An idea to make random battle balanced

[HighRollah]

This policy has been over for months. People used to be able to get voice during a rotation of featured tiers that included basically all the official Smogon metagames in addition to randbats. But again, that ended months ago and was implemented by an administrator who is no longer actively involved in policy.


Anyone who is remotely aware of competitive chess knows that chess ends in a tie all the time.

This policy has been over for months. People used to be able to get voice during a rotation of featured tiers that included basically all the official Smogon metagames in addition to randbats. But again, that ended months ago and was implemented by an administrator who is no longer actively involved in policy.


Anyone who is remotely aware of competitive chess knows that chess ends in a tie all the time.

Thats why they have tie breakers.

Sorry I have to do this. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Even the better-knowing users in this thread who, in their pursuit of explaining the skills involved in randbats and the importance of long-run observations, are positively murdering every single point you're trying to make (which you mainly do by highlighting selected examples of when you think you were unlucky (you're just as lucky as everyone else, play more battles and you'll see, and with Elo it doesn't matter if you start bad or w/e)) --- even those users are grossly underestimating the level of skill involved in randbats! This is something most people do, but the fact is that randbats is very much something you can attain a high skill level in, if you observe in the long run, that is. No reason randbats should be looked down at, compared to tiers where you select your own team, I'd say battle skill becomes even more important, so it's the ultimate de facto, objective skill measure as I see it (again, LONG RUN, mind you). You, my boy, clearly haven't done your homework in investigating players who have such skills. Instead, you label yourself as top 25 material throughout the thread, leading everyone to respond to your drivel as if you actually know what you're talking about, and possess a high level of skill. I may be the only responder who ranksearched and/or replaysearched your PS alt, but even that and the three latest games (including each raving chat dialogue) (links listed below), were highly indicative of how seriously one should take it when you speak of randbats. If you think you're among the 25 most skilled randbats players out there, you're gravely mistaken.
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/randombattle-80458185
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/randombattle-80454277
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/randombattle-79238736
Hopefully the end of this thread (don't bother responding to me, OP).

That hasn't proven anything. I know I lose some battles and it isn't luck. I never said every battle I lose was due to bad luck. I said there are many battles where its impossible to win due to luck, and those 3 battles I posted were all perfect examples whether it was luck on my side or the opponents.

I know the tier system has been improved and losses are no longer as important for preventing your climb to the top, but just saying "play enough and it all balances out" is a giant slap in the face of statistics. There are things called "outliers" meaning that some people will always be more lucky on average and some will be less on average. In BALANCED games like chess/checkers these things don't exist in terms of luck AT ALL.

Nobody has given any proof so far of how ranbats is balanced. You either you the excuse of "it all balances out" which is not the stance people take the real world of popular e-sports/real sports. Why does pokemon get to special? We are trying to turn this into a serious competitive game, aren't we?

My suggestion of making randomized teams that are mirrored and give you the ability to choose which pokemon will lead is literally the most balanced the meta in pokemon can get. Providing pokemon like serene grace shaymin and liepard aren't in the tier (I have swept people using luck and only a liepard. Killed 5 of his pokes and there was nothing he could do because ranbats doesn't allow you to prepare for such threats)

I am still flabbergasted that so many here thing ranbats has no more luck factored in than the other tiers, or think "it doesn't matter if you lose to luck because you'll win to luck and it balances out the next round". Aside from that logic not taking account again for outlier, it never gives you back the time wasted on losing a battle. Even if you are able to gain your rank back.

Maybe this is why nobody will take pokemon seriously as an e-sport. Because the main promoters of the culture don't even know how much luck is involved in their own game!

Don't we want it to be as balanced as possible?

 

[Skalaylee]

Clearly it is fine the way it is. Nothing is going to be fixed because there is nothing to be fixed. You have to remember you are playing RANDOM BATTLES. If you want to play something where you can have more control. Try something without the name random in it. There is always going to be factors that will make or break battles no matter what you play. Now please stop trying to make this thread into something it is not.

 

[Eminegg]

Please bear in mind, everything below is not meant to be offensive and almost 95% of material below is only just my opinion, which is not meant to be offensive either. Thank you and please continue reading and posting your opinion if you would please.

I'm still laughing.

So... as a not-so-good battler and Ladderer I will declare that Random Battles is luck + skill. Play more, get experience, perhaps change alts (no need now because of new ranking system <3) and destroy the Ladder.

I myself sometimes hate the tier and stuff, but seriously, just don't play it if you don't like it. Random Battles tier is as random and better as ever, especially this Gen. I've myself saw alot of players getting teams worse than mine and still winning, despite me giving it my all and not getting haxed (rare times). And the amount of battles like those I've had are no less than 5, that's a lot considering how much I get haxed and how much I get good teams in Random Battles.

I've seen alot of people (some better mentions: Coronis, Androidyumi, Gippy, Peacebone, jdarden) that have experience and I honestly never saw them not in the top 50 with atleast 30-50 battles. And that's when the Ladder wasn't as good as it is, where if you lose you might even lose 300 points.

So Random Battles is more like a gear for newer users, who'd battle and battle and battle and slowly slowly they might even learn the basics of teambuilding and battling. The Pokemon have sane sets with correct items and abilities. You need to have good plays and it's a bit relying on luck where if you get a bad team you might end up on the losing side, but mentioning the Ladder again I'd say that it's fair-and-square now. Even if you lose the battle it'll be ok.

And about making it more balanced, I honestly don't think there is a way a tier like this has to be more balanced, atleast what you're mentioning. What's more balanced than what it is now? Same team for both guys? That's the best you can think? Well, no offense, but that isn't the best way to make randbats more balanced.

Randbats is more like: play, get experience, learn sets, learn strategies, make good plays, try to see how this works with that and then you'll be topping the Ladder just the other day. It's a tier that if you focus on you can really get going with. And perhaps the tier is as good as can be. Atleast for me.

 

[Pikachuun]

Nobody has given any proof so far of how ranbats is balanced.

Lol, that's because you aren't reading in between the lines. Note that, in randbats, the uber Pokemon are level 70ish, while the lesser-used Pokemon are level 80ish (at least that's how it is in gen 5 randbats, I'm not sure about gen 6). That gives the lesser-used a chance, and provides a sense of balance. While this meta is luck-based, it's not entirely so. Let me give you an example. Let's say for a second a noob was given a team of ubers. Now let's say the opponent is an extremely good person who was given a team of the suckiest Pokemon allowed. At that point, the pro would most likely win because the noob has less of an idea of prediction and more of an idea of "ooh what's this button do." If almost-equally skilled people fight, yes, it's luck-based; I'll agree with that. But let me tell you something that you didn't account when you made this thread, and the point that you never covered that proves that your suggestion for a more balanced version of it is dumb, and an overall waste of time.

It's called RANDOM battle. What did you expect? OU?

 

[HighRollah]

http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/randombattle-81820923

Another unwinable battle.

But one persons anguish at an unfair loss is meaningless in the grand scheme of randbats, right?

 

[Soul Fly]

It's called RANDOM battle. What did you expect? OU?

to be fair Random battles were meant to be at least marginally competitive. What you're talking about is more of challenge cup territory

 

[Woodchuck]

http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/randombattle-81820923

Another unwinable battle.

But one persons anguish at an unfair loss is meaningless in the grand scheme of randbats, right?

Yup.

To summarize, Random Battles serve as an introduction to competitive Pokemon sets for new battlers. The diversity of Pokemon and moves present in every battle allow them to be introduced to a variety of strategies, and the increased variety makes for a more fun game (for most people, not including the OP, apparently). Yes, luck is an inherent part of this, but making every battle a mirror match is not on the table. Adding Team Preview to Random Battles is a more reasonable proposition that will be discussed among staff, but Random Battles will always have a random element to them.