Data ASB Feedback & Game Issues Thread - Mk III

[Frosty]

*sigh*

in a second. Stay tuned to this subforum.

 

[Dogfish44]

06:57:18 ~ <&dogfish44> Open question to the house: Does activating Mega Audino's Klutz cause Healer to drop back to 30%?
06:58:47 ~ <FMD> I feel like the intent is for that not to happen, but the wording technically means it should.
06:59:39 ~ <+ZtheWork> @asbitem Audinite
06:59:40 ~ <+ASBot> Audinite | Item Type: Signature | Cost: 15 CC | Affected Pokemon: Audino | Max Uses Per Match: - | Trigger: N/A | Nat. Gift Type: N/A | Nat. Gift BAP: N/A
06:59:40 ~ <+ASBot> Allows Audino to Mega-Evolve into Mega Audino. Causes Healer to activate 50% of the time for each allied Pokemon in both single and multiple battles at the end of the round, including Audino itself. Can Mega-Evolve even if Klutz is active.
06:59:58 ~ <+ZtheWork> @asbility Klutz
06:59:58 ~ <+ASBot> Klutz | Type: Toggle | Mold Breaker-affected: No
06:59:58 ~ <+ASBot> By default, the Pokemon moves in a rare style of battling that uses an unpredictable, clumsy looking manner. The accuracy of its attacks is increased by 10% (flat). While engaging in this style it cannot use a hold item, though an item is necessary to pull it off. When toggled, there is no effect.
07:00:19 ~ <+ZtheWork> What she said, yea.
07:00:22 ~ <@deadfox> i think i have to agree with fmd

Can we get a formal answer on if this is intended, or a side effect?

Also, can we put something into training items/Klutz saying "These work regardless", because otherwise there's daftness potential.

 

[Exclaimer]

Curse:

If the user is a Ghost-type, this move costs 50% of their maximum HP and 27 Energy instead of merely 6 Energy. They pay this price in order to cast a wicked and crippling affliction on the opponent. Pokemon afflicted with Ghost Curse take five (5) damage at the end of each action, and Chill and Rest only restore half as much energy or HP as normal. Such Pokemon also take an extra two (2) damage per action and lose one (1) more energy per action when affected by Nightmare. This version of Curse will fail if the user is at or below half of its maximum HP.

Can we at least make this barely usable? 15 damage a round for usually 50% HP and 27 EN is a really, really bad trade-off and would only be used if the mon used is the most potent defensive beast you could imagine. I was told that it can break Magic Guard Endure, which is a nice benefit I guess... but at the cost of 50% HP and 27 EN, the Endure user still basically wins by taking such an enormous toll on the opponent.

 

[FortColors]

question: what does disable do here:

"LET'S END THIS."

Vale Tudo @ Flying Gem

Sky Attack (Gem) | Acrobatics (Gem) | Sky Attack (Gem)

If Encore, use Dodge that action. Push back actions.
If Pain Split, and you are not taunted, use Protect that action. Only do this once. Push back actions.​

"Hmm, an interesting opportunity has arisen."
Gallade @ Galladite
[Mega Evolve] Disable [Sky Attack] - Magic Room - Psycho Cut

im not going to ref until someone who knows what is what gives an explanation; currently I think disable should fail.
<headache>

edit @ below: charge moves ingame are too different from in asb for this to be really acceptable. example showing difference: your article gives 3 examples of disrupting a charge move

• If a Pokémon uses Disable on a target that has just performed the Charge Action of a charge move, the target will be unable to perform the Attack Action and will therefore forfeit its turn.
• A Pokémon under the effect of Torment cannot select the charge move of which it has just performed the attack turn.
• A Pokémon with a Choice item selects a charge move on its first turn in the battle and successfully executes the move's Charge Action. On its second turn, it is unable to execute the Attack Action of the charge move (it flinches, for example). All of its other moves will still be locked because the Charge Action is considered an execution of the move.

the latter 2 are false in asb, and the first one is the point up for discussion.

If you want a ca that actually pertains to your argument, charge phase is an execution ingame because it takes up an entire turn. it doesnt do that in asb.

 

[JJayyFeather]

Reasoning time:

(A) I tested this on PS! already, and Disable goes through, making the Sky Attack user fail to act.

(B) http://www.smogon.com/dp/articles/move_restrictions#disable and http://www.smogon.com/dp/articles/move_restrictions#charge
Disable: When a Pokémon uses the move Disable, it locks the last move executed by the target. This lock prevents both the selection and execution of the move and remains in effect for 4-7 rounds or until the target leaves the field. If the last action taken by the target was not an executed move, Disable fails. If the targeted move has no PP left, Disable fails. Only one move can be Disabled per Pokémon at any given time.

Charge Moves: Charge moves are two-round attacks. The user charges the move on the first turn (the Charge Action) and delivers the attack on the second turn (the Attack Action). For the purposes of move restriction, the move is selected once and executes twice. Both the Charge Action and the Attack Action are considered an execution of the move. However, only one PP is used up each time the move is used. The PP is lost when the Charge Action executes.

Because the move is only selected once (before the Charge Action), preventing the selection of the move after the execution of the Charge Action will not prevent the execution of the Attack Action. The Attack Action bypasses the selection process entirely. However, preventing the execution of the move will prevent the Attack Action.

The Charge Phase of a Charge Attack is counted as an execution of the move, allowing Disable to target it. Since Disable blocks move selection and execution, the mon that was Disabled would then forfeit the turn because the restrictive effect was applied in the same round as it tried to act.

 

[Frosty]

We already discussed if charging is considered a complete action for ASB. It was a discussion if Solarbeam could be used to counter Encore and make it encore solarbeam instead of another move. We ended up ruling (I don't remember if it was a ruling or a council decision) that the charge part was indeed an action for all intentions and purposes, so if the pokemon charges solarbeam at +1, the encore that happens on that action at 0 will encore solarbeam, instead of whatever previous action that was completed. That ruling is still valid.

I assume this answers your question?

 

[JJayyFeather]

It does, thank you.

 

[Frosty]

With new non-sig items prices, the consumable ones got the short end of the stick somewhat.

I am thinking on making the following broad changes:

20CC->10CC
10CC->6CC
5CC->4CC

Not messing with the effects themselves, unless someone else feels like managing the discussion.

 

[Exclaimer]

The sub clause "[Type] Damaging Move" needs clarification in the handbook, since it heavily implies it only works on moves with BAP:

• Damaging [Type] Moves: Covers all of Flamethrower, Lava Plume, Fire Blast, Ember, etc. under the umbrella of "Damaging Fire-type Move." Covers all of Psychic, Psyshock, Confusion, Dream Eater, etc. under the umbrella of "Damaging Psychic-type Move." NOTE: This Substitution applies to all attacks of a certain type that have a BAP, so moves like Rapid Spin and Knock off will trigger "Damaging Normal-type Move" and "Damaging Dark-type Move," respectively.

However, as I've been told several times over from IRC chat, this clause also covers moves like Seismic Toss, Mirror Coat, and Counter, none of which have BAP. Perhaps a simple fix like this?

Damaging [Type] Moves: Covers all of Flamethrower, Lava Plume, Fire Blast, Ember, etc. under the umbrella of "Damaging Fire-type Move." Covers all of Psychic, Psyshock, Confusion, Dream Eater, etc. under the umbrella of "Damaging Psychic-type Move." NOTE: This Substitution applies to all attacks of a certain type that are not status moves, so moves like Rapid Spin and Knock off will trigger "Damaging Normal-type Move" and "Damaging Dark-type Move," respectively, and moves like Counter and Mirror Coat will trigger "Damaging Fighting-type Move" and "Damaging Psychic-type Move," respectively.

alternatively:

We could change the handbook's wording to "ONLY attacks that have a BAP", excluding Mirror Coat and Counter and static damage moves.

 

[FortColors]

We could change it to where the Handbook wording is the official ruling, excluding Mirror Coat and Counter and static damage moves.

just noting that this wouldnt be a change lol

edit at below: thats still not a change. you're just repeating "only attacks without BAP" in a different manner lol

 

[Exclaimer]

just noting that this wouldnt be a change lol

I fixed the wording, blame 2 am sleepy Exclaimer.

 

[Exclaimer]

Oh hey, here I am again, woooo

Rebound vs Magic Coat is currently a mystery; there's no defined answer as to whether a Rebound'd hazard would be bounce-able or not. There's good reasons for it to go either way, so I'm unsure which stance to take.

1) Rebound acts very similarly to Psycho Shift; It removes status/a hazard from one side, and gives it to the other side. Psycho Shift is not bounce'able, so Rebound might fall under the same tree. Also, since to use Rebound you need to have hazards on your side to begin with, a Magic Coat user wouldn't be able to bounce hazards it doesn't currently have.
2) Since rebound has no in-game precedent to build off of, and Magic Coat specifically says it bounces back hazards, it should bounce Rebound because it already bounces back Stealth Rocks/spikes/etc. Rebound can be likened to a status-inducing move.

IRC chat doesn't really know what to make of it.

 

[Frosty]

Magic Coat reflects moves and rebound isn't one.

That is my take on it.

With new non-sig items prices, the consumable ones got the short end of the stick somewhat.

I am thinking on making the following broad changes:

20CC->10CC
10CC->6CC
5CC->4CC

Not messing with the effects themselves, unless someone else feels like managing the discussion.

This was done.

 

[P2X7]

Swords Dance: The Pokemon performs a graceful, spinning dance of sorts, increasing their fighting prowess by boosting Attack two (2) stages. The spinning action can deflect some attacks, though some damage will still be taken. This move locks its changed stat for the round if used on the last action of a round.

Attack Power: -- | Accuracy: -- | Energy Cost: 7 | Attack Type: Other | Effect Chance: -- | Contact: No | Typing: Normal | Priority: 0 | CT: Passive

Swords Dance (Move):
The user performs a graceful, spinning dance of sorts, increasing their fighting prowess by boosting Attack two (2) stages.

Attack Power: -- | Accuracy: -- | Energy Cost: 7 | Attack Type: Other | Effect Chance: -- | Contact: No | Typing: Normal | Priority: 0 | CT: Passive

Is anyone able to explain when and why the bolded text from the first quote was removed? I can remember the effects of Swords Dance remaining identical between BW and approximately half way through XY, and my attempts to search for an answer have produced no results.

 

[Texas Cloverleaf]

Odds are that was a casualty of the move purge involving "wtf is this bullshit effect who the fuck put that there why is tat even a thing goddammit Deck"

 

[Frosty]

I didn't take part in the respective discussion/voting, so I am confused.

As per the Action Lock rules, if the guy ordering first posts orders, the next guy ordering can only post after either the DQ interval for the first player or 1/3 the DQ interval from the time first orders, whatever comes up first? Or can the second-to-order player post whenever?

I am guessing the former, but it would be nice to have some clarification

 

[JJayyFeather]

From what I remember (will edit in a link), the former is what was decided. (Even though I think this whole action locking thing is very, very unnecessary)

EDIT: Voting Link
Turns out it applies to both sides.

 

[ZhengTann]

[21:51:31] <Zt> Frosty - this is just me wanting to vent, but can we propose/fiat that training items only work if you're sent out with them and not swapped around just to farm?
[21:52:07] <Frosty> propose yes
[21:52:13] <Frosty> I feel the same about it as you
[21:52:25] <Frosty> but fiat will need support of at least another mod

First of all, if someone would accuse me of being emotionally biased, I accept that. But let me try to prove the validity of my claim that allowing battlers to farm from more than one Training Item (Exp. Share, Lucky Egg, Amulet Coin, and Heart Scale) by swapping them in a flash-match brings more harm, IMO, than good to the community in general.

1. From the viewpoint of Heart Scales being Gym rewards: Heart Scales were the prizes that come with the third Gym badge instead of the first, meaning they were meant to reward successful, competitive battlers with the bonus means to go further on the Gym leaderboard. But allowing Heart Scales to confer their bonus KOCs to your opponent simply by Tricking them from you beats the point - why bother to win Heart Scales on your third Gym when you're abusing them with a veteran all the time before that? Why not just regress Heart Scales to the first Gym badge reward and increase its distribution, instead of going through this "proxy by Trick" process?
2. From the viewpoint of a referee: Even with an extra action from Trick and co., flash-matches will not last longer than their usual length. Referees essentially reffed an unnecessary action for no extra rewards. Why reff a flash-match with Trick, when your battlers get 2 more KOC and 1 more CC while you get more work? This dis-incentivize reffing. I admit that the extent of the damage is unknown, though.
   
3. From the viewpoint of an approver: Approvers have to Ctrl+F the match for the original Training Item, and Ctrl+F to make sure Trick is ordered and carried out in battle, in order to proofread the claims, for more or less the same pay. It does not help that flash-match claims come in batches, so that extra minute per battle adds up. I will also cede that the extent of damage is unknown here.
   
4. It is biased towards mons without an Item-Swapping move: We've already had to admit that "use your favourites!" is a terrible slogan for our ASB. Let's not tip the scales further by giving mons with Trick and co. no other niche use than to farm (who even considers Trick in competitive battles these days?)
   
5. It encourages flash matches: I admit to this being a salty point.

Please like this post if you think this deserves Discussion. No likes in a week means the silence of the lambs - whereby I will seek out a third mod to fiat this. Any counterarguments you have can be written up in a Discussion thread as long as you like this post first.

 

[Exclaimer]

Ignoring ZT's salt, I agree with it because of the Heart Scale/bias to Trick user sentiments. It's a bit unfair that to those who really work for their Heart Scales and it lets people train very specific Pokemon faster (Mostly psychic types, which is unfair because they're usually the most powerful). I do not agree with the referee standpoint because a lot of the time, referees do it themselves, and 1 extra trick action isn't a big deal at all (There are no calcs, you literally just type two lines and the EN differences).

Your point with flash matches makes me wonder if we need an alternative method to use in addition to flashes to let people train their Pokemon effectively. Or make flashes a bit more interesting and less brainless. Even though I am personally against the idea of flashes, I end up doing like 90% flash matches simply because they're the most effective way to get my Pokemon trained up and help me figure out how they work, unlike UC dumping. They're a means to and end, whether that be a gym match, gym quals, a TLR, or just having an arsenal to use for actually interesting matches.

 

[Frosty]

We have vetoed worse farming shit before. With the introduction of Heart Scales, you are looking at +2KOC for a move, which is all-kinds of bogus. We didn't have that kind of cost-efficiency with other farming strategies, and they were denied. Consistency should be a thing here.

 

[akela]

It was allowed back when players were not outright gifted a set of training items upon signing up for asb and it was the only real way to help newbies train up their pokemon until they could afford the 12 CC for the items (an Amulet Coin and an EXP Share. The lucky egg is not so important for training purposes). But now that everyone gets one Amulet Coin, one EXP Share, and one Lucky Egg for free upon joining ASB, I don't see much issue with doing away with the farming strategy.

 

[Dogfish44]

Agreed. It's easy to make the items read 'If this Pokémon is sent out holding this item, then...".

We should probably also look at trying to make 4v4s+ be more rewarding, but it's often the case that people use well trained mons there anyway, and then there're 13v13s which are... -_-'

 

[Agender Nerd]

On irc I pointed out that Mons that start with extra MC (Beldum, Burmy, Tynamo, etc) count egg moves at 3 MC when calculating extra MC. I was told (by Zarator I believe) that this was an oversight, so I thought I should bring it up here.

EDIT by Zarator: I don't think I've ever talked about this, but I approve of this message
EDIT by ZhengTann: Sorry AGN, Zt is my abbreviation nick on IRC. Don't worry, you're not the only one to associate that with Zar. Also sorry Zar.
EDIT by Agender Nerd: I realize this now, still the issue is an inconsistency due to rules changes.

 

[deadfox081]

Suspended Damaging Evasive moves currently trigger the sub clause of "Damaging [TYPE] Move". This is quite silly and should not be the case. An exact order of Dive [Suspend] has zero chance of doing any damage on the action it is ordered.

 

[Dogfish44]

Curse and Belly Drum do waaaay less damage than their in-game counterparts, so we shouldn't be tied to their in-game HP reduction. Can we reduce it to 1/4 Max HP or something?

Also can we remove the self-taunt on Belly Drum whilst we're removing dumb things ¬_¬