-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Gen 3 Gen 3 on PS, final fixes
- Thread starter Joim
- Start date
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3oubeta-26145
I am not sure if this is M Dragon having terribad luck or a bug, but at any rate, he couldn't drag out anything but Dugtrio with Roar for a whopping 6 turns
I am not sure if this is M Dragon having terribad luck or a bug, but at any rate, he couldn't drag out anything but Dugtrio with Roar for a whopping 6 turns
Must be bad luck:
Turn 1
The opposing Gengar used Lick!
It's not very effective... Skarmory lost 2.4% of its health!
Skarmory used Whirlwind!
Zapdos was dragged out!
Turn 2
Popsickles withdrew Zapdos!
Popsickles sent out Gengar!
Skarmory used Whirlwind!
Exeggutor was dragged out!
(ww and roar use the same code)
Turn 1
The opposing Gengar used Lick!
It's not very effective... Skarmory lost 2.4% of its health!
Skarmory used Whirlwind!
Zapdos was dragged out!
Turn 2
Popsickles withdrew Zapdos!
Popsickles sent out Gengar!
Skarmory used Whirlwind!
Exeggutor was dragged out!
(ww and roar use the same code)
So Gen 3 has some weird mechanics (by today's standards, anyway). Whenever both players choose to switch out on the same turn, the order isn't determined by which active Pokemon is faster, but by which player is hosting the battle (the host always switches out first). This is the case in Gen 2 as well, and in Gen 1 it's irrelevant because switches happen instantly on your own screen without waiting for the other player's choice (and their choice will appear to happen first for them too, unless they attacked in which case your switch happens first).
This also has the unfortunate side effect of allowing the host to sacrifice a low HP Pokemon to Spikes damage with zero risk. Since the turn finishes in Singles whenever a Pokemon faints, and the host always switches out first, you guarantee that the other player's attack for that turn will not happen. Even worse, if both players choose to switch out and the host's Pokemon faints to Spikes, the other player's switch does not happen either.
In Gen 2 that kind of situation doesn't happen; the host switches out first, takes Spikes damage, goes to 0 HP, then the other player switches out. Once both new Pokemon are on the field, the host's Pokemon faints. (The turn does end when a Pokemon faints, though, so Player 1 switching and Player 2 attacking will have Player 1 switch and faint and Player 2 doing nothing.)
This also has the unfortunate side effect of allowing the host to sacrifice a low HP Pokemon to Spikes damage with zero risk. Since the turn finishes in Singles whenever a Pokemon faints, and the host always switches out first, you guarantee that the other player's attack for that turn will not happen. Even worse, if both players choose to switch out and the host's Pokemon faints to Spikes, the other player's switch does not happen either.
In Gen 2 that kind of situation doesn't happen; the host switches out first, takes Spikes damage, goes to 0 HP, then the other player switches out. Once both new Pokemon are on the field, the host's Pokemon faints. (The turn does end when a Pokemon faints, though, so Player 1 switching and Player 2 attacking will have Player 1 switch and faint and Player 2 doing nothing.)
Here is just a suggestion,
in the challenge environment, the person who sent the challenge be the host. In tours, ADV games could be best out of three with the loser being the host after a coin flip or decision deciding the person who sends the challenge first.
The ladder has to be random on who is host and who is not unfortunately, but you can't be perfect with this kind of system.
Once again, this is just a suggestion if we decide to implement this into PS!
in the challenge environment, the person who sent the challenge be the host. In tours, ADV games could be best out of three with the loser being the host after a coin flip or decision deciding the person who sends the challenge first.
The ladder has to be random on who is host and who is not unfortunately, but you can't be perfect with this kind of system.
Once again, this is just a suggestion if we decide to implement this into PS!
We do kinda have a "host", player 1 and player 2 are chosen in a deterministic way. I'm asking whether this should be really implemented, because it seems, well, odd and something of the likes of immunity bug on gen 1. I think in such a case we maybe should implement what's been done always on sims as opposite to benefitting the host.
Just saying, this seems like a perfect example of a reason to not follow cartridge mechanics to the T. Doing it based on speed would probably make the most people happy and avoid complications of determining host, as well as the downright unfair advantage it gives.
Definitely something has to be done about this. I remember in PO if both players switch out the player who submitted the switch first will go first. So if you were going to switch your Salamence in, you could stall for 4m 59s to make sure that intimidate is applied to the right Pokemon if your opponent also switches mons.
I just want to say that I didn't post this information here because I thought "this is so stupid it will never be implemented", but because the whole point of this thread is to fix Gen 3 mechanics.
I only made comments like "unfortunate" and "even worse" because in my opinion this stuff negatively affects competitive play (although there are plenty of advantages and disadvantages to being the host). Nowhere did I mention that I don't think it should be implemented anyway; that's the whole reason I do any research in the first place. If everyone expected arbitrary parts of past gen research to be discarded, nothing would ever get done because no one would do research.
Mechanics like these are what make Gen 2 and 3 what they are: an improvement on Gen 1 mechanics but not quite as refined as Gen 4 mechanics (which are still "buggy" compared to Gen 5). In Gen 3 Doubles it's entirely possible to KO four opposing Pokemon per turn, but I don't expect anyone to have a problem with that or want simulators to change it to Gen 4 Doubles mechanics.
In my opinion, game mechanics are not something that we can go around cherry picking to arrive at whatever the majority perceives to be the best results. They're the foundation of each set of games and whichever set you choose to simulate comes with all the perceived bugs and glitches and unintentional behaviour along with it.
How PO or any other simulator implements anything is beyond irrelevant. If they have something implemented in any other way than what happens in reality, then it's wrong and should be fixed. The same applies to PS.
Sure there is precedent for pretending certain mechanics don't exist, but at the very least it should be explicitly shown that something isn't adhering to the reality of the game's mechanics (like for example the HP Percentage Mod, although this isn't really the same kind of situation at all).
I only made comments like "unfortunate" and "even worse" because in my opinion this stuff negatively affects competitive play (although there are plenty of advantages and disadvantages to being the host). Nowhere did I mention that I don't think it should be implemented anyway; that's the whole reason I do any research in the first place. If everyone expected arbitrary parts of past gen research to be discarded, nothing would ever get done because no one would do research.
Mechanics like these are what make Gen 2 and 3 what they are: an improvement on Gen 1 mechanics but not quite as refined as Gen 4 mechanics (which are still "buggy" compared to Gen 5). In Gen 3 Doubles it's entirely possible to KO four opposing Pokemon per turn, but I don't expect anyone to have a problem with that or want simulators to change it to Gen 4 Doubles mechanics.
In my opinion, game mechanics are not something that we can go around cherry picking to arrive at whatever the majority perceives to be the best results. They're the foundation of each set of games and whichever set you choose to simulate comes with all the perceived bugs and glitches and unintentional behaviour along with it.
How PO or any other simulator implements anything is beyond irrelevant. If they have something implemented in any other way than what happens in reality, then it's wrong and should be fixed. The same applies to PS.
Sure there is precedent for pretending certain mechanics don't exist, but at the very least it should be explicitly shown that something isn't adhering to the reality of the game's mechanics (like for example the HP Percentage Mod, although this isn't really the same kind of situation at all).
Nope, just the ban list! Including abilities, moves and items, not just mons.
are smogon ruining the metagame?
Well, Marty, you know I agree with you and I think we should research each game until we know how it works step by step, however, I do think we should cherry-pick specific stuff when it's highly detrimental from the game. I did cherry pick out the division by zero bugs on Gen 1 (what do we do there, tie the game?) and the invulnerability bug, reasons should be obvious. Maybe I should add an informative clause, Cartridge Glitch Clause, that says "abusive cartrdige glitches that ruin the game are not affecting this battle." (Thoughts Zarel Crystal_ M Dragon McMeghan @Mr. E and I'm tired now of at-ing).
This case here on gen 3 seems like something to think about. PO has it wrong and it gives disadvantage to the first to submit the switch request.
This case here on gen 3 seems like something to think about. PO has it wrong and it gives disadvantage to the first to submit the switch request.
What about the host is determined at random prior to starting the battle? I agree that the fact that the players should know whether they'd switch first or last in a given battle is part of the game and as such should be implemented in the simulator if possible. However, the term "host" sort of doesn't have the same meaning in simulators because the conditions in which the battle take place are different. The host could be the player who sends the challenge if anything, but I think it would be fairer if it was selected at random.
Even on challenges it's probably better to be random most of the time, since a large majority of challenges are either casual battles where nobody really cares or tournament matches where everyone would just otherwise argue over who gets to be the challenger/challenged for certain advantages and there's no other fair method of deciding.
Apparently ingame the order is determined by which active Pokemon is faster (according to that Jackal post)
We might need to do some research ingame
What Jackal was talking about and what Joim is talking about are different things. The host is the person who confirms the battle type with the lady at the counter first, no matter which side of the field the players choose to stand on once in the link room. Obviously for fairness the host being random is preferred.
Who is hosting has nothing to do with the order Abilities activate once the lead Pokemon are sent out, though. It's just as it is in future gens: fastest first, slowest last, and Speed ties are broken at random. The quirk in Gen 3 is that they are grouped in different levels of activation. Drizzle, Drought, and Sand Stream activate before Intimidate which activates before Trace, regardless of Speed. Since all the weather Abilities are on the same level, you can actually rely on logical Speed order. Between levels though, you can't know whether a Gardevoir is faster than an Arbok just by watching their Abilities activate.
Deleted User 108547
Banned deucer.
Hi, I was trying to find some bugs on PS when I found one related to the move beat up.
The first log belongs to PO, while the second one belongs to PS. As you can see, the damage in the second log doesn't match with the first one. The move beat up has a singular mechanic, so I'm sure something is wrong with this.