Sleep Clause V2: a better definiton for WiFi battles.

[Incarnation]

Originated from this thread.

On battle platforms like Shoddy Battle and PBR, Sleep Clause is very simple: it is impossible to have more than one pokémon asleep on one team by anything other than Rest.
However, in Wifi matches the Clauses aren't implemented, and the new rule becomes: It is forbidden to break a clause, with the penalty of being disqualified.

This brings some complications with it thanks to the random factors in the game. Freeze Clause is hardly ever used on wifi, simply because there aren't any moves that specifically aim at freezing the opponent, it is merely a side-effect from moves like Ice Beam and Blizzard.
With Sleep Clause it becomes even more complicated as there are both moves that intentionally induce sleep and scenarios in which inducing sleep happens incidentially or is forced. A few examples are Effect Spore, Sleep Talking Psycho Shift or an Encored Sleep Move.
Therefore, the more precise Sleep Clause is:

only one pokemon on your opponent's team at a time can be put to sleep by you

This indicates that putting someone to sleep by the effect of Effect Spore does not count as breaking Sleep Clause, but Sleep Talking Psycho Shift does. However, in some cases it's very hard to say if this "by you" rule still applies or not.

After reading some of the odd scenario's in the "Sleep Clause: Clarification, or exception"-thread and the heavy discussions about if they break Sleep Clause or not, I think it's clear the current Sleep Clause isn't specific enough for Wifi battles.

So, in this thread:
1. We discuss if a new Sleep Clause is necesarry
2. We try to come up with a better Sleep Clause
3. I try to get the idea of a new Sleep Clause under the attention of some badged members who could actually make some work out of it. With my current postcount I won't get much off the ground myself.

One of my own ideas for a new Sleep Clause is to cap it at a specific percentage:
If choosing a specific move has a chance of 30% or more to induce a second sleep (other than Rest) on one of the opponent's pokémon, it violates Sleep Clause.

However this idea still is very flawed. Forced move scenarios would still get very complicated, and I'm sure a lot of people have better ideas.

EDIT: If a new SLeep Clause should be created, it should at least:
1. Be 100% clear about when it is violated and when not.
The current Sleep Clause has a lot of room for discussion; did the person who broke the rule do it intentionally or not? This should be prevented as much as possible. Ideally, violation of the rule should be mathemathically decidable, for example by putting a percentage-of-happening cap on it.
2. Prevent forced violation of the clause
If it is possible to force a win by letting the opponent disqualify himself, the clause doesn't work properly. That's not the game we're trying to play.
3. Have little to no exceptional cases.
If we have too many exceptions to the rule, it becomes too complicated. If we could keep Rest as the only exception of Sleep Clause, that would be ideal. A percentage-of-happening-cap could work here, too. This way Assist, Metronome and Effect Spore would fall under regular Sleep Clause and be permitted due to not having enough percentage of happening to break the clause, instead of being an exception.

So far we are putting together a list of moves that should or should not break Sleep Clause:

Moves that break Sleep Clause when inducing Sleep
-Dark Void
-Sing
-Hypnosis
-Sleep Powder
-Spore
-Grasswhistle
-Psycho Shift (selected with Sleep Talk)
-Secret Power
-Yawn

Moves that do not break Sleep Clause when inducing Sleep
-Rest
-Effect Spore
-Metronome
-Sleep moves used by a pokémon forced to use it (Encore, Imprison, Torment)
-Sleep moves by a Choiced Pokémon that is unable to switch out (Mean Look, Arena Trap, Shadow Tag)
-Magic Coat

 

[keelhauled]

Hmm, creating a better Sleep Clause could be a good idea. As you stated, Wi-fi doesn't have the capabilities of PBR and Shoddy to automatically block sleep, if SC is activated. Personally, I like the idea for 30% chance or more of sleep, to include Psycho Shifting sleep, as a violation of SC.
I do feel however, that there would be quite a bit of confusion caused by this, and the players who would be unaware of the change, would start getting worked up, as they wouldn't be able to ResTalk as often, with a chance of breaking said Sleep Clause.

I think, its probably for the best, if sleep clause remains the same. Unless a monstrous amount of pokemon started Sleepshifting, I don't see how a new Sleep Clause could benefit, aside from vastly reducing the amount of PsychoShift+RT sets. As long as people are stopped from Spamming Spore and Hypnosis, it should be OK. I think a new rule should probably only be implemented to stop people getting their entire teams slept by a psychoshifter, although, i'm fairly confident people will know to bring a sleep absorber, or at least something that can clear status.

If we Were to implement a new rule however, I would promote standard sleep clause, and an extra pokemon being able to be slept by psycho shift. So then it would be a max of 2 pokemon, which really isn't That devastating, unless you get bad hax and 5 turn sleeps constantly.

 

[Sharpteeth]

That would be hard to define. I mean, what if the opponent has a Togekiss that's SleepShifting but it's 4th move is Focus Punch (which can't be chosen by Sleep talk) and you don't know it? Then the sleep would have a 50% chance, which isn't far from Grasswhistle's 55%.

Or what if the opponent has Psycho Shift, Sleep talk, Focus Punch, Fly, but not Rest? You're the one who put the Togekiss to sleep in the first place (kind like using a contact move against Breloom), but it has 100% chance of putting you to sleep with Psycho Shift, like Spore. There's no way to tell if he is using that set either.

 

[Incarnation]

I think, its probably for the best, if sleep clause remains the same. Unless a monstrous amount of pokemon started Sleepshifting, I don't see how a new Sleep Clause could benefit, aside from vastly reducing the amount of PsychoShift+RT sets. As long as people are stopped from Spamming Spore and Hypnosis, it should be OK. I think a new rule should probably only be implemented to stop people getting their entire teams slept by a psychoshifter, although, i'm fairly confident people will know to bring a sleep absorber, or at least something that can clear status.

So far, Sleeping a pokémon through Psycho Shift does count as violating Sleep Clause. The user of the move knew there was a chance Psycho Shift could be chosen and therefore violated the clause.
Hoewever there are some possible scenarios that are a lot more complicated. Encoreing a Sleep move, for example, would force the Encored pokémon to switch out 100% of the time. On another Encored move you would at least have the possibility to wait for Encore to end.
Another one is Assist or Metronome. The user should know that there is a possibility of using a Sleep move even though it's a very small chance. He/she would be disqualified for an about 1 in 200 chance in the case of Metronome.

I do feel however, that there would be quite a bit of confusion caused by this, and the players who would be unaware of the change, would start getting worked up, as they wouldn't be able to ResTalk as often, with a chance of breaking said Sleep Clause.

Yes, making a new Sleep Clause will probably confuse some players for a while, but that's the case with every change in the metagame.

If we Were to implement a new rule however, I would promote standard sleep clause, and an extra pokemon being able to be slept by psycho shift. So then it would be a max of 2 pokemon, which really isn't That devastating, unless you get bad hax and 5 turn sleeps constantly.

Making a specific rule for one move seems like a bad idea to me. While learning a new Sleep Clause isn't a big problem on long terms, making one-move rules will get confusing. I believe we aren't banning Stealth Rock for the same reason.

That would be hard to define. I mean, what if the opponent has a Togekiss that's SleepShifting but it's 4th move is Focus Punch (which can't be chosen by Sleep talk) and you don't know it? Then the sleep would have a 50% chance, which isn't far from Grasswhistle's 55%.

Therefore it would be a violation of Sleep Clause. The user of the move knows there is a 50% chance of breaking Sleep Clause and therefore IS breaking Sleep Clause in the case of Psycho Shift actually being chosen.

Or what if the opponent has Psycho Shift, Sleep talk, Focus Punch, Fly, but not Rest? You're the one who put the Togekiss to sleep in the first place (kind like using a contact move against Breloom), but it has 100% chance of putting you to sleep with Psycho Shift, like Spore. There's no way to tell if he is using that set either.

Then again the Togekiss user should know that Sleep Talk has a 50% chance of using Psycho Shift and would be violating the clause if Psycho Shift would hit.

 

[Annoying Old Party Man]

so your disqualified if you missclick a sleep move?

 

[Familiar Trainer]

so your disqualified if you missclick a sleep move?

Yeah.

Look at what you're clicking twice before doing it.

As for Metronome, I think it should not be counted in Evasion/Sleep/OHKO clauses. The main reason being the chances of any of those clauses being broken is so low, and the second reason being the player has the balls to use Metronome in the first place.

Assist is a different case.

 

[RegalStar]

Should there also be an exception made if, say, you slept a Blissey, and sleep the second switch-in thinking that Blissey had Natural Cure when she actually had Serene Grace?

 

[Objection]

On battle platforms like Shoddy Battle and PBR, Sleep Clause is very simple: it is impossible to have more than one pokémon asleep on one team by anything other than Rest.

This is how it should be on Wi-fi too. Failing that, any sleep caused by anything other than the player himself selecting a sleep-inducing move when he has another option available (either switching out or another move) should not result in disqualification.

 

[Incarnation]

As for Metronome, I think it should not be counted in Evasion/Sleep/OHKO clauses. The main reason being the chances of any of those clauses being broken is so low, and the second reason being the player has the balls to use Metronome in the first place.

Assist is a different case.

Agreed.

Should there also be an exception made if, say, you slept a Blissey, and sleep the second switch-in thinking that Blissey had Natural Cure when she actually had Serene Grace?

Í think not. You can simply check if Blissey has Serene Grace by waiting for the next time it switches in.

This is how it should be on Wi-fi too. Failing that, any sleep caused by anything other than the player himself selecting a sleep-inducing move when he has another option available (either switching out or another move) should not result in disqualification.

However, on PBR and SB it is simply impossible to sleep a second pokémon. And abusing a Psycho Boost ResTalker SHOULD be forbidden after the first sleep I think. 30% chance of Sleep isn't much, but it's very dangerous on a bulky pokémon like for example ResTalk Cresselia if there is no limit to how many pokémon you can put to Sleep.

 

[eric the espeon]

How would the clause handle the situation where you have slept one opposing Pokemon and use a sleep move on a second opposing Pokemon which has a Lum Berry (this could occur if you predict or know that it has the berry and want to use a less accurate status on it)?

 

[Incarnation]

How would the clause handle the situation where you have slept one opposing Pokemon and use a sleep move on a second opposing Pokemon which has a Lum Berry (this could occur if you predict or know that it has the berry and want to use a less accurate status on it)?

The berry immediatly gets activated, and not a single turn of sleep is caused. It's a VERY risky strategy, because a mispredicted switch would mean you'd lose the match, but I think that shouldn't result in a disqualification.

 

[cim]

I don't see the problem with "If you put two of your opponent's Pokémon to sleep, you lose.". You must factor in the risks of using Effect Spore and Psycho Shift on your team when addressing this rule, it's a design decision.

 

[Intro1827]

I don't see the problem with "If you put two of your opponent's Pokémon to sleep, you lose.". You must factor in the risks of using Effect Spore and Psycho Shift on your team when addressing this rule, it's a design decision.

Nobody uses Effect Spore and Psycho Shift breaks the rule. Easy

 

[Incarnation]

I don't see the problem with "If you put two of your opponent's Pokémon to sleep, you lose.". You must factor in the risks of using Effect Spore and Psycho Shift on your team when addressing this rule, it's a design decision.

However there are some scenarios in which it isn't really clear if it was your specific intention to put the opponent to sleep. For example if you use a Scarfed Breloom, and your opponent switches in Dugtrio. You put Dugtrio to sleep, and the next turn you have no other choice than using Spore again. Now if your opponent switches out, you will Spore another pokémon, by a Sleep move of your pokémon. You could say it wasn't your intention and your opponent forced you to use Spore again, but then again your opponent could say he didn't expect you to use Spore.

Nobody uses Effect Spore and Psycho Shift breaks the rule. Easy

Yes, nobody uses Effect Spore. But nobody uses Rage either, and you should see the discussions about Rage's effect from behind a Substitute. Smogon is a competitive site and we're huge nitpics at it.

 

[Intro1827]

Yes, nobody uses Effect Spore. But nobody uses Rage either, and you should see the discussions about Rage's effect from behind a Substitute. Smogon is a competitive site and we're huge nitpics at it.

Still, Effect Spore isn't activated by the player in the middle of the battle, so it doesn't violate Sleep Clause

 

[Incarnation]

Still, Effect Spore isn't activated by the player in the middle of the battle, so it doesn't violate Sleep Clause

I never said it did. Effect Spore doesn't break Sleep Clause, neither the current one nor "my" variation of Sleep Clause.

 

[MrIndigo]

Again, from the other thread, I restate that the most important consideration in clarifying the sleep clause is to look at why it's there in the first place.

Sleep Clause is intended to promote more interaction in battle and avoid a metagame where Sleep status is so powerful that it's abuse unbalances the metagame.

Under no circumstances should it be a win mechanism, creating situations that force your opponent to breach the rule (and 'switching out' should not be considered an available alternative; if you want to force a switch, their are in-game moves that do just that). That is making Sleep Clause an arbitrary way to force certain setups to be unplayable (e.g. Scarf Breloom; uses Spore, you take the sleep, then switch to Dugtrio, and force the DQ).

The definition I think will work the best is: independently choosing to use a (successful?) Sleep-inducing attack when you have currently succeeded in putting an opponent's pokemon to sleep with a sleep-inducing attack is banned.

Independantly here means you actively and wilfully chose to select the particular attack that induces sleep, your opponent had no influence in the choice (e.g. by switching a trapper, or using Encore). This also means that Metronome and Assist would not be violations, because it is not them that put the opponent to sleep, but whatever attack they randomly select. Sleep Talk would also be permitted under the basic definition, but I could see an exception being made for it when one of your other attacks is a Sleep-inducing move or Psycho Shift. In terms of metagaming, I think allowing SleepTalk/PsychoShift to be used would be fine to start with, and then it can be banned under an expanded Sleep Clause if it becomes to abusive.


This definition is, I feel, the most accurate to the spirit of the original, the least likely to cause technicality arguments, and enough to maintain the competitive nature of battling.

 

[Incarnation]

Ah yes, thank you MrIndigo, that's exactly what I mean. As far as I see, the current Sleep Clause can be abused to force the opponent to lose by disqualification, or could at least start a discussion about if a Clause has been broken or not. If a new SLeep Clause should be created, it should at least:
1. Be 100% clear about when it is violated and when not.
The current Sleep Clause has a lot of room for discussion; did the person who broke the rule do it intentionally or not? This should be prevented as much as possible. Ideally, violation of the rule should be mathemathically decidable, for example by putting a percentage-of-happening cap on it.
2. Prevent forced violation of the clause
If it is possible to force a win by letting the opponent disqualify himself, the clause doesn't work properly. That's not the game we're trying to play.
3. Have little to no exceptional cases.
If we have too many exceptions to the rule, it becomes too complicated. If we could keep Rest as the only exception of Sleep Clause, that would be ideal. A percentage-of-happening-cap could work here, too. This way Assist, Metronome and Effect Spore would fall under regular Sleep Clause and be permitted due to not having enough percentage of happening to break the clause, instead of being an exception.

I'll put these 3 headlines into the first post.

 

[Ferrouswheel]

I take it that this would not ban assist? Or for that matter it's arguable that psycho shift wouldn't be banned unless you do make that exception that you were mentioning.

 

[MrIndigo]

I take it that this would not ban assist? Or for that matter it's arguable that psycho shift wouldn't be banned unless you do make that exception that you were mentioning.

Yeah, that's where I'd stand. Assist and Metronome aren't exactly common moves, either.

 

[Incarnation]

I take it that this would not ban assist? Or for that matter it's arguable that psycho shift wouldn't be banned unless you do make that exception that you were mentioning.

with the 30% cap, Metronome wouldn't be banned because the chance of choosing a Sleep inducing move is a lot smaller than 30%.

Sleep Talked Psycho shift however WOULD be banned: there's at least a 1 in 3 chance that Sleep Talk would choose Psycho Shift, and Psycho Shift has 90% acc: 1/3*.9 = .3, exactly 30%, just enough to be banned.

Assist depends on the situation: It depends on how many Sleep moves the user's team carries. Let's say the user has 3 Sleep Inducing moves devided over 5 pokémon: 3/(4*5) = .15, not enough to be banned.
However, if the user only has 2 team members left and 4 Sleep moves at ther disposal, it becomes 4/(2*4) = .5, which is breaking Sleep Clause.

This could actually permit Assist but prevent abuse of it. A regular team could use Assist, however a team that tries to abuse Assist as being unbanned by stacking as much Sleep and OHKO moves behind it can't.
On the other hand, this can get extremely complicated. The examples I gave use a 100% accurate Sleep move, but if we really want to be fair we should use the accuracy of those Sleep moves in the calculation, which gets really hard if you use a mix of Sleep Powder, Spore and Grasswhistle. Next to that, some moves can't even be picked by Assist.

 

[MrIndigo]

with the 30% cap, Metronome wouldn't be banned because the chance of choosing a Sleep inducing move is a lot smaller than 30%.

Sleep Talked Psycho shift however WOULD be banned: there's at least a 1 in 3 chance that Sleep Talk would choose Psycho Shift, and Psycho Shift has 90% acc: 1/3*.9 = .3, exactly 30%, just enough to be banned.

Assist depends on the situation: It depends on how many Sleep moves the user's team carries. Let's say the user has 3 Sleep Inducing moves devided over 5 pokémon: 3/(4*5) = .15, not enough to be banned.
However, if the user only has 2 team members left and 4 Sleep moves at ther disposal, it becomes 4/(2*4) = .5, which is breaking Sleep Clause.

This could actually permit Assist but prevent abuse of it. A regular team could use Assist, however a team that tries to abuse Assist as being unbanned by stacking as much Sleep and OHKO moves behind it can't.
On the other hand, this can get extremely complicated. The examples I gave use a 100% accurate Sleep move, but if we really want to be fair we should use the accuracy of those Sleep moves in the calculation, which gets really hard if you use a mix of Sleep Powder, Spore and Grasswhistle. Next to that, some moves can't even be picked by Assist.

It's not that hard to calculate the weighted probabilities, actually, but the difficulty with Assist in that case would be being able to calculate them in a Wifi situation; it would not be immediately apparent how stacked they'd made it, especially if they only just broke the percentage barrier.

 

[Incarnation]

It's not that hard to calculate the weighted probabilities, actually, but the difficulty with Assist in that case would be being able to calculate them in a Wifi situation; it would not be immediately apparent how stacked they'd made it, especially if they only just broke the percentage barrier.

Well, I think that the violation of Clauses should be discussed after the battle anyway.
If someone would quit a battle because he thought the opponent had just broken a clause and it turns out the opponent didn't, he just lost a match that he could possibly have won. If he had continued to play after the clause had been broken, he could always put the broken clause to a discussion after the match if he lost.

Also, it turns out Assist is actually able to choose moves from fainted pokémon too, so you could calculate if Assist would break a clause before the match even started.

 

[Ash Borer]

My theory was that if it is possible to take advantage of a certain move to inflict sleep then it should fall under the clause. Obviously spore, etc can, and effect spore can't but can psycho shift?

My answer is yes, it can. Most commonly there would be a 33% chance of sleeping, which should be banned IMO but there are ways to further boost chances to inflict sleep. Such as having moves that can't be chosen such as protect.

I say yes for having psycho shift fall under the sleep clause.

 

[MrIndigo]

Well, I think that the violation of Clauses should be discussed after the battle anyway.
If someone would quit a battle because he thought the opponent had just broken a clause and it turns out the opponent didn't, he just lost a match that he could possibly have won. If he had continued to play after the clause had been broken, he could always put the broken clause to a discussion after the match if he lost.

Also, it turns out Assist is actually able to choose moves from fainted pokémon too, so you could calculate if Assist would break a clause before the match even started.

I wasn't aware that it was standard Wifi practice to show your entire team contents before a battle, eliminating any surprise ability.