• Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!

Glitched Weather in English Platinum [Part 2, Clearer Video] (Update March 18, 2009)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Griffin said:
How would you implement that on Shoddy?

There's no real host for ladder battles, is there?
Click to expand...

Actually sometimes it will be either Opponent Vs. You on the window screen, or it could be You Vs. Opponent. I guess thats the closest thing to "hosting" that you can get.

Can there AT LEAST be a vote on implementing the glitch if it is not removed in the future? I dont think many people (or if any one) wants to lose many games due to horrible programing!
 
We don't have votes on simulator accuracy. We do not take votes on whether Blissey should have base 100 HP, or whether Garchomp should have Sand Veil replaced with Truant, or any other mechanics changing ability because it goes against the purpose of simulating the game.
 
So, why don't we allow Sky Attack Kangaskhan and stuff like that in RBYG? After all, thanks to the Missingno glitch, you can obtain a Sky Attack Kangaskhan, or Explosion Venusaur, etc, with ease, and they can be played in game, so how come that was never simulated?
 
So, why don't we allow Sky Attack Kangaskhan and stuff like that in RBYG? After all, thanks to the Missingno glitch, you can obtain a Sky Attack Kangaskhan, or Explosion Venusaur, etc, with ease, and they can be played in game, so how come that was never simulated?
Click to expand...
Consider the case in which this glitch occurs. Level 250+ Pokemon in RBY, Sky Attack Kangaskhan, Swords Dance Clefable, etc are bannable as said events occur outside of battle. However, this "acid weather" glitch occurs inside a battle, and what mechanics go and happen inside a battle must be accurately simulated.
 
Deucalion2 said:
What about the Fly/Dig glitch then in RBYG, then? It allowed invincible Pokemon, and could be performed in battle.
Click to expand...

I don't even know what the glitch is, but assuming your description is true that is irrelevant since if they allowed for "invincible Pokemon" the moves would be banned for being broken and thus not used anyway.


I'm going to say this again. Basing your argument on past precedent of how something was handling doesn't necessarily give it any weight. If something was handled badly or incorrectly previously, why should we continue to maintain that standard ?
 
It actually doesn't allow invincible Pokemon.

For those unfamiliar with the glitch:

If a Pokemon in RBY is paralyzed and uses Fly / Dig, and is then fully paralyzed on the turn they would attack (so the second turn, after they are invulnerable), then they remain in that mostly invulnerable state. However, if the Pokemon uses Fly / Dig again, if they successfully execute it, they are removed from this state. Moreover, they can still be hit by Swift.
 
Caelum said:
I don't even know what the glitch is, but assuming your description is true that is irrelevant since if they allowed for "invincible Pokemon" the moves would be banned for being broken and thus not used anyway.
Click to expand...
If that's the case, will we ban Pursuit if the weather glitch is found to be broken?
 
I don't find 12%-25% weather damage a turn all that broken, considering both players will take all this damage, and normal hail/sand weather will be restored upon sending in one of the 3 weather changers.
 
The Hail glitch doesn't hurt Ice types and who actually uses them outside of Hail teams? I can see Walrein working with only Protect or only Substitute and both Surf and Blizzard. Recovering 31% per turn is pretty awesome.

Of course, I could be wrong about quadruple Hail healing Walrein, but that's how I see it
 
imperfectluck said:
I don't find 12%-25% weather damage a turn all that broken, considering both players will take all this damage, and normal hail/sand weather will be restored upon sending in one of the 3 weather changers.
Click to expand...

According to the video I linked, Tyranitar does not clear Acid Hail.
 
I think both indeed too soon to say whether to make a will it or above Shoddy, nevertheless I would like to assist to a metagame with this novelty, it would also be enough a few weeks of test.
Nevertheless speaking of the influence on the metagame of this change, I believe that Pursuit T-Tar risks to be used on 99 teams on 100, I don't believe that it would benefit a lot of to the originality of metagame, Kabutops that according to my battle in Uber did at least 2 victims to game, I would be really curious to see what it combines with this new meteorological condition.
 
I still think all this glitch will really accomplish is causing people to stay in against Pursuit users, which they should probably be doing anyways.
 
Sometimes staying in against a Pursuit user just isn't an option. Gengar staying in on CB Scizor and Celebi staying in on Heracross come to mind....either one is potentially fatal. The reason you would switch out against a Pursuit user is specifically because it isn't safe to stay in (usually).
 
I understand that this is part of the catridge's programming, but I would lobby for this not being implemented on Shoddy. It is most assuredly a glitch, and it is one that drastically changes gameplay. I mean, look at the Acid Hail - if all reports are to be believed, it is un-removable weather that deals 25% a turn to ANYTHING, regardless of typing, while simultaneously healing Walrein by 25% of his HP rather than damaging him. Which means that if this glitch is activated, Walrein can come in and sub repeatedly, actually HEALING each turn, while anything the opponent could send out (save their own Walrein) dies in 4 turns, 5 if they carry leftovers. Clearly the dominant team would be one with a powerful pursuit user (preferably one that threatens even worse things if the opponent does not switch out, like Scizor, who can threaten a SD sweep), Abomasnow, and Walrein on it. Teams that did not run the Acid Hail strategy would be forced in to running Walrein as a counter to it. The only way to prevent this would be to ban either Pursuit, Abomasnow, or Walrein.
 
But the effects of weather we saw in youtube are hacked (English) versions, and often played in an emu? Correct but do not flame me if I am wrong.
 
Twash said:
I disagree. I have a feeling the only reason that Scizor receiving recoil from Technician was called "ridiculous" is because it didn't happen in Diamond or Pearl. If we always knew Technician as "If a move has 60 base power or less, damage is increased by 50% at the cost of 10% health per turn.", I bet it wouldn't be called ridiculous. Why? Because that's how it would have been made, and people wouldn't say "we must change it so the user does not receive the recoil".
Click to expand...

But that means Nintendo clearly programmed it that way, which means that it was intentional. The fact is that Technician does not cause recoil damage, so a glitch that enables it to do so is plain ridiculous.
 
If this glitch is implemented because we want to copy the cartridges, then we should also implement the glitch that allows Mimic Pokemon to have like every move ever.
 
Mekkah said:
If this glitch is implemented because we want to copy the cartridges, then we should also implement the glitch that allows Mimic Pokemon to have like every move ever.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between those 2 glitches. We can control the mimic glitch by forcing pokemon to have legal movesets. We can't control this because in order to do so, we would have to change the game mechanics of a battle, which would mean we are no longer playing pokemon "as it was given to us", but we have started playing pokemon "as we think it should be"
 
Banning Pokemon is just changing the rules; maybe we're not playing "Pokemon as it was given to us," but at least we're playing Pokemon.
 
Most of the opposition to implementing this glitch into our simulator is really a question of whether we should take developer intent into account when we decide how to simulate the game. If we assume that yes, developer intent is important, then we should remove the following glitches from the game:

Currently, if a Pokemon with Flash Fire is frozen, when it is hit by a Fire attack it is thawed and takes damage, rather than being thawed and activating Flash Fire. This is clearly not what was intended. The glitch probably results from Game Freak wanting Fire moves to thaw Flash Fire Pokemon, but not being careful about where they put each check in the queue.

You cannot use Chatter on a non-Chatot Pokemon. It cannot be Sketched, Assisted, Mimicked, etc.. This is because it requires a call to Chatot's cry to determine the confusion rate. Surely Game Freak didn't want this to happen.

It's only through a flaw in the random number generator that certain IV combinations are impossible on non-breedable Pokemon. This was most certainly not intended by Game Freak, and thus should be fixed on our simulator.

If a Pokemon with a Choice item uses Sleep Talk, Sleep Talk must be chosen but will always fail. Surely the intended effect is that you must choose the move that was selected by Sleep Talk.

If you use Baton Pass to a Pokemon with Baton Pass, then the new Pokemon that came in is vulnerable to being hit by Encore. However, this Pokemon is not locked in to Baton Pass if it has a Choice item. The obvious intended mechanic here is that Encore fails.

We should fix Dream Eater so it works on Substitutes. All of the other draining moves do.

Life Orb's 10% recoil does not activate when the attack is used on a Substitute. This should be fixed as well.

OHKOs don't actually OHKO Pokemon, they do damage equal to their max HP. If you pass a Substitute with more HP than the target's max HP, OHKOs will actually fail to break the Substitute. The obvious mechanic would be that OHKOs OHKO stuff, so they should always break the Substitute.

Substitute should block the effects of Static, Poison Point, etc. It makes no sense at all (and obviously goes against the status-blocking wishes of Game Freak for Substitute) that Substitute doesn't block being put to sleep by Effect Spore.

Reflect / Light Screen should not be broken when Brick Break hits a Ghost. Ghosts block Rapid Spin, so why should they not block this? Must be an oversight by Game Freak; I'm sure they'll fix it in the English release of Platinum, as long as they're aware of it.
 
I was under the impression that Shoddy represented more than a simulation. It represented ideal battle conditions for a competitive environment. If this is the case, then I don't think allowing a condition that is quite obviously a harmful glitch should be allowed. If it is deemed that it is more important that we are cartridge accurate, then the glitch can be allowed, as long as it is not harmful to the metagame, in which case we can work out what can be done.
 
Obi, whilst I agree with you on the majority of your points, I still feel that there is a certain degree of subjectivity involved when it comes to the problem of working out intentionality. For instance:

Obi said:
We should fix Dream Eater so it works on Substitutes. All of the other draining moves do.
Click to expand...

I would say that this makes sense for the following reason. The mechanics of Dream Eater dictate that a check on the status of the target is made before deciding whether damage is done or not. If the target is asleep, the move goes through. If not, it doesn't. Since Substitute is always the target of an attack while it is up, and Substitutes never have the Sleep status by definition, it surely makes sense that the attack would fail.

Obi said:
Substitute should block the effects of Static, Poison Point, etc. It makes no sense at all (and obviously goes against the status-blocking wishes of Game Freak for Substitute) that Substitute doesn't block being put to sleep by Effect Spore.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about this one either. The reason being similar in that the 'target' of pseudo-status traits is not the Substitute, but the object that made contact with the Pokemon having said ability.

Obi said:
Reflect / Light Screen should not be broken when Brick Break hits a Ghost. Ghosts block Rapid Spin, so why should they not block this? Must be an oversight by Game Freak; I'm sure they'll fix it in the English release of Platinum, as long as they're aware of it.
Click to expand...

Pardon my ignorance here, but I have a question. What was the case back in ADV? If Brick Break's secondary effect was blocked by Ghosts back in ADV but has been changed in the transition, then I might possibly agree with you, but I'd still have my doubts. If it wasn't, then I'd say that this was intentional.

Of course the most intuitive solution would be that both moves activate their secondary effect regardless of whether the move hits a target or not. After all, the objects they are removing are entirely separate from the Pokemon themselves. Then again the same could be said about Substitutes and Evasion, so it is obvious that Gamefreak's intentions do not conform to intuition.

I feel that the fact that we disagree on these points goes to show that there is some degree of uncertainty in trying to determine Gamefreak's real intentions, which is one argument against the idea of implementing game mechanics via this philosophy. At least when it comes to simulating the game literally you can be 100% sure that you're doing it right. Just my 2 cents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top