-
The moderators of this forum are the Pokémon Showdown! Administrators.
-
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.
-
View the suggestions ordered by popularity here.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Rejected Be able to dexsearch Pokemon by their category
- Thread starter Low-Key
- Start date
- Status
This isn’t useful for team building or anything at all and actively hinders the only rooms on the site that I know actually use category names (aka the game rooms that use them as questions/puzzles). This would also, to my knowledge, be a pain to implement since afaik ps doesn’t have category names atm. Overall this feels like it’s definitely not worth the effort.
Respectfully, I ask you reconsider your opinion, with the perspective of the trivia room (for instance) in mind: category questions are a staple way to get new users to participate in our room (as for their ease and accessibility).
Making the category information accessible would make running the flow of the room more pedantic and cumbersome, for a feature with negligible competitive gain or usage.
I'd sooner have the holdable items with no in-battle effects be searchable than have categories searchable.
Thanks, Sincerely; Fmaj7
Making the category information accessible would make running the flow of the room more pedantic and cumbersome, for a feature with negligible competitive gain or usage.
I'd sooner have the holdable items with no in-battle effects be searchable than have categories searchable.
Thanks, Sincerely; Fmaj7
I'll do my best to speak for Game Corner on this one. Implementing this would substantially worsen the quality of at least two of our games (SSS and BCC along with any others that use them as minigames) that are centered around category names and turns a knowledge based game into one that relies only on how fast you can /dt a category. I can't imagine a good use for this in any scenario to be honest, especially on a battle simulator. What good will /dt Gleam Eyes = Luxray provide for the standard PS! user? If you're actually considering adding it simply because the information is available, kindly consider the few game rooms who will be affected.
Respectfully, tidal otter
Respectfully, tidal otter
Prefacing it with the notion that categories are useless in battle, knowing that Sylveon is the Intertwining Pokemon doesn't help any user in battle, and therefore would be cosmetic information, for the most part. I don't mind it in teambuilder for that reason.
As far as dexsearch goes, those are mostly angled at covering sets of Pokemon that share a trait like "Pokemon that are weak to fire" or "Pokemon that learn a recovery move" rather than a one-one matching.
Out of the 652 categories in existence, 475 are one-one, meaning that for 475 of these if implemented, you'd receive a single Pokémon.
Apart from this, a lot of these share their names with existing parameters. For example, Drednaw is the Bite Pokemon, along with Poochyena and Mightyena. But if you implement categories, there's always the element of confusion that can stem from it. You'd have to implement a specific command in high probability like "category = " to do so.
Lastly, category names are obscure in relation to the Pokemon they represent, it doesn't make sense to make the obscure part the keyword to search. You'd rather find for: given the Pokemon - figure out what category name it has, which means it's not a suitable ds term in general.
If implemented, it's likely to cause additional clutter in the already confusing dexsearch help document, so it's counterproductive to do so.
As far as dexsearch goes, those are mostly angled at covering sets of Pokemon that share a trait like "Pokemon that are weak to fire" or "Pokemon that learn a recovery move" rather than a one-one matching.
Out of the 652 categories in existence, 475 are one-one, meaning that for 475 of these if implemented, you'd receive a single Pokémon.
Apart from this, a lot of these share their names with existing parameters. For example, Drednaw is the Bite Pokemon, along with Poochyena and Mightyena. But if you implement categories, there's always the element of confusion that can stem from it. You'd have to implement a specific command in high probability like "category = " to do so.
Lastly, category names are obscure in relation to the Pokemon they represent, it doesn't make sense to make the obscure part the keyword to search. You'd rather find for: given the Pokemon - figure out what category name it has, which means it's not a suitable ds term in general.
If implemented, it's likely to cause additional clutter in the already confusing dexsearch help document, so it's counterproductive to do so.
I don’t have much new to bring up here as the others have been pretty comprehensive so far, but I’d like to say that while “quiz games use it” would admittedly be such a minor argument that it can be discarded in most cases, in this case, where the change would have zero competitive use and even the person suggesting it has stated that it “might be useless”, it is absolutely worth considering game rooms, as they are one of, if not the only legitimate use for an on-site category search. With that in mind, I’m quadrupling down with the others and requesting that you re-evaluate this decision, taking into account all of the new points that have been raised.
Respectfully, I am simply going to join in with the other Game Room posters. This significantly harms us for little to no (really, it's no) competitive benefit.
Trivia relies on category names not being /dt'able to keep our dead hours going, let new users ease into the game since they can ask and answer some very easy questions (among which category names are the most common), give people a simple yet fun way to not always have to think too hard. It's a staple for our room and really, as any other mod or RO or even ex-RO of Trivia would say, it's an integral part of the room and we need it for the simple virtue of how well liked and "easy to go to" it is.
Fmaj respectfully asked to reconsider, I'm respectfully imploring people to reconsider this. Please don't kill something that's been a massive part of our room's culture and community for well over 4 years now. Please.
Edit addition: I could've stolen Litt's post on how this doesn't even seem all that practical to have on a "will this confuse people" scale, judging by how much "psychic vs psychic type" already confuses people, but I didn't.
Last edited:
Everybody in this thread, including the original poster, seems to agree that implementing this would provide next to, if not zero benefit, to anybody. I don't think I'm exaggerating when I suggest that this change would cause serious damage to the Trivia room in particular, especially during our quieter hours when simple questions such as Categories are used to keep chat flowing. Categories are also the topic that the vast majority of room staff will use to demonstrate to new users how the very room itself works. I really cannot put into words how much the prospect of this change being implemented concerns me for the long-term future of Trivia.
While it could be fundamentally seen as a flaw in the game rooms than a floor in the command, and that it can be seen as something that would be better to have than to not, my personal opinion is that this would provide little to no benefit to the battle simulator unless we have an unknown OM that uses Species/category names. Of course, Trivia and Game Corner using categories is not that much of an excuse to not add it at face value, these are the basics for these rooms (Trivia specifically) and are helpful to new users trying to settle into the rooms and could drive people away, in my humble opinion.
Speaking as Trivia room RO, my roomauth (Darth, elchunko, LittEleven, shadowsirens, Tapler) have all brought up reasons for not implementing this. I fully agree with their points.
Notably, because this information is not available on PS!, Trivia (as well as GC) use categories as a go-to for beginners into our room. We also ban questions whose answers can be found using on-site commands (eg. "which is the only Pokemon to learn Spirit Break?" is banned because of /ds spirit break), and we've had to slowly ban more and more questions over the years as commands such as /is and /as were added. While I understand that these commands were useful for competitive teambuilding, they raised the barrier to entry for our room whenever they were added. As others have pointed out, Pokemon categories are competitively useless, and having this information being on PS! is about as useful as having a Pokemon hold a Hyper Potion.
Moreover, the information is readily available on Bulbapedia, so a quick Ctrl+F there is a very simple way to get whatever information you'd want with any command.
Tagging the other ROs (Struchni Garrett16 Notater )
Notably, because this information is not available on PS!, Trivia (as well as GC) use categories as a go-to for beginners into our room. We also ban questions whose answers can be found using on-site commands (eg. "which is the only Pokemon to learn Spirit Break?" is banned because of /ds spirit break), and we've had to slowly ban more and more questions over the years as commands such as /is and /as were added. While I understand that these commands were useful for competitive teambuilding, they raised the barrier to entry for our room whenever they were added. As others have pointed out, Pokemon categories are competitively useless, and having this information being on PS! is about as useful as having a Pokemon hold a Hyper Potion.
Moreover, the information is readily available on Bulbapedia, so a quick Ctrl+F there is a very simple way to get whatever information you'd want with any command.
Tagging the other ROs (Struchni Garrett16 Notater )
With all due respect, I’m gonna move this to closed suggestions, given the massive support not to implement this and the very little to no support to implement this.
For anyone that actually wants easy access to this information, it’s a very quick search on bulbapedia, and is linked here.
You rejected the suggestion only a few hours after my post, before I had any chance to read its replies.
I would have rejected the suggestion once I read the replies. But since you posted, I still need to clarify that no, there is no disagreement among PS tech staff; we did in fact already agree to reject the suggestion. You just closed it without asking us. Please do not post accept/reject decisions in the future; leave that to the tech staff.
- Status