Prediction or Probabilities ?

[Chou Toshio]

@ goofball
Point A- The whole reason why switching out Lucario from Hippowdon is a smart move is because you can see a possible OHKO from earthquake coming, prediction, simple but still there. Plus, not many battling situations are as black and white as this.

That is stretching Prediction as a concept. If I switch Luke out and Celebi in, and in doing so gain a superior position, this is not really a victory of my prediction as much as it is a victory of my team building for having the Celebi needed in this situation. That is what Goof is saying, that team building and common sense play bigger roles in long-term success than the prediction factor.

Point B- Charming

Point C- So many players are trying to make a great team, you will stalemate if you don't play around the opponent to gain advantage.

Gah, you seem awfully cynical for a pokemon player.

The point is that there is a real threshold to how much you can gain by trying to out-predict the enemy. You can't know every player, and you can't know exactly what the opponent will do. There is even a random factor involved, as the same player in the same situation will not make the same move every time.

To boot, even if you know what the player is going to do, that doesn't help if you don't have a move that beats it or stops it.

Which leads me to my next point. Often the obvious move is the best move. A player that wins over the long run is a player who can make his "obvious moves" very meaningful. When someone leads with Hippo, you know odds are you are going to have to fight in sand for the rest of the battle. When Vaporeon comes in on Gyarados, you know something is going to get a nice wish passed. These victories are decided a lot more on what pokemon each player has than the actual in-battle decision making of the battlers.

If you look at warstories, we always tell people not to warstory ones with stupid moves. You also say there are a lot of players of "skill." What that really means is that there are a lot of players who know the game well enough not to make stupid decisions in battle. Predicting which "not stupid" decision they are going to make often comes down to luck. Ultimately the big difference maker usually comes down to team construction.

 

[Tarquin]

I'm starting to feel really down about pokemon now lmao xD

I loved playing offensively on the edge and trying to outplay my opponent. Although it is nigh impossible to do really well without putting alot of thought and design into your team, I am worried that if you don't try and surprise and outplay your opponent, they will just outplay you for each win.

Being prepared for every scenario is one thing. But if you don't use some prediction then your opponent will avoid your planned counters and gain the initiative.

 

[malomyotismon]

The way I work it is this

lets say my opponent has a fortresss out you have mixmence your opponet is unaware it's a mixmence ad think it could be other mence sets. What do you do ? do you flame that forttty to kingdom come or do you risk the eathquake because you are aware your opponent has scarfran, now what I think is this, Can I handle the heatran if it come in on flamthrower can my pokes handle heatran? If not i'll probally still flame thrower the fortress, why do you ask? well it's simple my mence is the only member of my team cabiple of handling the heatran if I misspredict and fortty stays in i risk loosing mence and there gose my best bet for killlng scarfran so i risk letting heatran in, heatran switches in oh no free boost, i switch in fortress he uses hp ice i take the hit or if he use flamethrower boo hoo pooor fortty and out comes mence to attack. It's not a situation i'd like but still.


If I look at it like this

0-40% chance I will risk blasting the opponent to kingdomcome regardelss of to any negative consiquence I may think of being cautoius if I know my team cope and opt for predicting the switch

41-80% chance of a switch it will all depend on how my team can cope should worst come to worst

76% or higher i will predict the switch and opt for trying to hurt or kill the switch in however it will depend on how my team can cope greatly if a bluder is made.

The percentages coem from situations in a battle that I give a percentage in my head to the chances of it happening. i am not a big fan of predictiona nd i try to mimimize it's use with out any real negitve effects wich works for me fine but even now and then I use it when curcimstances need be. At the end of the day you gamble when predicting and I like to gamble as little as possible and keep things solidifyed and face things as they come and make sure I can cope if worst comes to worst.

 

[Yamitahuvaka]

To me, it seems like everyone tries to think 2 steps ahead...

Every battle you have had in your past affects your future battles. The whole learning from your mistakes thing.

 

[errorrrr]

It is rather obvious that it's not glorified guessing. If that were the case, we would expect all players to have ~50% win rate, controlling for differences in teams. Put another way, if two players use the same team, their win rate should be identical.

This is not the case. You're using bad statistics here. Just because an event is not 100% doesn't mean it's 50%. Prediction is your ability to determine what they'll do. It's not an always right or always wrong thing, it's a gradient. Yes, they're trying to predict you as well, but the whole point is to be smarter than them (or else you'll be outpredicted).

All things equal, same team, player of the same level, the law of large number WILL give you 50% win rate on both team. I am almost certain.

Anyways, the most obvious is just switch in your wall if you can't make up your damn mind... or someone who resist all your opponents move, and see he either goes with guts, or second guess him/herself, or third guess him/herself.

 

[Pyromanic]

All things equal, same team, player of the same level, the law of large number WILL give you 50% win rate on both team. I am almost certain.

Tell me how many times this has happened.

 

[errorrrr]

Tell me how many times this has happened.

I will tell you when you give me a large enough sample size.

 

[husk]

I'd define prediction as "going against logical play" and I believe goofball does too which is why:

When he says:

You make smart moves you'll win 80% of the time.

and you reply:

Thanks for a new definition I guess. I presume that some of these "smart moves" are prediction, playing the most obvious move won't help you much if your opponent is skilled in any way.

You have clearly misunderstood what he meant. No "smart" moves are prediction. If it is logical then you're not predicting, it's obvious what is logical. Yes, winning vs 80% of opponents with simply a good team and logical play is easy. In your mind you can think of your opponent's 5 options (assuming nothing has influenced this): move 1, move 2, move 3, move 4, and switch. And then your own 5 responses...

1 being the most logical and safest move and 5 being the least logical. Prediction would be to simply choose a non 1 move because you "know" what your opponent will do.


All of you saying prediction is just "guessing" or that it's not worth it, I completely disagree and will venture you don't like to predict often or can not predict well. When making a correct prediction, it does not feel like a guess. You know what will happen and you're responding logically. You are basing your play off of a fact that definitely does not exist...therefore it can be considered illogical from the viewpoint of someone dealing purely with statistics but to the player predicting there is no risk because it's simply the most logical move. The safest bet.

I'm not so great with words so feel free to argue with me and I'll explain myself better.

 

[Stathakis]

what I find interesting is that generally people associate offense with prediction. I find this to be incredibly far from reality. generally, when I play, the important turns are the ones in the early game. I might make a prediction or two there to gain momentum, but if you've built your offense team well it's near impossible to lose a game once you have the momentum. that's why I (and most other players worth their salt) say it's all about team matchup. it's easy to win if your team matchup enables you to easily gain momentum from the start of the match without having to predict. when you have a bad team matchup, that is when you MIGHT predict. even then, however, smart playing and a well-built team often puts you in a position where rather than predict what they will do, thinking "if i do x while they do y I win but if they do z I have to do w to win," you are in a position along the lines of "if I do x I win no matter if they do y,z,q,d,s,w, or anything else." the thing about predicting lategame is while it's not completely guessing, it's incredibly unreliable because with prediction you cannot put yourself on a level above your opponent (i.e. you can predict that they would predict that you would predict them to not make the obvious move etc etc), while between teambuilding and thinking, the great players can put themselves above the average joe shmoe. husk, I think what most people who say predicting is guessing (or at least this is my take on it) is that I'd rather win guaranteed than only win if I outpredict the person. and you get that situation by making a good team and using it smartly. when it's necessary, you predict. for the most part, however, I think that the superior player is the one who wins no matter what rather than the one who wins if the opponent does a certain move and they respond correctly.

 

[xBLUEx]

This has happened to me a great number of times in the past. At first I would usually just randomly pick one and hope that my opponent chooses the wrong move. Recently I have been thinking about the long run of the battle when a situation like this comes at hand. I think to myself, "Which poke will I need most later on?" ans this has helped quite a bit.

 

[husk]

Oh, Stathakis, I'm only discussing battles where the superiority between players is contestable because I have accepted that there is a peak to team building and that high level players have reached it.

Basically, I'm discussing a good player vs a good player. I believe that making a team that is "amazing" and playing logically will let you win 80% of the time but for an ambitious, excellent player that isn't enough. To get that as close to 100% as possible is prediction. That first 80% is something I don't really believe in discussing as it's absolutely basic to battling at a high level...though I realize just by calling it battling at a high level I've already excluded a large number of people...which is probably why you were explaining to me what people in this thread were discussing.

But on the subject of predicting when necessary...well when I said "logical" I meant playing to win. Don't predict when you can win for sure obviously...I mean I think that's logical.

 

[Chou Toshio]

Husk, I think I know what you are getting at, but it is really difficult to word and you did a valiant effort of it.

Here's my attempt though at trying to explain what you were trying to explain.

On any given turn, a player has a number of options, 4 moves and switch (to whatever other pokes he has left). These have a rank degree of reasonableness (1, 2, 3, etc.). There is a logic based on just the situation itself, not taking into account outside information (such as the flow of the battle, revealed team members, insights on the opponent's playing style, etc.), which I will call "Base Logic."

As an example, If I have 2 pokes left, Lucario and Celebi, and I have Lucario v. Enemy Hippowdon, "Base Logic" would look like this:

1 - Switch to Celebi (who can beat hippowdon)
2 - Close Combat (does most damage to hippowdon)
3 - Crunch (does less damage to hippowdon)
4 - Extremespeed (does less damage than CC and also has no super effective coverage against switch ins)
5 - Swords Dance (lets hippowdon kill me if he EQs)

"Prediction" is picking an option that is not #1 on the list set by "base logic." However, "Base Logic" is not the same as "Real Logic."

Over the course of the battle a player does gain outside information in the form of the flow of the battle, insights on the enemy's play style, knowledge of enemy teammates and knowledge of the opponent's knowledge of your own teammates, etc.

The brain takes these other variables into account, and in doing so
creates a list by "Real Logic." Let's refer to "Real Logic" takes into account outside information and the logic/guesswork or "skill" of the player making the prediction.

"Real Logic" might produces a list that looks like this:

1 - Close Combat (based on previous turns, there is a very high chance the enemy will try for a double-switch to Scizor to try and kill Celebi, and Close Combat also does highest damage to Hippowdon)
2 - Switch to Celebi (there is still a substatial level of risk he will just stay in and earthquake)
3 - Swords Dance (there is a small chance he will switch to a different pokemon that will let me go for the sweep)
4 - Crunch (same as base logic)
5 - Extreme Speed (same as base logic)

Based on "Real Logic" you might get an answer that is different from Base Logic. What many of the other players talking about "smart moves" were getting at though, is that unless under extreme circumstances (like this being the 10th rematch today), Real Logic and Base Logic will produce similar looking lists. For example my "Real Logic" example only switched numbers 1 and 2.

It is worthy of note that picking a "smart move" does not necessarily mandate that you pick number 1, as number 2 or even 3 might also be a fairly "smart move" based on the situation.




edit: For Fun

Real Logic List of Stupid Player:

1 - Extremespeed!!! (Hippos are 4x week to speed!!!)
2 - Close Combat!!!!! (My Luke will defin'ly wack that fuckin' hippo!! Die!!)
3 - Swords Dance!!!!! (I'm goin' super saiyan!!!)
4 - Crunch!! (Def drop all the way!!!)
5 - Switch to Celebi (I hate that gay pixie!!! Why'd I even put it in my team, even though I copied it from those stooopid smogonerss!!!)

 

[husk]

Yeah...that's pretty much what I meant. The only thing I'd add is that all of the thinking is only relevant against someone who has a distinct team advantage against you or is extremely skilled...something that is usually irrelevant if you've prepared in advance and are playing on the ladder.

 

[Objection]

In your mind you can think of your opponent's 5 options (assuming nothing has influenced this): move 1, move 2, move 3, move 4, and switch. And then your own 5 responses...

Actually, I'd say it's 9 possible options: move 1, move 2, move 3, move 4, switch to A, switch to B, switch to C, switch to D and switch to E. Obviously as the opponent loses A, B, C, D and E, his or her options become more limited, and if the pokemon that's in play is subject to Taunt or Torment or Encore or has a choice item equipped, the move options are also narrowed down.

 

[Potential]

Actually, I really like this definition of prediction (with the logic arguments and the possible moves). The only real problem seems to come in the early game when (most of the time), for things like Salamence, you don't know what their moves are, and you don't know what the opponent's other Pokémon are. So, using the information that you are given (what lead are they using, did it use Reflect/Light Screen, is it not gaining Leftovers recovery, etc.), you need to deduce what you can, if vaguely, what the opponent's options are; you don't know exactly, say, "Salamence has the moveset Draco Meteor, Outrage, Dragon Dance, Earthquake with a Life Orb!" as soon as it's sent out. However, you may be able to tell, if a lead Uxie uses Reflect, Light Screen and Memento (possibly before the Memento so you can send in something appropriate), you will likely see something like a Swords Dance, max Spd, etc. Lucario.

So, basically, as the game progresses, possibilities collapse, finalizing (in the player's mind) what the opponent's team is, and, by extension, what their moves will be.
That reminds me of one of the last paragraphs in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series...

 

[obi]

Prediction has so much instinct to it.

"Instinct" is just the word we use when we are unaware of what thought processes brought us to a conclusion.

It is impossible to stop predicting. If they have Scizor out and you use a Fire move, you're predicting that they're probably staying in (or that you can handle whatever they switch to).

 

[Stathakis]

Oh, Stathakis, I'm only discussing battles where the superiority between players is contestable because I have accepted that there is a peak to team building and that high level players have reached it.

but which peak is easier to reach, the peak in teambuilding or in prediction? generally most average players can predict. very few players can build really good teams. the prediction peak is so much easier to reach, or rather, so much harder to go "above and beyond." I know for a fact that both my teambuilding skills and my longterm thinking / battle assessment / non-prediction thinking skills are much better than those of the average player. my prediction skills are at the same level as near everyone, the "peak" level of prediction. I'd much rather challenge my opponent to a match of teambuilding and thinking, where I know I am superior, than to a match of prediction.

 

[Yamitahuvaka]

"Instinct" is just the word we use when we are unaware of what thought processes brought us to a conclusion.

It is impossible to stop predicting. If they have Scizor out and you use a Fire move, you're predicting that they're probably staying in (or that you can handle whatever they switch to).

QFT

Considering nearly every battle of Pokemon is just a big "Prediction". "What move is he going to use now?" "Im sure he wont switch if i keep my pokemon in play" "If i use this...." (Unless your psychic and can read your opponent move for move, which i highly doubt anyone can do). Predicting is a big part of life, not just pokemon =P.

 

[Tarquin]

but which peak is easier to reach, the peak in teambuilding or in prediction? generally most average players can predict. very few players can build really good teams. the prediction peak is so much easier to reach, or rather, so much harder to go "above and beyond." I know for a fact that both my teambuilding skills and my longterm thinking / battle assessment / non-prediction thinking skills are much better than those of the average player. my prediction skills are at the same level as near everyone, the "peak" level of prediction. I'd much rather challenge my opponent to a match of teambuilding and thinking, where I know I am superior, than to a match of prediction.

I spent months and months learning about different teams and experimenting and writing tables of how to combat the game's top threats. I have reached the peak of my team building ability right now with my offensive team. When I face an opponent, I am fully aware that my team is capable or destroying them, or falling flat on it's face. The team I designed is not wholly easy to play correctly and for me, that makes it a bigger payoff and more fun when I play and predict well to bring it success.

It doesn't make my team any worse, I just designed it with prediction in mind.

 

[Erodent]

Hello Tarquin, this is Ping Pong Player. We have battled twice, I believe, and on both occasions you have defeated me. I can't remember either of us making key predictions though. Maybe what we share is a fear-to-predict syndrome. Indeed, my heart tenses in anticipation whenever I make a prediction. This:

I am fully aware that my team is capable or destroying them, or falling flat on it's face

Is actually very true. I have been trying out all out offense, and if you have ever tried it, you know that you must predict or die.

My prediction phase (on Shoddy) is particularly "unique", if you will call it that. The first thing I do is scout my opponent. Look up their ranking. Scout what they do. If they leave a Life Orb Infernape on an Azelf... well, this is a symbol that I can pretty much wreck their team with effortless prediction. If they don't make a mistake as stupid as that, then I begin to take caution. Always, I Psychic a Skarmory before I Flamethrower it for fear of Heatran and Psychic a Blissey before Exploding for fear of Protect. These are pretty much natural habits that I have developed after using my team for so long.

However, if I am matched up with an opponent whose ranking is significantly higher than mine or made some great moves in the early stages of the game, I begin to play stupid. Sometimes it's better than way. I've won a large number of matches by playing dumb. In the end, however, I begin to make prediction that my opponent never thought I would have (Draco Meteoring an Empoleon because I know he switched in a Latias previously) and have emerged victorious.

Those are my thoughts. Good opponent, be dumb. Silly opponent, be smart.

 

[X-Act]

If I were to return playing, I would choose to do the move that would hurt me the least and would hurt my opponent the most even if I mispredict.

For example, in the Salamence vs. Dragonite example, I would probably choose to Dragon Pulse. Even if the opponent switches to Scizor, it will still be dealt okay damage even though Scizor resists Dragon Pulse, since Scizor's SpD isn't spactacular. Just because a move is not very effective doesn't mean damage wasn't dealt. (As an aside, this is the reason why Dragon moves are so good - they never hit for zero damage and usually have a high base power.)

If I Dragon Danced, I might have lost my Salamence since Dragonite might have left his Dragonite in and hit me with a Dragon move. Thus, Dragon Dance is riskier than Dragon Pulse in this scenario.

 

[Tarquin]

Hello Tarquin, this is Ping Pong Player. We have battled twice, I believe, and on both occasions you have defeated me. I can't remember either of us making key predictions though. Maybe what we share is a fear-to-predict syndrome. Indeed, my heart tenses in anticipation whenever I make a prediction.

I do indeed remember you :) I believe against your team I used my strategy of using toe-to-toe battling, i.e. temporarily abandoning the common team goal in order to simply break down the opponent piece by piece.

We didn't make key predictions, but in such as game, every prediction is in fact key, as each move can potentially bring down another one of the opponents key battle tools. I also get a little jittery when I predict too, thats why i stops actively laddering, it is quite a scary experience when a false prediction could cost you 6 battles' work. When you're battling in relaxed conditions, you're much more free to experiment with your prediction and strategy.

 

[imperfectluck]

I play a team that never gains the momentum and I always tend to let the opponent set the pace of the match. I also choose not to use any moves on my team that don't have 100% accuracy. Prediction isn't important, usually I pick my move in under 5 seconds without really thinking about what it means, I just do it. It's all about teams in DPPt in my opinion and how they match up against each other.

 

[Tarquin]

That seems pretty hollow :O

You seem to be just preparing for the battle but then not really enjoying the full experience when you get there. The risks, the prediction, the pace, the shift of momentum back and forth.

This seems so clinical and well, boring :o

 

[imperfectluck]

Really? I never pay attention to what I'm doing while playing Pokemon on the ladder, lol. I can't stand this boring game that never changes bar a few suspect test shakeups (used the same team for 3 years now.) Taking no risks is by far the easiest way to keep a firm grip on the top of ladder, as I have proved over and over again.