Data ASB Feedback & Game Issues Thread - Mk III

[Geodude6]

Related to discrepancies between ingame and ASB:

King's Rock NDA description:

All contact attacks used by the Pokemon that connect have a 10% chance to cause the opponent to flinch. Multi-hit moves have as many chances to flinch as hits made successfully. If held by Poliwhirl, Politoed, Slowpoke, or Slowking, it increases the Pokemon's Special Attack by one (1) rank.

Somebody's comment on it:

King's Rock activates on all moves in-game, not just on contact moves. Bulbapedia and Veekun support this statement, and I have seen battles with Cinccino and Cloyster reffed in this way, with King's Rock activating on Rock Blast, etc. Not sure if this is a deliberate nerf from ingame or just an unintentional discrepancy; if it's the latter it should probably be fiated/fixed.

Smogon, Serebii and Bulba all stated "all attacks" without restrictions in regard. Wat do?

Can we change King's Rock to activate on all attacks instead of contact only? My reasoning is already in "somebody"'s comment (mine) and I don't feel like repeating myself.

 

[S0L1D G0LD]

Personally, I've never had a problem with how King's Rock works in ASB. I am actually pretty confident that this is intentional, and as a result don't see a reason for it to be changed.

Just my two cents.

 

[Gerard]

I think I'll have to repeat that this is already standard practice in all matches (that King's Rock activates in any attack, not just contact moves). Since it's the preferred items of such Skill Link users such as Cloyster and Minccino, and most of their moves don't make contact (such as Icicle Spear and Rock Blast). We need to change the description though, since it's incorrect.

 

[akela]

I think I'll have to repeat that this is already standard practice in all matches (that King's Rock activates in any attack, not just contact moves). Since it's the preferred items of such Skill Link users such as Cloyster and Minccino, and most of their moves don't make contact (such as Icicle Spear and Rock Blast). We need to change the description though, since it's incorrect.

Or we can just make people follow the rules.

 

[Its_A_Random]

King's Rock Cinccino and Cloyster are totally broken alright with such massive game-changing mechanics.

Real talk though while it will not break those two, the change does smell a bit like buff culture to me since while the proposed change is justified in that it follows in-game, it is still arbitrary and pointless as it does not fix anything important.

Tagging Frosty so I know whether we will handle this ourselves alongside Dogfish or we will let this carry on as normal.

 

[deadfox081]

I'd say both sides have valid points. Yes the mostly accepted way to ref it is against ingame precedent but it wouldn't be the first time a rule in ASB has differed from ingame. I'd say a discussion and vote is necessary to decide whether we want King's Rock to activate on contact attacks or all attacks.

 

[Frosty]

Buff to make coherent to ingame can be done by council Imo so carry on.

Also i didnt know/notice asb deviated from ingame, but i dont like more flinch either So i am on the fence.

 

[Gerard]

Buff Culture would be a valid point if anything used King's Rock outside of Skill Link users. No pokemon, not even Slowking, uses it on a regular basis because 10% flinch is just not that good, worst of all it can't even stack with other flinching moves, it needs to be used with an move without a flinching secondary effect, thus making it only useful in the hands of the users of multiple hit moves.

 

[waterwarrior]

Surprise surprise the guy who uses Cloyster in his Gym wants what he honestly thought was legal but apparent not to be truly legal

But seriously, I'm for taking the limits off of King's Rock because it doesn't even fulfill it's (what I assume to be) intended purpose in limiting the power of multi-hit moves with Skill Link- Ambipom and Cincinno's main multi-hit moves are contact, and Mega Heracross doesn't count for obvious reasons. Realistically, the contact limit to Skill Swap affects Cloyster and uh... Shellder. As Gerard pointed out, nothing uses King's Rock outside of these mons. As for the "buff culture" argument, I don't really buy it- we're not taking something that's sucky in-game and making it better, we're reversing a needless nerf, which imo are two different things.

 

[Its_A_Random]

Ehhh to be fair Garbodor could abuse Stench Rock Blast for up to 65-68% chance of flinching but it is generally better off using Rare Candy. That also depends on if it stacks with Stench or not.

Plus nobody uses Garbodor except for the boss of a dead RP. And me I suppose but I have not used it in forever so nobody does.

Also stop bringing up buff culture because it was not even an argument. The whole reason I brought it up in the first place was because I felt like it could have been exactly that which is why I got Frosty to confirm or deny as per the policy he set in the STAB thread. Any further talk after Frosty's post on BC wrt the proposal is unnecessary.

 

[TSRD]

Can we get some consistency in the NDA? Like why does Fly say No Guard will hit through it but Dig does not?

 

[tavok]

Add it to No Guard's description. Well, make it more explicit.

 

[akela]

Can we develop critical thinking skills?

 

[TSRD]

You can't have it both ways Akela. Either we follow in game (in which case why does Dive hit someone in the evasive stage of Dive?) or we follow the NDA (and it should be updated correctly).
Then again I guess "Critical Thinking Skills" would totally be what tells people that Protect's energy cost isn't the formula in the NDA it's actually split (and how it interacts with being in a combo is plain as day).

Yep, I'm being totally unreasonable to expect the rules to actually say what they are supposed to say. Thanks Akela, I feel better now.

 

[akela]

I want people to stop deleting information that we've added to the NDA, resulting in it not being consistent. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened. More so, I fucking sitting here staring at the NDA. No Guard is mentioned thrice in the move section. Once for Agility (Evasive), one for Teleport (Evasive), and once for Dodge. Where in Fly's description No Guard is mentioned is unknown to me.

How about this. Let's try and get someone with the authority to update the handbook to add to the FAQ section, explaining that No Guard hits through Damaging Evasive Maneuvers instead of updating Bounce, Dig, Dive, Fly, Phantom Force, Shadow Force, and Sky Drop's NDA entries to indicate that they cannot evade attacks from no guard users or be used by a no guard user to evade an attack?

 

[Its_A_Random]

Apparently everything has to be explicit.

I took a third option and updated No Guard's description with the explicit mentions of it ignoring Double Team, Evasive Moves, Dodge, Sky Drop, and Evasive Damaging Moves.

 

[deadfox081]

Just thought I'd raise this for discussion..

Priority + Damaging Evasive Moves

Currently the consensus seems to be they evade at +1 priority then strike at some negative priority (I've not seen an example where the exact negative priority was important and hence not explicit). The handbook isn't exactly clear on how it should work in my reading of it. It says to "calculate the strike priority of the combination as normal" and then add on the usual difference between evade and strike for the D/E move. This basically means Quick Attack + Dig would evade at +1 and strike at -1. I'd just like to confirm that this is our intention, given it makes for some fairly powerful combinations (and lots of mons get Quick Attack and Dig). If this is the exact intention then perhaps it should be added as a concrete example to the handbook to clear it up.

 

[Its_A_Random]

Just thought I'd raise this for discussion..

Priority + Damaging Evasive Moves

Currently the consensus seems to be they evade at +1 priority then strike at some negative priority (I've not seen an example where the exact negative priority was important and hence not explicit). The handbook isn't exactly clear on how it should work in my reading of it. It says to "calculate the strike priority of the combination as normal" and then add on the usual difference between evade and strike for the D/E move. This basically means Quick Attack + Dig would evade at +1 and strike at -1. I'd just like to confirm that this is our intention, given it makes for some fairly powerful combinations (and lots of mons get Quick Attack and Dig). If this is the exact intention then perhaps it should be added as a concrete example to the handbook to clear it up.

That is the intent, yes. Adding an example into the handbook to make it certain.

EDIT: Added this to the priority paragraph: "If the combo is a different-move combo where one of the moves is a damaging evasive one and the other move is a priority attack, apply the same rule using the damaging evasive move's two priorities, but do not apply the -2 priority because priority moves maintain priority. Thus, Dig + Quick Attack, with its strike priority of -1, has an evade priority of 1."

 

[waterwarrior]

Speaking of D/E moves, there is a discrepancy in the handbook on Sky Drop. While Sky Drop is not listed in the sub descriptions as a D/E move, it's referred to as a D/E move while describing how the work earlier in the handbook

In the event of a different-move combo of two damaging evasive moves, add the two differences together, so Fly + Sky Drop, with a strike priority of -5, will have an evade priority of -2.

While I personally think that it SHOULD be listed as a D/E move, simply changing that description to Fly + Bounce fixes the problem so I guess there should be discussion about it rather than just being edited in, but that's also not really my say.

 

[Dogfish44]

In singles, Sky Drop is evading nothing - not D/E. We'll fix the handbook wording though.

Speaking off, can we redo the whole section on Combo Moves with multiple stages and priority? I do not want to have to deal with moves with a Charge Priority, an Evade Priority, and a Strike Priority, all in one bundle =|

 

[Frosty]

Speaking of Sky Drop, it is broken on Doubles+. Please fix it.

To elaborate: if you don't use a sub slot on it for every mon, you will: a) not hit the user of sky drop; b) possibly not deal any damage with the target of sky drop; c) lose considerable health, as it has decent power.

Too lazy to elaborate further though.

 

[Texas Cloverleaf]

And Fly is any different?????????????????(excepting b)

 

[Its_A_Random]

Speaking of Fly, it is broken on Doubles+. Please fix it.

To elaborate: if you don't use a sub slot on it for every mon, you will: a) not hit the user of fly; b) possibly not deal any damage with the target of fly; c) lose considerable health, as it has decent power.

Point: Same argument for Sky Drop can be applied to any damaging evasive move. i.e. What Texas said above.

 

[Frosty]

Thanks for the sarcasm, iar. Always lovely.

My problem relies on "b". But let be more specific so I don't get misunderstood but the local village people.

(assume user of fly/sky drop is faster)

On Doubles. Take these orders:

YOURMON: Ice Beam - Ice Beam - Ice Beam (all on A)
IF A is on the evasive-type on a damaging-evasive move when YOURMON is to act THEN redirect to B

If A uses Fly, then the user of Ice Beam will just redirect to B, right? B will have to deal with it, but that is besides the point. Thing is: A can't use Fly or Dig or Dive to simply escape the move.

But if A uses Sky Drop and considering the issue above we can have:

a) If Sky Drop isn't deemed Damaging-Evasive: Sky Drop (YOUROTHERMON)*3 = you will need a sub, as it works exactly like Fly.
b) If Sky Drop is deemed Damaging-Evasive: A can just use Sky Drop (YOURMON) - Sky Drop (YOURMON) - Sky Drop (YOURMON) and you will still won't hit a thing with it, since YOURMON can't redirect to B as it being taken away.

Conclusion: You will need a sub just for Sky Drop ON TOP OF your damaging evasive sub. And lemme tell you, pretty much every mon with Sky Drop has Fly so you are looking at 2 subs being lost by default.

BUT WAIT! THERE IS MORE!

Consider those orders so we see what will happen if you don't sub:

YOURMON: Ice Beam - Ice Beam - Ice Beam (all on A)
YOUROTHERMON: Ice Beam - Ice Beam - Ice Beam (all on B)

If A uses Fly*3 worst case scenario one of your mons is a sitting duck, right? Well, Sky Drop can accomplish just that, as we saw above. But it can accomplish more!

If A uses Sky Drop (YOUROTHERMON)*3 you get the marvelous result of A evading the attacks of YOURMON through the evasive part of the move AND ALSO YOUROTHERMON won't be able to hit B. In the end you are using one mon to cock-block 2, being twice as effective as Fly and co.

"But who is the dumbass that will focus fire like that?"

Well, the example is exagerated so it is clearer. But you will almost always see it being done in at least an action at a time and in that particular action Sky Drop will have the same effect at both mons using fly. Except using only one pokemon's action. Or you can spam spread moves and be subject to wide guard (3rd sub gogogo) or even you can focus fire on one pokemon only and be subject to endure and focus punch while having to deal with sky drop STILL HAVING THE FLY EVASIVE PROPERTIES for the mon not being taken away. Even if you prepare for it, Sky Drop will be, most of the time, at the very least a Fly clone, with the difference that if you don't, it will be much much more.

So while you can get by not subbing for fly, the same can't be said for sky drop. Sub is mandatory.

And the last thing: Fly costs 11En. Sky Drop costs 7en on average (it has the exact same cost as psychic) and will only reach 11en if facing a FUCKING GROUDON. If you think at least that is fine and dandy then I am clearly preaching at the wrong crowd here.

Back in the old day (unless my mind is playing tricks with me), there was a ruling that said that every move done by the target of Sky Drop during Sky Drop are redirected at the user of Sky Drop, with support moves that target arena and heal pulse failing. I simply want that ruling to be revived and included on NDA, so it truly becomes, as you said, a clone of Fly. Also, bump up that EN, as it is ridiculous -_-.

 

[Its_A_Random]

Back in the old day (unless my mind is playing tricks with me), there was a ruling that said that every move done by the target of Sky Drop during Sky Drop are redirected at the user of Sky Drop, with support moves that target arena and heal pulse failing. I simply want that ruling to be revived and included on NDA, so it truly becomes, as you said, a clone of Fly. Also, bump up that EN, as it is ridiculous -_-.

That ruling was actually removed?

That is the first time I heard of it and I do not recall a single policy discussion to remove it. Ergo, it was supposed to be an offensive bodyblock but someone changed it to remove it. Anyone object to me actually throwing it back in since that is what the effect was—well I thought it was—in the first place?

Also the EN is fine since it is supposed to be an offensive bodyblock. Besides who is using Sky Drop on a Groudon or a Snorlax unless you are a Hawlucha or a Tomohawk anyway?