This is a pretty lol definition of skill. Shooting a basketball is a skill, can somene just train it up to the same level as an NBA player? No. You can certainly improve someone's skill at shooting a basketball but they hit a ceiling at some point. Same goes for what we're talkin about here.
-
Smogon Premier League is here and the team collection is now available. Support your team!
-
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.
Skill, or glorified guesswork?
- Thread starter SevveN
- Start date
This is a pretty lol definition of skill. Shooting a basketball is a skill, can somene just train it up to the same level as an NBA player? No. You can certainly improve someone's skill at shooting a basketball but they hit a ceiling at some point. Same goes for what we're talkin about here.
I don't see it necessarily as prediction. Sure you can call it that, but in the end, you're just guessing. Let's assume we have out Abomasnow, for instance, and someone sends out a Scarfed Heatran. Generally, you can decide what the opponent might use based on it's moveset and item(this could be hard to tell), and since Earth Power doesn't have raw power to kill him, and his hidden power of choice won't do anything, he'll probably use Fire Blast, and I could switch in something to take it well like Flygon or Porygon2, neither of which Heatran will want to try breaking past.
But this tactic can backfire easily enough. After revealing said Flygon or Porygon2, Heatran might come back in and instead of firing a Fire Blast, catch the Flygon switchin with HP Ice. Same applies with Porygon2 and Earth Power(which is a 3HKO on him anyway) or in a twist of fate, can bait out an explosion, which bones the whole switchin.
Case in point, it's not only guessing, but weighing the options and risks of each action, and playing mind games to crush your foes.
But this tactic can backfire easily enough. After revealing said Flygon or Porygon2, Heatran might come back in and instead of firing a Fire Blast, catch the Flygon switchin with HP Ice. Same applies with Porygon2 and Earth Power(which is a 3HKO on him anyway) or in a twist of fate, can bait out an explosion, which bones the whole switchin.
Case in point, it's not only guessing, but weighing the options and risks of each action, and playing mind games to crush your foes.
Prediction is, in my opinion, what one calls an "educated guess". One essentially is guessing about the outcome in next turn, but generally speaking the guessing is not a wild guess, and there is a certain amount of skill and experience involved in correct predictions most of the time.
I think it is just guesswork most of the time. For example, take this situation:
You have a cb scizor out and only a machamp left. Your opponent has an azelf out and only a magnezone left. What do you do? Well, there are four cases:
1. You BP and he stays in. You win because scizor kills azelf, zone kills scizor, and machamp kills zone
2. You BP and he switches. You lose because zone kills scizor, machamp kills zone, and azelf kills machamp
3. You use Superpower and he stays in. You lose because azelf kills scizor and machamp
4. You use superpower and he switches. You win because scizor kills zone, then you switch to machamp who dies to azelf, and you kill azelf with scizor.
What would you do, superpower or bp?
You have a cb scizor out and only a machamp left. Your opponent has an azelf out and only a magnezone left. What do you do? Well, there are four cases:
1. You BP and he stays in. You win because scizor kills azelf, zone kills scizor, and machamp kills zone
2. You BP and he switches. You lose because zone kills scizor, machamp kills zone, and azelf kills machamp
3. You use Superpower and he stays in. You lose because azelf kills scizor and machamp
4. You use superpower and he switches. You win because scizor kills zone, then you switch to machamp who dies to azelf, and you kill azelf with scizor.
What would you do, superpower or bp?
Glorified guessing.
For example, many times I kill Salamence locked into Outrage with CB Scizor and what decides to come out. Heatran, that's who. Well you will see me immediantly going to Blissey after that. I get hit with a Fire Blast, but there is no LO recoil, no increase in damage otherwise. Hence it may be Scarf. On the other hand it could always be Shuca. So what I do is Bring Blissey in blindly then switch immediantly afterwards to my Rotom.
One of two things will happen:
a) they switch to something that will threaten Blissey, hence no reason to keep it in regardless. Now I've gotten a free switch to Rotom and he wasted his time doing nothing. Now I'm led to believe the Heatran's scarfed.
b) They exploded. Cool =D
For example, many times I kill Salamence locked into Outrage with CB Scizor and what decides to come out. Heatran, that's who. Well you will see me immediantly going to Blissey after that. I get hit with a Fire Blast, but there is no LO recoil, no increase in damage otherwise. Hence it may be Scarf. On the other hand it could always be Shuca. So what I do is Bring Blissey in blindly then switch immediantly afterwards to my Rotom.
One of two things will happen:
a) they switch to something that will threaten Blissey, hence no reason to keep it in regardless. Now I've gotten a free switch to Rotom and he wasted his time doing nothing. Now I'm led to believe the Heatran's scarfed.
b) They exploded. Cool =D
Play it smart and U-turn out of there... unless you know it has flamethrower. But most people switch out Azelf when Scizor is around anyway, so Superpower would be the superior option.
You take note of how the opponent has played and guess on how he's been acting accordingly. If he's a more conservative player, superpower, if he's the kind that has shown that will run serious risks, bp. Prediction doesn't occur in a vacumn, particularly towards the endgame, as you should have an idea of how your opponent plays.
Referring to Aldaron et al:
Prediction is certainly related to battling skill, but the act of predicting will never be anything but guesswork. Battling skill is all about knowing your team, analyzing the structure of your opponent's team, and knowing the metagame. However, its a safe bet that two great players will automatically do all of this. And when they come up against each other, it becomes a mind game where, as in the princess bride, one person will either be hailed as a genius or fall over into his grave.
Referring to the Scizor+Machamp vs. Azelf+Magnezone example.
Does the opponent know that you have a Machamp? Information can change the guess you can make (of course, it is still a guess, just an educated guess now). Regardless, an opponent never follows a conservative or liberal path 100% of the time, or he will lose way too often either from being read like a book or making mistakes that allow the opponent to gain an advantage. Therefore, all we have to try to analyze the opponent are tendencies, and the gravity of the situation certainly affects what a player will do. It becomes another guessing game.
Prediction is certainly related to battling skill, but the act of predicting will never be anything but guesswork. Battling skill is all about knowing your team, analyzing the structure of your opponent's team, and knowing the metagame. However, its a safe bet that two great players will automatically do all of this. And when they come up against each other, it becomes a mind game where, as in the princess bride, one person will either be hailed as a genius or fall over into his grave.
Referring to the Scizor+Machamp vs. Azelf+Magnezone example.
Does the opponent know that you have a Machamp? Information can change the guess you can make (of course, it is still a guess, just an educated guess now). Regardless, an opponent never follows a conservative or liberal path 100% of the time, or he will lose way too often either from being read like a book or making mistakes that allow the opponent to gain an advantage. Therefore, all we have to try to analyze the opponent are tendencies, and the gravity of the situation certainly affects what a player will do. It becomes another guessing game.
I agree completely with Aldaron and Colin, so I'm just going to reiterate what they said, basically, by explaining it how I think about it.
It's silly to view it as "either prediction or guessing", just like it's silly to view behavior as "nature or nurture". Both positions are wrong because neither side is completely true. It's better to view prediction, in this sense, as a sliding scale between guesswork and skill.
When I have no information about my opponent, I'm more on the "guess" side of the scale. I'm still not completely on that side because I have past knowledge of other battles that I can apply to this one ("People tend to switch their Tyranitar out of my Lucario, so I'm going to Swords Dance instead of Close Combat, even though Earthquake kills me"). Of course, until I know more about my opponent, I can't say that this would be safe with any degree of certainty. Maybe my opponent is a bad player and thinks switching is lame. Maybe my opponent can't beat Lucario if it gets a Swords Dance and thus is willing to risk his Tyranitar to save the game. Maybe my opponent's experience has been that Lucario tend to use Swords Dance against their Tyranitar, and thus they're staying in.
As the battle continues, however, each side is gathering more information about the other. Each side is attempting to move their own slider more toward "skill" or "prediction" while keeping their opponent's down at "guess". In other words, they want to figure out how their opponent plays while giving the least amount of information about how they play (or, even better, the most amount of wrong information about how they play).
In short, the idea that prediction is either 100% a skill or 0% a skill clearly leaves out a lot of options, and the truth in this case tends to be somewhere in the middle.
It's silly to view it as "either prediction or guessing", just like it's silly to view behavior as "nature or nurture". Both positions are wrong because neither side is completely true. It's better to view prediction, in this sense, as a sliding scale between guesswork and skill.
When I have no information about my opponent, I'm more on the "guess" side of the scale. I'm still not completely on that side because I have past knowledge of other battles that I can apply to this one ("People tend to switch their Tyranitar out of my Lucario, so I'm going to Swords Dance instead of Close Combat, even though Earthquake kills me"). Of course, until I know more about my opponent, I can't say that this would be safe with any degree of certainty. Maybe my opponent is a bad player and thinks switching is lame. Maybe my opponent can't beat Lucario if it gets a Swords Dance and thus is willing to risk his Tyranitar to save the game. Maybe my opponent's experience has been that Lucario tend to use Swords Dance against their Tyranitar, and thus they're staying in.
As the battle continues, however, each side is gathering more information about the other. Each side is attempting to move their own slider more toward "skill" or "prediction" while keeping their opponent's down at "guess". In other words, they want to figure out how their opponent plays while giving the least amount of information about how they play (or, even better, the most amount of wrong information about how they play).
In short, the idea that prediction is either 100% a skill or 0% a skill clearly leaves out a lot of options, and the truth in this case tends to be somewhere in the middle.
There is some prediction which has little to no risk involved.
For a good example, look at Hector's Warstory. Hector switched to flygon every time his opponent brought in flygon because an outrage would allow him to win with empoleon. This meant that he was hedging his chances to win by making a play that would result in an advantage either way.
This is defensive prediction, now let's look at an offensive example.
I have LO Recover Latias in against their Agility SubPetaya Empoleon (for the sake of argument, Grass Knot + Surf). I know that they have scarf flygon in the wings. Empoleon has little he can do to me, so the correct course of action would be to dragon pulse it to death, recovering off any damage incurred. This ensures that something is kod.
Both of these examples are not prediction per se, but allow you to hedge your odds. You will benefit no matter which course of action the opponent takes. Often these moves are called prediction when the worst possible result happens.
This is the kind of prediction people should engage in, not the reckless things. If you MUST use reckless prediction as in mtr12's example, you should at least wait until the second time the loop occurs. So mtr would want to go to forretress/giratina to take the uturn, and then the next time blissey came in to take something he could immediately go to forretress. It is never necessary to do it the first time. You have to wait until you have a feel for your opponent.
For a good example, look at Hector's Warstory. Hector switched to flygon every time his opponent brought in flygon because an outrage would allow him to win with empoleon. This meant that he was hedging his chances to win by making a play that would result in an advantage either way.
This is defensive prediction, now let's look at an offensive example.
I have LO Recover Latias in against their Agility SubPetaya Empoleon (for the sake of argument, Grass Knot + Surf). I know that they have scarf flygon in the wings. Empoleon has little he can do to me, so the correct course of action would be to dragon pulse it to death, recovering off any damage incurred. This ensures that something is kod.
Both of these examples are not prediction per se, but allow you to hedge your odds. You will benefit no matter which course of action the opponent takes. Often these moves are called prediction when the worst possible result happens.
This is the kind of prediction people should engage in, not the reckless things. If you MUST use reckless prediction as in mtr12's example, you should at least wait until the second time the loop occurs. So mtr would want to go to forretress/giratina to take the uturn, and then the next time blissey came in to take something he could immediately go to forretress. It is never necessary to do it the first time. You have to wait until you have a feel for your opponent.
You're right. I would originally throw in a Giratina to the U-turn, because I'd prefer that Forry not take any damage unless it is fulfilling a utility role, and I'd rather not risk Groudon in case the other dude has a DDRay. Maybe the next time around, I could try a double-switch.
To ignore game theory and pass it off as not a skill would be tragic, I think.
If one can get better than a 50% success rate off of their choices (assuming, of course, that every choice only has two options; expand the statement as necessary), then there is another element aside from guessing randomly. I call this "skill" only because there needs to be a term for it, and skill fits at least somewhat well.
To say that a person cannot find trends in an opponents strategy-that is, that a person cannot discover a person's strategy-in the game theoretical sense is a lie. Will it be difficult? Certainly. Yet I believe that it is still hypothetically *possible* to be able to understand the odds with which the opponent will make particular moves and act accordingly to one's best chance of success.
If one can get better than a 50% success rate off of their choices (assuming, of course, that every choice only has two options; expand the statement as necessary), then there is another element aside from guessing randomly. I call this "skill" only because there needs to be a term for it, and skill fits at least somewhat well.
To say that a person cannot find trends in an opponents strategy-that is, that a person cannot discover a person's strategy-in the game theoretical sense is a lie. Will it be difficult? Certainly. Yet I believe that it is still hypothetically *possible* to be able to understand the odds with which the opponent will make particular moves and act accordingly to one's best chance of success.
Trends exist, but they are exactly that: trends. They aren't rules by any means. More to the point, it is difficult to divine the nature of your opponent if you both are playing fast-paced offensive teams, as the games are over relatively quickly. The opponent's nature becomes more apparent if stall is involved, but then prediction only matters against stuff like Trick users and mixed sweepers.
Isn't all prediction just skillful guesswork? There aren't that many cases when you know anything will happen for sure.
The thing with prediction in DPPT is, as Obi/Aldaron/Colin have said, is that there is simply not enough information. Not only is there far too little information to intelligently act upon, but this actually leads to another lack of information - since the lack of information leads to relatively "safe" opening moves (Sasher with Taunt/SR, etc, because I find it is extraordinarily hard to recover from errors, especially against major threats), it becomes hard to discern not only the threats the opposing team presents, but the overall skill level of the player.
Thus, taking prediction risks may fail, either from being outpredicted by a better player, or from a worse player making a bad move (and because of the sheer power in the dppt metagame, even a mistake against a bad player will likely cost you the match). This leads players to generally play conservative, sticking to their preplanned strategy, and looking for sweep opportunities, or favorable end-game matchups.
Another dimension of prediction is the speed of matches. In RSE and GSC, battles lasted anywhere from 25 to 150+ turns, often without a single pokemon being fainted or even being weakened, or any major change in the tide of the battle. This often created conditions of 100% information attainment for both players, which made the prediction mind-game critical to victory, as the stalemate would be otherwise unbreakable without prediction (this could be illustrated by having two players who limit themselves to only basic prediction, using a well-built stall team). In DPPT, matches proceed far faster, and information is often attained as pokemon are being fainted. Thus, it decreases the role of risky prediction in victory.
Thus, taking prediction risks may fail, either from being outpredicted by a better player, or from a worse player making a bad move (and because of the sheer power in the dppt metagame, even a mistake against a bad player will likely cost you the match). This leads players to generally play conservative, sticking to their preplanned strategy, and looking for sweep opportunities, or favorable end-game matchups.
Another dimension of prediction is the speed of matches. In RSE and GSC, battles lasted anywhere from 25 to 150+ turns, often without a single pokemon being fainted or even being weakened, or any major change in the tide of the battle. This often created conditions of 100% information attainment for both players, which made the prediction mind-game critical to victory, as the stalemate would be otherwise unbreakable without prediction (this could be illustrated by having two players who limit themselves to only basic prediction, using a well-built stall team). In DPPT, matches proceed far faster, and information is often attained as pokemon are being fainted. Thus, it decreases the role of risky prediction in victory.
I'm from those who uses instict to battle in this game.
It's rare to see me thinking a lot before making a move. Most of the time I make a fast move procesing all the possible moves the opponent could make and hoping I'm right. Of course it has it's cost because sometimes you want to cancel your attack and the fucking "Cancel" button doesnt work xD
While the battle starts and continues I can think on how's my opponent by it's nickname, it's switch ins/out, sometimes pokemon and act according to that (perhaps wrong) profile.
Other times you're not in a good psychological shape and just play like shit, because can't think fast what your opponent's most likely going to do or you're not paying atention on what's he/she doing in the battle.
That's my style of play anyways.
It's rare to see me thinking a lot before making a move. Most of the time I make a fast move procesing all the possible moves the opponent could make and hoping I'm right. Of course it has it's cost because sometimes you want to cancel your attack and the fucking "Cancel" button doesnt work xD
While the battle starts and continues I can think on how's my opponent by it's nickname, it's switch ins/out, sometimes pokemon and act according to that (perhaps wrong) profile.
Other times you're not in a good psychological shape and just play like shit, because can't think fast what your opponent's most likely going to do or you're not paying atention on what's he/she doing in the battle.
That's my style of play anyways.
You can expect to have something happen, then have it happen. But there are also times when you have something you totally do not expect that benefit you. Just recently I had my celebi in against a swampert, so I was using psychic(not carrying a grass move), and they happened to switch gengar into my psychic. I did not expect him to switch specifically to gengar, or that they even had gengar on their team, I was simply using my most effective move against swampert. On the other side I've had heatrans switch into an earth power because I knew they had it and I expected them to try and counter celebi with it.
Moves like thunder wave are can be called 'safe' prediction, because it will hurt just about anything that switches in.
Moves like thunder wave are can be called 'safe' prediction, because it will hurt just about anything that switches in.
Ok, I am going to take a very, very simple pokemon scenario and do the mathematics to show you exactly how much skill and how much guesswork does go into pokemon, and so like you have an example you can follow in case you encounter a similar situation in future.
For any situation in pokemon there is a strategy where whatever move your opponent selects they cannot improve their chance of winning above an arbitrary point (before the teams are selected this point would be 50%). Against a perfect opponent this is the perfect strategy. Read here, for more detail.
Anyway, I decided to use an example I remember from a game in an early DP tournament that I lost. Because it was a particularly good one.
The scenario was this. I had Heracross and CB Tyranitar, my opponent had only Scarf Garchomp. Garchomp has very little health left and can be KOed by any attack from either of my pokemon, but it outspeeds both.
My Heracross had just KOed my opponents last other pokemon with close combat. This is important because it lowered my defense, meaning with the health I had remaining Garchomp would be able to KO me with earthquake. However if I switch and switch back, I would be able to survive an earthquake. Even without a defense drop Garchomp is able to KO Heracross with Outrage.
Tyranitar has enough health to survive one Outrage but not an Earthquake.
So, disregarding anything other than the most likely outcome, the problem is essentially: if I switch and Garchomp Outrages I lose. If I switch and Garchomp Earthquakes I win. If I attack and Garchomp Outrages I win, if I attack and Garchomp Earthquakes I lose.
However thanks to Sand Veil, CHes, and the possibility of Outrage causing Garchomp to hit itself in confusion with its third outrage the maths is a little bit more complicated than that. (I have simplified some of the calculations a little, the fact that Garchomp can keep hitting itself for 4 turns while I keep missing would take too much effort so I estimated a couple of these).
If I switch and Garchomp Outrages, I have a 18.75% chance of winning and my opponent has a 81.25% winning
If I switch and Garchomp Earthquakes I have a 75% chance of winning and my opponent has a 25% chance of winning.
If I attack and Garchomp Outrages I have a 79% chance of winning and my opponent has a 21% chance of winning.
If I attack and Garchomp Earthquakes, I have no chance of winning at all.
Here is a table:
Whoo boy, I think I am over my head explaining this. But I will soldier on..
Anyway, what I want is a strategy whereby whatever strategy my opponent employs he cannot improve his likelihood of victory. What this means is that the expected return of either move he selects is exactly the same.
E[x] is the expected value of selecting a move.
p is the probability I should attack.
E[Outrage] = .21*p + .8125*(1-p) = .21p + .8125 - .8125*p = .8125 - .6025p
E[Earthquake] = 1*p + .25*(1-p) = 1p + .25 - .25p = .25 + .75p
so E[Outrage] and E[Earthquake] are equal when
.8125 - .6025p = .25 + .75p
.8125 = .25 + 1.3525p
0.5625 = 1.3525p
p = 0.415896
I should Attack 41.5896% of the time.
For my opponent:
q is the probability he should Outrage
E[Attack] = .79*q + 0*(1-p) = .79q
E[Switch] = .1875*q + .75*(1-p) = .75 - 0.5625q
.79p = .75 - 0.5625q
1.3525q = .75
q = .55452865
He should outrage 55.452865% of the time.
If I had played according to this strategy I would have had a 43.807767% chance of winning.
However, you must also consider that this strategy is only optimal if your opponent plays optimally. Which they will not do.
It could have been possible my opponent hadnt realised that my defense drop had put me in KO range of earthquake. Though he was a very skilled player. This made me think perhaps I should be more inclined to attack.
It is also extremely unlikely he would be able to calculate the exact equilibrium during the battle, generally in such clear cut situations as this one I expect people err towards 50/50. Also I couldnt calculate it either. The best I managed was to notice that if I predicted wrong, by forcing him to outrage I would still have a 25% chance he would hit himself in confusion. Which suggested perhaps I should be more inclined to switch.
In the end I switched and he Outraged. I cant remember if I tossed a coin for that one (which I do do sometimes), but I remember I thought about it for a long time. I still wonder if I overestimated him and that he outraged because he hadnt noticed the def drop. But I dunno if I'd trust him even if he told me.. So I guess I'll have to remain in the dark..
Your Blissey vs Kyogre scenario is significantly more complicated than my example (and you havent given us enough detail to analyse it properly). But it seems like the Blissey should have softboiled and then softboiled again against Scizor.. I am unsure if Blissey is enough of an immediate thread to Kyogre to expect with any confidence that Kyogre would switch out..
So basically I am with Obi, Colin and Aldaron. There is luck in prediction but there is skill also.
Have a nice day.
For any situation in pokemon there is a strategy where whatever move your opponent selects they cannot improve their chance of winning above an arbitrary point (before the teams are selected this point would be 50%). Against a perfect opponent this is the perfect strategy. Read here, for more detail.
Anyway, I decided to use an example I remember from a game in an early DP tournament that I lost. Because it was a particularly good one.
The scenario was this. I had Heracross and CB Tyranitar, my opponent had only Scarf Garchomp. Garchomp has very little health left and can be KOed by any attack from either of my pokemon, but it outspeeds both.
My Heracross had just KOed my opponents last other pokemon with close combat. This is important because it lowered my defense, meaning with the health I had remaining Garchomp would be able to KO me with earthquake. However if I switch and switch back, I would be able to survive an earthquake. Even without a defense drop Garchomp is able to KO Heracross with Outrage.
Tyranitar has enough health to survive one Outrage but not an Earthquake.
So, disregarding anything other than the most likely outcome, the problem is essentially: if I switch and Garchomp Outrages I lose. If I switch and Garchomp Earthquakes I win. If I attack and Garchomp Outrages I win, if I attack and Garchomp Earthquakes I lose.
However thanks to Sand Veil, CHes, and the possibility of Outrage causing Garchomp to hit itself in confusion with its third outrage the maths is a little bit more complicated than that. (I have simplified some of the calculations a little, the fact that Garchomp can keep hitting itself for 4 turns while I keep missing would take too much effort so I estimated a couple of these).
If I switch and Garchomp Outrages, I have a 18.75% chance of winning and my opponent has a 81.25% winning
If I switch and Garchomp Earthquakes I have a 75% chance of winning and my opponent has a 25% chance of winning.
If I attack and Garchomp Outrages I have a 79% chance of winning and my opponent has a 21% chance of winning.
If I attack and Garchomp Earthquakes, I have no chance of winning at all.
Here is a table:
Code:
Outrage Earthquake
Attack .79,.21 0,1
Switch .1875,.8125 .75,.25Whoo boy, I think I am over my head explaining this. But I will soldier on..
Anyway, what I want is a strategy whereby whatever strategy my opponent employs he cannot improve his likelihood of victory. What this means is that the expected return of either move he selects is exactly the same.
E[x] is the expected value of selecting a move.
p is the probability I should attack.
E[Outrage] = .21*p + .8125*(1-p) = .21p + .8125 - .8125*p = .8125 - .6025p
E[Earthquake] = 1*p + .25*(1-p) = 1p + .25 - .25p = .25 + .75p
so E[Outrage] and E[Earthquake] are equal when
.8125 - .6025p = .25 + .75p
.8125 = .25 + 1.3525p
0.5625 = 1.3525p
p = 0.415896
I should Attack 41.5896% of the time.
For my opponent:
q is the probability he should Outrage
E[Attack] = .79*q + 0*(1-p) = .79q
E[Switch] = .1875*q + .75*(1-p) = .75 - 0.5625q
.79p = .75 - 0.5625q
1.3525q = .75
q = .55452865
He should outrage 55.452865% of the time.
If I had played according to this strategy I would have had a 43.807767% chance of winning.
However, you must also consider that this strategy is only optimal if your opponent plays optimally. Which they will not do.
It could have been possible my opponent hadnt realised that my defense drop had put me in KO range of earthquake. Though he was a very skilled player. This made me think perhaps I should be more inclined to attack.
It is also extremely unlikely he would be able to calculate the exact equilibrium during the battle, generally in such clear cut situations as this one I expect people err towards 50/50. Also I couldnt calculate it either. The best I managed was to notice that if I predicted wrong, by forcing him to outrage I would still have a 25% chance he would hit himself in confusion. Which suggested perhaps I should be more inclined to switch.
In the end I switched and he Outraged. I cant remember if I tossed a coin for that one (which I do do sometimes), but I remember I thought about it for a long time. I still wonder if I overestimated him and that he outraged because he hadnt noticed the def drop. But I dunno if I'd trust him even if he told me.. So I guess I'll have to remain in the dark..
Your Blissey vs Kyogre scenario is significantly more complicated than my example (and you havent given us enough detail to analyse it properly). But it seems like the Blissey should have softboiled and then softboiled again against Scizor.. I am unsure if Blissey is enough of an immediate thread to Kyogre to expect with any confidence that Kyogre would switch out..
So basically I am with Obi, Colin and Aldaron. There is luck in prediction but there is skill also.
Have a nice day.
Well, we arrived at the conclusion that the Blissey user should switch to Giratina on the first time to take the U-turn, and only risk switching to Forretress on the second time around or maybe even afterwards.
Blissey can wall a Kyogre stuck on Surf, and it can hit it with Toxic or Seismic Toss to whittle down its health. Barring a critical hit, the Kyogre user won't win without Water Spout or Calm Mind, so most Kyogre will switch out. The point is that the Blissey user is not gaining anything by staying in after Kyogre leaves, and the net loss of health from Scizor's U-turn is ~6% (although Blissey's health under 62% is a kill), coupled with the fact that the Scizor user gains another advantageous switch-in.
It's more of a long-term example, but the stall player needs to gain the advantage in terms of residual damage at some point or another, or he loses. Therefore, a premium is placed on getting a turn to spin.
Blissey can wall a Kyogre stuck on Surf, and it can hit it with Toxic or Seismic Toss to whittle down its health. Barring a critical hit, the Kyogre user won't win without Water Spout or Calm Mind, so most Kyogre will switch out. The point is that the Blissey user is not gaining anything by staying in after Kyogre leaves, and the net loss of health from Scizor's U-turn is ~6% (although Blissey's health under 62% is a kill), coupled with the fact that the Scizor user gains another advantageous switch-in.
It's more of a long-term example, but the stall player needs to gain the advantage in terms of residual damage at some point or another, or he loses. Therefore, a premium is placed on getting a turn to spin.
Once you're down to the last few pokemon (the scizor/machamp v. azelf/magnezone, scarf garchomp v. tyranitar/heracross), you have "perfect information" about the other team. You know every move the other player could make, and they know every move you could make. In a game of perfect information, there are dominant strategies. Dominant strategies are either strictly dominant or weakly, though. A strictly dominant strategy would give a higher payout regardless of the opponent's choice, whereas a weakly dominant one would sometimes lead to a lower payout.
All of these scenarios that have been given have no strictly dominant strategy. While you can calculate the advantage of each strategy (as Hipmonlee did), this calculation actually shouldn't inform your decision at all. If you can calculate those percentages, then so can your opponent. If he knows "I will win 55% of the time if I outrage," then he should expect you to know that. If both of you know that, then it is completely reduced to a guessing game. Why would he choose outrage, when he knows that you know it would be better for him and expect it? This leads to an infinite loop of "overprediction," where you think "he probably will outrage as it has a 55% chance of winning, but he'll know i'm predicting an outrage, so he'll EQ, but then he'll expect that i'll expect etc. etc."
All of these scenarios that have been given have no strictly dominant strategy. While you can calculate the advantage of each strategy (as Hipmonlee did), this calculation actually shouldn't inform your decision at all. If you can calculate those percentages, then so can your opponent. If he knows "I will win 55% of the time if I outrage," then he should expect you to know that. If both of you know that, then it is completely reduced to a guessing game. Why would he choose outrage, when he knows that you know it would be better for him and expect it? This leads to an infinite loop of "overprediction," where you think "he probably will outrage as it has a 55% chance of winning, but he'll know i'm predicting an outrage, so he'll EQ, but then he'll expect that i'll expect etc. etc."
Some of these are just... wow. Anyways, I suppose this is more of a subjective topic here are my two cents...
Prediction:
When predicting you are...
Playing off the metagame
-I can't play in OU with my UU mindset.
Playing off your knowledge of your opponent
-Am I facing IPL, Eu, or consitent high ranking player or am I facing a "nobody"
Playing off your team options
-How many pokemon you have shown you opponent, your teams play style, teams movepool, etc...
Playing off you opponents team options
-How many pokemon your opponent have shown you, his teams play style, teams movepool, etc...
Play Style
-How have I been making my moves? Conservatively or Aggressive?
Understanding peoples tendencies
-After playing soooooooo many matches you get an idea of whats going to happen 3 turns ahead of everything. (Not to be bragging but....)
-An Example, I use SubPunch Toxicroak in UU. I know that 9/10 if I switch him into Milotic they will switch out the first time. I get a guarenteed sub. For the sake of the example... Donphan switches in. I Focus Punch, he EQ's. Assuming that SR has not been set up and Donphan has a tendency to carry SR... the next move should be obvious... Toxicroak uses... "Taunt, Sub, FocusPunch". This is a minor case of reading into what people are going to do.
Knowing about viable "gimmick sets"
-If your opponent switches his Entei into your Roserade you better know that Entei learns STone Edge before hastily grabbing your Moltress...
-Yea stuff like that
Anyways when "predicting" there is more than "Oh, shit... I guess I'll do this".
Prediction:
When predicting you are...
Playing off the metagame
-I can't play in OU with my UU mindset.
Playing off your knowledge of your opponent
-Am I facing IPL, Eu, or consitent high ranking player or am I facing a "nobody"
Playing off your team options
-How many pokemon you have shown you opponent, your teams play style, teams movepool, etc...
Playing off you opponents team options
-How many pokemon your opponent have shown you, his teams play style, teams movepool, etc...
Play Style
-How have I been making my moves? Conservatively or Aggressive?
Understanding peoples tendencies
-After playing soooooooo many matches you get an idea of whats going to happen 3 turns ahead of everything. (Not to be bragging but....)
-An Example, I use SubPunch Toxicroak in UU. I know that 9/10 if I switch him into Milotic they will switch out the first time. I get a guarenteed sub. For the sake of the example... Donphan switches in. I Focus Punch, he EQ's. Assuming that SR has not been set up and Donphan has a tendency to carry SR... the next move should be obvious... Toxicroak uses... "Taunt, Sub, FocusPunch". This is a minor case of reading into what people are going to do.
Knowing about viable "gimmick sets"
-If your opponent switches his Entei into your Roserade you better know that Entei learns STone Edge before hastily grabbing your Moltress...
-Yea stuff like that
Anyways when "predicting" there is more than "Oh, shit... I guess I'll do this".
There is a nash equilibrium even if all 6 pokemon are in existense as long as both players know them (say they've played before.) The saving grace of pokemon isthat its relatively complex and played very fast. It is highly likely that you could come to a better idea of the actual optimal strategy then your opponent by thinking faster.
There is also a nash equilibrium at the start of a battle before you select your pokemon, as you know every possible pokemon your opponent could select, but it would be incalculably complex.
It would involve using team A a% of the time, team B b%, and so on and so on for probably quite a long time.
It's really only practical in extremely simple endgame scenarios though.
Have a nice day.
It would involve using team A a% of the time, team B b%, and so on and so on for probably quite a long time.
Actually a nash equilibrium is the safest solution to any prediction contest of that sort. Essentially in these situations, if your opponent is good enough, you should act as the nash equilibrium suggests. This is what calculating the advantage of each strategy tells you. If your opponent is imperfect, then you should adjust your probabilities after calculating to include any bias you think your opponent might exhibit, but if you dont know what bias they might exhibit, then you should just stick to what you calculated.
It's really only practical in extremely simple endgame scenarios though.
Have a nice day.