I’m not really sure what you’re asking. Soul Heart specifically triggers when a Pokemon faints; what do switchins have to do with it? When is Soul Heart triggering, and how? When are Pokémon fainting for Soul Heart to trigger?
-
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.
Research Scarlet & Violet Battle Mechanics Research
- Thread starter Marty
- Start date
I'm sorry, let me explain better.
I'm not testing Soul Heart—I'm testing Mirror Herb. Mirror Herb activates after most switch-in effects have occurred. For example, if an Intimidate Pokémon enters the field and lowers the Attack of two Pokémon with Defiant, both Defiant abilities will activate first (each gaining +2 Attack), and then Mirror Herb will trigger, copying the stat changes—resulting in +4 Attack.
What I'm asking is: if a Pokémon faints during the switch-in effects, does Mirror Herb activate earlier, or does it still wait until all effects have resolved?
Last edited:
Hi. According to Bulbapedia, prior to Gen 8, -ate abilities override Electrify. This is currently implemented incorrectly on PS, and I'm working on fixing it. My question is: in SM, do Normalize and Liquid Voice also override Electrify?
Last edited:
Re: move type changes, this is how the games work from Gen 5 to present:
- set the move type to its type in the move data, and allow this value to be overwritten ONCE
- check Electrify, which overwrites the move type with Electric
- check every other move type change event handler that exists (except Ion Deluge) (move events always run before Ability events), overwriting the move type only if Electrify didn't already change it
- again, allow the move type to be overwritten ONCE
- check Ion Deluge, which overwrites the move type with Electric if it's Normal
There are zero differences in the order of the event flow described above between Gen 5 and Gen 9. So in reality Electrify happens first, and Normalize happens after Hidden Power/Judgment/Natural Gift/whatever other move. But it doesn't matter what happens after because the type already changed and further event calls other than Ion Deluge are simply locked out from changing a move's type again.
I am so tired of being gaslit by Bulbapedia to re-research things I tested firsthand... Someone very clearly read my descriptions for Pixilate-like effects "This effect comes after other effects that change a move's type, but before Ion Deluge and Electrify's effects." and without testing it themselves or understanding the sentence whatsoever, wrote "overrides Ion Deluge and Electrify" on all the Bulbapedia pages, which obviously completely changes the meaning. Bulbapedia is not reliable for battle mechanics, and nobody should be reading it, or linking it in research or bug reports, or attempting to implement anything written there unless it's been independently verified by someone on Smogon.
Wait, gen 5? But the only one of those that existed in gen 5 was Normalize. Electrify and Ion Deluge are gen 6 moves, as are the ates aside from Galvanize. Wouldn't the gen 5 one just be a check for Normalize?
In the quoted post, Marty outright stated some examples of moves that naturally can have a type change event (Hidden Power/Judgment/Natural Gift), note that there are more like Techno Blast and Weather Ball, which existed in Gen 5. This is why the specification that move events run before ability events is relevant even in Gen 5, because it handles the Normalize case in Gen 5 and -ate cases later on. This specific example is clear to see in Gen 5, where none of the moves that change type are affected by Normalize.
While the Electrify and Ion Deluge checks aren't relevant in Gen 5 (much like how a check for an event on Multi Attack wouldn't happen in Gen 6 and the -ate checks don't happen in Gen 5 either), their exact placement was determined later on. Saying that the event flow Marty listed out is the case for Gens 5-9 is accurate with the (implied) caveat that checks for things that don't exist yet don't happen, rather than having to create several different charts to address additions and removals.
Forgive me if I'm overstepping my boundaries here.
While I understand your frustration with whoever misinterpreted your initial research and put that incorrect conclusion as fact on Bulbapedia, I doubt the edit was done in bad faith, and I don't feel that the user who asked about move type change priority was trying to undermine your previous research. If anything, if I'm reading the post edit correctly, they took the time to look for a related post after asking the question, implying that they did try to look for information here, but wanted confirmation that your explanation for games two generations ago was still how it functions, despite what Bulbapedia claims.
I agree that Bulbapedia shouldn't be taken as a conclusive source for battle mechanics, particularly in extremely niche, mostly-only-applying-to-Hackmons cases like this one, but there have been multiple times where I've tried to look for move behavior on the main Smogon website, only to be disappointed by the succinct description. Bulbapedia's occasional lack of accuracy can be damning, but their move pages try to list as many relevant interactions as possible, and trying to list how said interactions change between generations is very convenient. I unfortunately do not have an example of Smogon's move pages lacking information I was looking for (I just know it's happened to me before).
Dismissing more casual information sources as never being completely trustworthy just kind of rubs me the wrong way (again, I still try to get my detailed battle info from Smogon first if it's available). If I'm not mistaken, it was Serebii who first had 2-layer Spikes damage as 1/6, not 3/16, and that had to be amended on Smogon and the battle simulators. I've also seen multiple instances where it's believed battle mechanics were understood, only to find out many years after the fact that a fairly major aspect of competitive play was simulated incorrectly. I don't think this happens as much now with VGC, though.
You are, but only because your post is entirely off-topic and not because I disagree with your points (which I do).
This would be a fair reading but you're missing context. Another developer pointed them to my post after they posted here and opened a pull request trying to change it on PS.
There's a link on every move page to a C&C thread so you can suggest improvements:
(Inadequate description? Let us know in this thread.)
It's not occasional; the way generational differences are presented on their pages is the source of the vast majority of actual misinformation, not to mention constant misunderstandings from people reporting sim bugs because it's so obtuse.
Surely it isn't controversial to say that lacking information while research is being done and descriptions are being (re)written is better than providing outright misinformation.
I'm specifically dismissing Bulbapedia. As a wiki, it trends towards being useless when anyone anywhere can submit edits that appear on their pages instantly, with no oversight. There are maybe two staff members I'm aware of who actually do their own research, but that certainly isn't enough to cover the volume of edits.
This is true, and I made those fixes myself because I did the research in all gens. If the only examples of this are from 2012 or before, I think we're doing pretty well with the "everything goes through a researcher" approach.
That is the point of these threads, after all.