Endeavour

[Frosty]

Thread approved by Texas Cloverleaf

This thread is to discuss Endeavour. If you want to discuss (or just cuss) other stuff, redirect your concerns to that thing we call "IRC".
​

So we have started a discussion on Endevour on the Feedback thread. Apparently nerfing combos wasn't enough, since a single endeavour still has the potential to deal a crapload of damage with astonishing frequency.

The following posts are made on the feedback thread:

In theory, Endeavor would be a balanced version of ingame, since ingame equals hp and here we just deal a proportional damage. But in ASB, after a mon defeats another, when the replacement is sent out, chances are that the weakened mon will still be able to use Endeavor at least once. That possibility is greatly increased by how Endure works and the turn-based aspect of ASB (so if you have a weak mon with endeavor and you are ordering last, the odds are that you will manage to fire at least one of those). On a situation like that, Endeavor deals up to 50hp of damage, something that no other move (and very few combos) can muster. And if you check battles, you will see that this happens quite a lot and is enough to put the opposing player in a spot extremely difficult to come out (see deadfox081 previous subway for an example). I propose we cap the damage, like we do with Destiny Bond and Final Gambit. 30 seems like a good place to start, since it is still big enough to make a splash, but not too much.

3) I completely agree with capping the damage of Endeavor, although I believe that in such a case we should also cap the energy cost (so that a Pokemon doesn't pay the equivalent of a 50 dmg blow in terms of energy for a 30 dmg blow)

Endeavor: Disagree about the cap though. For one thing, Endeavor is a niche move similar to Reversal, in that the user would have to be at a disadvantage to be able to use it effectively. If the problem is "50 damage blow in terms of energy of a 30 damage blow", then I'd rather propose tweaking the multiplier (1.75 is a cumbersome decimal anyway, why not change it to an integer like 2?)

Endeavor: The largest problem seems to be abuse after a round of Endure, in which case I'd suggest simply giving the move the Perish Song treatment and making it -1 Priority. Either that or some arbitrary cap on the damage it can do.

Endeavor: Even with a -1 priority that doesn't solve the ability to be used with Endure to cause massive damage (ex. I have 13 Hp after defeating an opposing mon, another mon comes out, it's faster but it lacks encore, now I can use Endure while he can attack me or use Infestation or something like that, which will probably not kill me, now I get at least one action to do whatever I want, I doesn't even matter if I Endeavor has -1 priority since I will get to do it anyway (and now I don't even have to worry about Phantom Force or Bounce)) So I agree that a 30 dmg cap would be the ideal here (Everything else is capped like that anyway)

So, what do you think? Is Endeavour still in need of a nerf? If yes, which kind of adjustment you propose/second?

 

[Mulan15262]

I do not think that Endeavor is in need of a nerf (although I can't really know since I've never used it or had it used against me). Endeavor is a very situational move that is very effective when used correctly. Endeavor is not the only such move like this, though. I've seen a pokemon go from max HP to 0 with just one hit from Bide, to provide an example.

If the problem is use of Endure, you could use an ExtremeSpeed + ExtremeSpeed (learned by 14 lines) combo or a Feint + Feint (learned by 21 lines) combo to strike at the same priority, or Fake Out + any priority move to tie, with Fake Out + Feint (which 10 evolutionary lines learn) or Fake Out + Fake Out (which 26 lines learn) to outspeed (I don't see Extreme Speed+Fake Out working, though).

 

[deadfox081]

I hate Endeavour




Oh wait I can't just say that? Okay then. Pain Split is capped at 25 HP. OHKO moves only have 30 BAP. Destiny Bond is capped at 30. I don't know how many more examples I need that a move should not be able to do 50+ damage ignoring type effectiveness regardless how much energy the mon has.

Cap the damage (25 preferably) and make it so the user must have the energy required. Also I'd vote for CT: none.

 

[Texas Cloverleaf]

The user recalls the hardships of the match and tries its hardest to pound that experience into its opponent. Endeavor fails unless the target has more HP remaining than the user. Endeavor can only be used once in the same round as Endure. This move fails unless the user can pay the entire Energy Cost.

fwiw

re: CT: None, I thought it already was CT: None when we banned Endeavour+Endeavour combos. Either way I support that.

I'm not convinced Endeavour needs a nerf, its somewhat situational, it has limitations that have been placed upon it, and it was designed both in-game and in asb to be a strong 'desperation' option. Convince me.

 

[Stratos]

to use endeavor you have to have high en and low hp, which means you're probably not about to demolish your opponent anyways

 

[Dogfish44]

Endeavour is currently CT: Force fwiw, although moving it to CT: None shouldn't pose a problem.

Endeavor in Switch = KO is traditionally a "Win Moar" move, whilst in Switch = OK it can be both that and a useful way to bounce back from a tough scenario.

I wouldn't oppose a raise to the EN cost. Again, I suggested we give this the Perish Song treatment since it means losing the first battle in Switch = KO is practically a game over, same scenario, and with PS at -1 priority it seems to be doing fine now. However, I don't feel that's implicitly needed.

One way we could go about the move is raising the EN so that we have an artificial cap in place, especially since you need to have the adequate energy to use the move. Since the move is supposed to be the last suicide move a mon makes before it's KOed, I wouldn't object to seeing the damage somehow connected to the user's remaining EN (This would help with the 1 HP 60 EN Endeavour users in particular, and could stop combos with endure being quite so potent), but again it's not needed in my opinion.

 

[tavok]

Why not make it so it is not usable while under the effects of Endure?

 

[Frosty]

Well... let me put it this way:

Say you have a 1vs1 where neither mon have a OMFG advantage and both players have similar abilities. One will faint and the other will be with low HP.

Once you send you the other mon, specially if the endeavor dude orders last (50% chance of that happening), there is the real chance of Endeavor being used to cut off half or almost half the hp of that mon in one blow. You only need 35 to pull that off and, let's face it. Unless you are stalling to no end or used too many combos, chances are that you will have more than 35 EN to work with, simply because every single damage move deals damage equal double or triple their energy cost.

OR you can just save your endeavor user for later and send it out for a sacrificial Endeavor.

Also Endure is a thing.

Neither of the three options is far-fetched. In fact they are all pretty common.

And before anyone says "you are theorymonning", I must say that I have seen this happening before. More than once. Hell, I sure have seen more 30+ Endeavour being pulled off than Final Gambit or Destiny Bond.

Saying that the move is situational is a lousy argument, since:
a) This isn't in game where you can KO a weak pokemon with Mach Punch. Stop pretending it is. Even a weak pokemon with 20hp will survive against most attacks and fire a lovely 45.7hp Endeavour against your every day 100hp mon.
b) Again, this isn't in-game where you can sweep with a 1hp mon. Hp is the main currency here and if you lose half a pokemon in one turn, you will either have to outsmart your opponent for many turns to get that back, or you will lose. While on in-game 1hp can still be somethink when OHKOs are a common thing. So you can be sure that Endeavor isn't as situational as you may think. Not even close.
c) Destiny Bond is situational and so is Final Gambit and both are EXTREMELY harder to pull off properly (and final gambit involves a sacrifice!). And they cap on 30. Why should we treat Endeavor different? Even situational, no move should be able to deal 50hp of damage in one go with no drawbacks.

Also, if your argument is "but it won't reach 50hp often!" than my answer is: "then you won't even notice the cap, so it shouldn't be a problem".

Honestly we put caps or severely nerfed (go go explosion combo needing 77En to be used, having -2 priority and involving a sacrifice) all moves capable of dealing hefty damage EXCEPT FOR Endeavor. Just doesn't make sense to keep it that way imo.

 

[Mulan15262]

Perhaps it could work to disable an Endeavor combo from being used, and it will fail under the effects of Endure to make it less effective.

Also, last I checked, Bide had no cap on it, despite it OHKOing pokemon some times (I've seen one scenario where a max HP pokemon was OHKOed, and a few others where the damage was enough to OHKO a max HP pokemon).

 

[Its_A_Random]

Endeavour + Endeavour is not an issue, just like the last time we brought up Endeavour (iirc as part of that Helping Hand thread?)

With the council-voted must have enough EN clause, the maximum HP gap a Pokémon can feasibly afford the en cost for Endeavour + Endeavour is 28. At that point, you deal 36 Damage. It costs 100 EN to do that combination IIRC. No sane person would even consider using such a combination. Unless there is some other Endeavour combo no one else has thought of that is "broken", then changing Endeavour's CT to None is imo, a superfluous change that we should not be wasting our time on. We have already dealt with Endeavour + Endeavour before, & the change made has achieved its purpose of nerfing it into the realms of infeasibility.

That said, I can see the merits with nerfing Endeavour itself, & I agree that it is a great last-ditch massive damage move that can really swing a match into the user's favour, perhaps even more if the user was already "winning". I myself can confirm this in the few times I have used the move (I nearly even won Gold Pike with only two Pokémon partially because of that move). Perhaps a damage cap could work, but I would like to see more options considered first before making judgement.

 

[deadfox081]

Obviously I am partially biased in this case but I draw your attention to this battle http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/battle-subway-challenge-deadfox081.3455707/page-9 particularly post #205. I was in a reasonably strong position having engineered match ups and switches that were favourable to me, then Endeavour comes out and deals 52 damage so my Krillowatt, something no other non combination move could have even come close to. This is from the physically powerful Haxorus to boot. Yes the move was used while under Endure but this held no bearing on the amount of damage it did, as I hadn't hit the Haxorus since it Endured. This basically turned the match from strongly in my favour to about a 40/60 against me. I went on to lose the match due to a slight misplay and some bad luck. But let me stress that a neutral damaging move did 52 damage to me, in one action, at normal priority, for about the energy cost of a combo which would do the same damage. This needs to be fixed.

30 damage cap
CT: None
Must have the energy to use it
Can't be used under Endure

End of story

 

[Dogfish44]

Just some more rambling on the matter...

It's a well known phenomenon that scoring the first KO swings a match heavily in one person's favour. However, unless the matchup is incredibly skewed (Syclant vs Pyroak cannot end well for the Syclant...), you can expect a reasonable sum of energy to have been spent - I'm estimating 30 EN spent, it may be higher it may be lower (A situation like deadfox's above where the 10 HP Mon has 85 EN is not common).

This actually opens up an interesting avenue where we change to damage formula to the following:

Fixed Damage Formula: (EN / 100) x (Target HP - User HP) / 1.75

This means that the less energy you have, the weaker the move - after an Endure, you have a max of x0.86 to contend with, which limits the move's power substantially. This is, of course, only a suggestion - but it means that Endeavor will have a net HP change lower than Pain Split in a large number of scenarios. For example, in Deadfox's scenario Endeavor would have dealt 36.4 damage, making it a great finishing blow but nowhere near as strong.

An alternative would be to just increase the EN (Remove the divider on the EN Calc) and to lower the damage (Make it /2 instead of /1.75, because having a round number would be nice).

 

[Objection]

Endeavour + Endeavour is not an issue, just like the last time we brought up Endeavour (iirc as part of that Helping Hand thread?)

With the council-voted must have enough EN clause, the maximum HP gap a Pokémon can feasibly afford the en cost for Endeavour + Endeavour is 28. At that point, you deal 36 Damage. It costs 100 EN to do that combination IIRC. No sane person would even consider using such a combination. Unless there is some other Endeavour combo no one else has thought of that is "broken", then changing Endeavour's CT to None is imo, a superfluous change that we should not be wasting our time on. We have already dealt with Endeavour + Endeavour before, & the change made has achieved its purpose of nerfing it into the realms of infeasibility.

What he said. Unless anyone wants to make an argument for why specifically combos involving Endeavor would be a problem even if Endeavor on its own received some of the proposed nerfs, I do not think CT: None should be taken seriously as a suggestion.

 

[Pallas Athena]

Endeavor combinations have not been a problem for some time. It is the simple fact that, more than any suicide move or power move, Endeavor is singularly hard to block. Unlike Bide or Counter, changing orders will at best just end in a ton of energy lost. Realistically, it is very hard to KO an Endeavor spamming Pokemon with priority because that more or less requires hitting for Super Effective or the Pokemon being at really low health. imo, capping the damage that can be done or reducing the priority provides a nice work around. It could still mess you up, but it would not tip battles with just its presence.

 

[Gerard]

That, that's in mi view the reason Endeavour it's so powerful, it's a damaging move, so you can't block it with Substitute (well, you can but it will destroy your sub so what was the gain there?) or Taunt like Pain Split. The only way to stop is is though protect, and that will probably cost you a ton of energy and only postpone it one action, having to lose half your Hp on one move if ridiculous. I think a cap in the dmg is the best option, bigger energy cost wouldn't deter from it unless it was too big to make it useless and the priority being set at -1 doesn't help against endure (or vs pokemon with around 30 hp, or bulky with 20 left, which is not unheard of) as the most it does is help against fast Endeavors.

 

[ZhengTann]

Well, I'd rather not Endeavour be a clone of Pain Split being a clone of Final Gambit being a clone of Destiny Bond being a clone of Explosion. Okay that was deliberate but you get the idea.

As it stands, comparing Final Gambit, Explosion or Destiny Bond to Endeavour can hardly be objective, since Endeavour does not actively call for sacrifices while the other three moves do. Which is part of the reason Endeavour is usually a better option anyway. So I'm looking to Pain Split in comparison to Endeavour. And guess what? Pain Split requires less difference in HP to be more cost-effective, IMO. At a minimum HP difference of 50, Pain Split can deal 25 damage, heal up that much, and cost 23 energy for, IIRC Pwne's words, "a 50 HP differential". In order for Endeavour to deal that much, the minimum requirement is a HP difference of 87, and it costs 35 EN, just as Frosty said.

And here's where I think things come in. At (comparatively) lower HP differences, Pain Split is a more EN-efficient move. But at higher HP gaps, Endeavour is a better bet for the damage races - again assuming that you actually have enough EN to pull it off, which as Frosty pointed out, is not uncommon (even though I disagree with a few parts of your theorymonning Frosty, but that's another thing for another day). Endeavour's first condition is that the user needs to be at a disadvantage in HP to be able to use it. So why don't we focus on the "have enough EN to pull it off" part, further reducing the amount of situations where Endeavour could be used?

I particularly support Dogfish's idea of changing the EN cost formula:

Energy Cost Formula: 6 + (Calculated Damage)

This way an Endeavour that deals 40 damage actually costs 46 EN. Or,

Fixed Damage Formula: (Target HP - User HP) / 2

Then, it would require a higher HP gap for Endeavour to be more effective.


Also Frosty, when you said

Also, if your argument is "but it won't reach 50hp often!" than my answer is: "then you won't even notice the cap, so it shouldn't be a problem".

Are you actually proposing a cap at 50 damage instead of 30?

 

[deadfox081]

Worth pointing out also that Pain Split can be negated by Taunt, Endeavour cannot.

 

[Frosty]

Endeavor can be slapped in combos with other moves without much hassle, since it is a simple strike move with nothing fancy. Pain Split can't.

If you block endeavor with substitute you will lose it, while that doesn't happen with Pain Split.

If you block Endeavor with Protect, you will lose a fuckton of energy, while with Pain Split the opposite will happen.

etc etc etc. Pain Split can be blocked with more ways than one. Same can't be said about Endeavor, since you can only block it if you manage to KO the mon before it attacks, or something silly like that.


Also, what I meant is: if it only reaches ridiculous numbers in rare occasions, than putting a cap won't be too much of a problem. I am shooting for a 30 cap.

AND, +25hp and -25hp =! -50hp. If you lose 50hp in one action, the odds are that you won't be able to recover from that whereas with Pain Split, the mon may do that by increasing the power of its moves, using combos etc to defeat the opponent and handling just the 25hp loss. It is a momentum thing...hard for me to explain, but it is the reason why we accept leftovers as a +1hp per action item (and we even consider that it sucks, because it does, even with gluttony sometimes), but there is no +1 damage to all moves item. Dealing damage is always better than getting hp.

And honestly? Pain Split is bordeline broken. The only reason I am not bitching about it too is because there are many ways to stop it, while the same doesn't happen with endeavor.


Finally, I don't get why we shouldn't compare Endeavor with Destiny Bond or Final Gambit. The fact that they involve a sacrifice only adds to my point, since Endeavor doesn't AND doesn't have a cap.

 

[ZhengTann]

Endeavour can be dodged by using Teleport!

Yay posting in daytime. Probably means more coherence. Well, I suppose you'd noticed that I didn't touch on move interactions (Taunt against Pain Split, Substitute against Endeavour, etc.) on my post comparing Pain Split to Endeavour because there are so many ways to do so (Disable, Agility, Dodge, subbing for Endeavour) that forgive me if I describe it as infinite. Yes, all the examples listed so far are in favour of Endeavour, and I may be accused of avoiding the issue entirely, but saying "Pain Split can be stopped by Taunt but not Endeavour" is pretty much the same as saying "Endeavour can be dodged using Teleport but not Pain Split". Which, IMHO, does not help with rational arguments. Same goes for team battle match-ups - if you happen to score the first KO with an Endeavour mon in a 5v5 Singles against me, all while ordering first, so that you can screw me twice over ordering second in the next round by using Endeavour, well, sucks to be me - unless of course, I happen to send out a Ghost-type instead. Which is why I'd tried to look into the moves in vacuum. And failed because they're not clones of each other :(

Again, I would like to point out that Endeavour's niche lies in:

• Having a relatively high HP gap in your opponent's favour.
  
• Having enough EN to actually pull it off.

And I can agree with the main arguments of pro-nerf peeps, which, if I interpret correctly,

... no move should be able to deal 50hp of damage in one go with no drawbacks...
... a neutral damaging move did (incredibly high) damage to me, in one action, at normal priority, for about the energy cost of a combo which would do the same damage. This needs to be fixed...

To that end, I think Deadfox summarised a potential slate:

30 damage cap
CT: None
Must have the energy to use it
Can't be used under Endure

So I'd like to go for the 3rd option, because it allows Endeavour to remain as a situational high damaging move - now with added drawbacks! I've done some maths, and I've noticed that most moves have a BAP/EN ratio of around 1.3, give or take (9 BAP @ 7 EN, or 11 BAP @ 8 EN). When it comes to combos in general (ugh, this is the exact move interactions that I'd just protested against), the BAP/EN ration drops to less than 1, not even factoring the combo cooldown, to compensate for the high damage output. So why not we do the same for Endeavour, only exacerbate the cost in terms of EN?

Say maybe

• Energy Cost Formula: 6 + (Calculated Damage) -> although it's still a relatively low EN cost to pay - 40 damage fixed for 46 EN, for example.
• Energy Cost Formula: 6 + (Opponents HP - User's HP) -> Somewhat precedence of syntax in Pain Split, and is, I believe, a hefty enough price to pay in balance for the damage output - 40 damage fixed for 76 EN, for example.

 

[deadfox081]

I might have made myself unclear, I wasn't suggesting a slate rather applying all four of those things at the same time. The "must have required energy" clause is already in place