was done in bad faith, and I don't feel that the user who asked about move type change priority was trying to undermine your previous research. If anything, if I'm reading the post edit correctly, they took the time to look for a related post after asking the question, implying that they did try to look for information here, but wanted confirmation that your explanation for games two generations ago was still how it functions, despite what Bulbapedia claims.
I agree that Bulbapedia shouldn't be taken as a conclusive source for battle mechanics, particularly in extremely niche, mostly-only-applying-to-Hackmons cases like this one, but there have been multiple times where I've tried to look for move behavior on the main Smogon website, only to be disappointed by the succinct description. Bulbapedia's occasional lack of accuracy can be damning, but their move pages try to list as many relevant interactions as possible, and trying to list how said interactions change between generations is very convenient. I unfortunately do not have an example of Smogon's move pages lacking information I was looking for (I just know it's happened to me before).
Dismissing more casual information sources as never being completely trustworthy just kind of rubs me the wrong way (again, I still try to get my detailed battle info from Smogon first if it's available). If I'm not mistaken, it was Serebii who first had 2-layer Spikes damage as 1/6, not 3/16, and that had to be amended on Smogon and the battle simulators. I've also seen multiple instances where it's believed battle mechanics were understood, only to find out many years after the fact that a fairly major aspect of competitive play was simulated incorrectly. I don't think this happens as much now with VGC, though.
You are, but only because your post is entirely off-topic and not because I disagree with your points (which I do).
This would be a fair reading but you're missing context. Another developer pointed them to my post after they posted here and opened a pull request trying to change it on PS.
There's a link on every move page to a C&C thread so you can suggest improvements:
(Inadequate description? Let us know in this thread.)
It's not occasional; the way generational differences are presented on their pages is the source of the vast majority of actual misinformation, not to mention constant misunderstandings from people reporting sim bugs because it's so obtuse.
Surely it isn't controversial to say that lacking information while research is being done and descriptions are being (re)written is better than providing outright misinformation.
I'm specifically dismissing Bulbapedia. As a wiki, it trends towards being useless when anyone anywhere can submit edits that appear on their pages instantly, with no oversight. There are maybe two staff members I'm aware of who actually do their own research, but that certainly isn't enough to cover the volume of edits.
This is true, and I made those fixes myself because I did the research in all gens. If the only examples of this are from 2012 or before, I think we're doing pretty well with the "everything goes through a researcher" approach.
That is the point of these threads, after all.
Noted (and I understand the frustration from that).
Will use this if it comes up again.
I'm not involved in testing mechanics or ensuring accuracy like you are, so I'll take your word for it, but I don't think I've personally had many issues using Bulbapedia for general move info.
When I say something is missing from a Smogon move page it's with info that I know has been tested, and I'm checking Smogon first because I value accuracy. I really do wish I had an example because I don't really even remember what sort of data I was looking for.
I guess I usually see Serebii derided for its information more than Bulbapedia (though your point about it being a wiki is valid). Apologies for assuming it was a more general criticism.
There are some mechanics that DaWoblefet tested when DLC 1 was released, but certain interactions involving Transformation, Terastallization and Ogerpon have changed in DLC 2. I'd like to verify how these mechanics work now and if they work with Terapagos.
- If Ogerpon with Illusion Terastallizes, does the Illusion still end after activating Embody Aspect?
- What about Terapagos? (It probably doesn’t, since it doesn’t transform from baby Terapagos into Terapagos-Stellar, so it doesn't get a new ability)
- If Ogerpon transforms into something and then Terastallizes (which has been confirmed possible), does it still retain its original ability (e.g., Defiant)?
- What about baby Terapagos?
- What about Terapagos-Terastal?
Last edited:
Have there been any mechanic changes/fixes in the recent update? Or anymore movepool compatibility fixes?
This post was brought to my attention, so I figure I should probably respond to some of the issues raised here.
I have gone and updated the Pixilate, Refrigerate, and Aerliate pages on Bulbapedia to remove that incorrect information. (The Normalize and Galvanize pages didn't contain equivalent claims due to interacting with those moves slightly differently. The Electrify and Ion Deluge pages also did not contain similar claims.) I also reached out to the user who added that information, but they don't remember what their source was.
I agree, I've never been a huge fan of the way the generational differences are laid out, and I think they can often lead to confusion. While I will clean up specific cases when I think they're especially confusing, there's only so much that can be done within that page structure. And unfortunately alternate possible page structures also have issues. The approach Smogon uses (separate pages for the move in each generation, so the effect is described separately each time) is not really practical for the structure of Bulbapedia; however, I think even without repeating the entire effect description every generation, there are often ways that Bulbapedia's effect descriptions can be improved to be substantially clearer.
This is a reasonable criticism. I assume you're including me among those staff members who research game mechanics, and I definitely don't have the time to review every single edit made to a game mechanics section. There are certainly more people who research game mechanics, but not all of them are on the Bulbapedia staff, and not everyone who researches game mechanics is actively reviewing new edits made by other users (just expanding on existing sections with their own research).
From reading these posts, I certainly get the impression that you've decided that Bulbapedia is just not worth fixing — that it's so frequently wrong that there's no point trying to correct it. I don't expect you have any interest in editing the incorrect pages to fix them. However, could I ask that if you do come across explicitly incorrect information on Bulbapedia (or even just cases where the structure of pages has mislead someone about game mechanics), that you let Bulbapedia staff know so that it can be corrected? I'm perfectly happy if this is just in the form of you DMing me on Discord — a link to a post on the Smogon forums, pasting a snippet from a false bug report on Showdown, etc. is fine, as long as there's enough info there to work out what needs to be fixed. We could certainly set up a more formal communication channel between Bulbapedia staff and Showdown devs if you think that's worthwhile, but I'm hoping something as simple as just Discord DMs is enough to get started.
However, since that specific 2016 post has come up, I should raise an issue with it that I found in my own research.
There's one specific claim in the 2016 post that is inconsistent with my in-game research. Specifically, the post claims that if a type-changing move like Judgment/Weather Ball/Techno Blast (but not Chilan Berry Natural Gift) does not change type and remains a Normal-type move, that it can be affected by Pixilate/etc. From my in-game testing, this is untrue. From my testing, if a Pokémon with Pixilate uses Judgment (without a Plate), Weather Ball (without weather), or Techno Blast (without a Drive), the move will remain Normal-type, unaffected by Pixilate.
The claim was originally made regarding Generation 6, so I just tested in Pokémon X specifically (and did many years ago as well), and found that Normal-type Judgment/Weather Ball/Techno Blast used by a Pokémon with Pixilate remain Normal-type (just like Chilan Berry Natural Gift). (I'm sure I've tested this in Gen 7 as well as got the same result, but I only re-tested Gen 6 while writing this post.)
If I'm misunderstanding that post and my test results are consistent with what you were trying to explain in that post, please let me know.
Hi, thanks for your post!
Also, we probably shouldn't derail this thread any further before the mods come down on us ;-;
A suggestion that I would make to potentially increase the accuracy between Bulbapedia and Smogon/Showdown would be to follow specific forums here (if you don’t already), namely:
- This thread
- Past Gens Research Thread: https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/past-gens-research-thread.3506992/
- Bug Reports Forum: https://www.smogon.com/forums/forums/ps-bug-reports.876/
- (Optional) Pull Requests on the Pokémon Showdown server: https://github.com/smogon/pokemon-showdown/
Regarding this, the current PS implementation already follows what you just described. The reason I started looking into this in the first place was a bug report stating that Max Moves using Weather Ball, Multi-Attack, etc. do change type to match Pixilate, etc. After submitting a PR to address that bug, I began asking myself more questions about -ate abilities and eventually ended up on Bulbapedia.
Also, we probably shouldn't derail this thread any further before the mods come down on us ;-;
Last edited:
When a move changes its type to itself, does it count as the one attempt at changing type? For example, will Electrify on an Electric-type move cause Normalize to fail?
When a status move is bounced back with Magic Coat/Magic Bounce, or Snatched, does the move execution restart from the beginning, or go on from where it left off? If it is the former, is the move state reset (i.e. does any changes done to the move disappear upon re-execute), or is the current move attributes used? For example, will a Normalize T-wave against a Magic Coat/Snatch Pixilate user be Electric, Normal or Fairy type (the idea being that if the move is re-executed with the inherited Normal type, it might get another type-adjustment opportunity)?
The move state is completely reset when the status move is bounced back. (proof) This means that in the given scenario, the bounced Thunder Wave would be Electric-type. However, the bouncing Pokemon's ability can still change the type of the move before it is bounced back (for example, a Liquid Voice Pokemon bouncing a sound move would cause the move to become Water-type; proof)
At the risk of oversimplifying things to explain to friends, do I understand that a Bounced/Stolen move is essentially "recast" by the Bounce Mon as the user, as opposed to the original user but retargeted to themselves?
EX: I have a Prankster Sableye use WoW on a MB Hatterene. The WoW is treated as Hat's move and thus does not copy the Prankster flag (as opposed to being "Sabeleye targets Sableye" where its Dark typing would null its own Prankster move)?
From my understanding of the game's mechanics, that is correct. Here is a link for what happens when Prankster moves are bounced back onto a Dark-type.