lol when I was first getting into the Maison with X, the first three or so failed runs were with Psychics/Hex and they all involved Gourgeist4 as the third and final poke. Started forming a stigma :P
Apologies, switching SD cards for my current run a couple of days ago seems to have caused this to go down. Re-upping now...
RNG7-WWWW-WW46-V4RM
Fortunately, I have plenty of space on this card and can just keep the current run going here, thanks for the catch
1: Saying "it's not likely, but it's possible" is not an argument (though you could argue that, given a series of infinite battles, encountering hax is inevitable, mass hax of this variety is incredibly uncommon, saying this as someone who has faced a lot of RNG on Showdown). Judging by the commonly accepted guidelines for AI having an unfair advantage over the player (let's use this as an example, since it's a quick and easy reference; there's even a section dedicated to Pokemon. For a summary with slightly less jargon, see Wikipedia's section on Cheating AI), the AI does not need to be perfect in order to be considered as "cheating" ("This can be a quick-and-dirty method of achieving a 'level' playing field against a skilled human player, but can also create Fake Difficulty when the computer has access to moves that a human player clearly does not."). Thus, being repeatedly improbable would be good enough to fit the definition. If the AI were always perfect in terms of RNG and prediction, it would pretty much be completely unbeatable, which wouldn't be very fun or enticing for the player. This need for a slight imperfection is also the reason why it is sometimes possible to exploit the AI. On the other hand, if the AI didn't have any sort of enhancements, it would likely be way too easy or exploitable. The problem is finding the right types of enhancements so that the player doesn't feel cheated- getting a multitude of BrightPowder-related misses (which seems to be a common item in the Maison) would definitely make someone feel cheated, since it's incredibly rare that a normal player would get this (i.e. if someone gets one BrightPowder miss, it can be attributed simply to bad luck, but when it happens multiple times in a row with battle-changing results it can reasonably be seen as the computer trying to get a leg up, but since, as far as we can tell, the AI is not a sentient entity, it probably doesn't do this "intentionally," so to say, hence why it doesn't happen ALL the time or even with deliberate aim; I'm just speculating here since I don't know all the fine points of AI in video games, and I may not be wording everything right because it's getting late here and I've had a long day).
There's also this, which would be a definite example of "the computer has access to moves that a human player clearly does not":
(from TVTropes) "The AI of the battle facilities of Generation III onward (often either the 'Battle Tower' or the 'Battle Frontier') are designed to gain knowledge about your team as you accumulate winning streaks, despite the fact that you're facing new opponents over and over again and thus it wouldn't make sense for "Schoolgirl Jane" to know anything about the team that "Punk Sid" just battled. Specifically, you'll be forced to face teams that are increasingly designed to counter yours the higher your streak.
While this may seem like a coincidence in many instances, the most damning evidence is that players that have used hacked Pokémon, Pokémon with special abilities and sets that literally do not exist anywhere in the game and thus the computer cannot possibly have had the knowledge to counter them beforehand, will still encounter teams that are tailor made to overcome the player's strategies.
For evidence this still exists in the 6th generation's Battle Maison, try entering a Pokemon with Sand Stream as your lead plus an Aron with Sturdy and Endeavor. In the Battle Maison, you'll quickly start encountering a disproportionate number of Pokemon who are immune to sandstorms."
2: The set of definitions you are using is asking for something that is rather unquantifiable (probably not completely so, but not something any one person could do easily): you would literally have to play tens of thousands of battles, find some sort of baseline to compare it to (which wouldn't be easy considering all the other factors that might influence results, and outliers, which will occur because RNG is, well, naturally unpredictable!), and even then, you can apparently dismiss everything by simply saying "lol rng." And even then, maybe I'm missing some sort of other complex steps you'd need to do in order to find instances where "there is literally no explanation except 'the AI cheated.'" Which is kind of pointless, because, as I said above, in length, the definition is stricter than necessary.
But, regardless of whether or not this would answer your question, I found a bunch of funny/painful-to-watch replays (I'm not trying to use any of this as argument, and I don't necessarily advocate any of the opinions stated in these videos: I just thought these were some fun instances of such things happening).
[followed by list of "hax" videos, ending with the famous 3 quick claw Rhydon video uploaded by DrDimentio way back in gen 4 days]
Altissimoooohhhh nooooooo..! How and why did you invite that torrent of retarded fucking drivel upon yourself?i'm getting angry
this shit is totally relevant sh'up
Altissimoooohhhh nooooooo..! How and why did you invite that torrent of retarded fucking drivel upon yourself?
Bingo!And I'm guessing that the numerous "hax" replays are their response to demanding replays of cheating AI?
I skimmed the first wall of text since it contained too many run-on sentences and actually read the latter half, which tells me that any page of information that could provide a logical, plausible explanation to anything one faced (the increasingly common sand immunity shit made my head hurt) would only be met with contradictory claims, or the fallacy that you only validated their previous claims.
I realized after I read the post I quoted above that this was one of those cases where no argument I present will be sufficient and changed the subject.Just let this one die. Just let it die with its shitty streak.
To be fair though, in the very early days of this thread, before things got organized and Eppie took over, there were a number of those bogus complaints here, too. When SuMo arrives, with its new battle facility (I hope / pray / assume at least!), I intend to make sure we avoid such an initial free-for-all of unsubstantiated and often demonstrably false claims.
If anyone is in danger of demotion, it has to be Vespiquen...has anyone on here ever lost a streak to that useless hive?
he should know better than thatI didn´t, thinking, hopefully nothing will go wrong
That looks amazing, I must breed that immediately!785, Vespiquen 4, Adamant, Shell Bell, 172, 139, 117, 85, 117, 55, Attack Order, Defend Order, Heal Order, Confuse Ray, HP/Attk
I plan to bring her with me as I move on to Super Triples with a few adjustments (Wide Guard). Overall she got us through some hard times and was able to tank hits even from legendaries with ease.
A while ago, I managed to get a streak of 255 wins in Super Triples on Omega Ruby. Battle Video for proof further down in this post.
I have a few other Battle Videos saved but most of them are not uploaded (the only other one I have uploaded is my battle against Dana, but I guess it isn't that interesting or important). If anyone wants to see any other battle videos, let me know. Most of them are from battles that was tough to win in one way or another.[/hide]