Alright. Read the stuff in hide tags too, it's a little more background-esque and was stretching the page but it's like half the crux of the argument. Tl;dr below, but read the full post for the full reasoning.
I went into the Z-move debate assuming the following two premises:
- We generally default to in-game / official spelling / phrases.
- We set our own standards if Game Freak's are excessively unwieldy / ambiguous or just plain don't exist (like Silvally-Water over Silvally, type: Water or whatever the official name would have been) or if there are small inconsistencies with previous precedences that we can remove without violating the spirit of the name (like how we normalised the outlier-y in-game spelling Shield Forme and went with Shield forme instead). We set our own standards when we need to or when what Game Freak gives us is inadequate, not when we can or when what Game Freak gives us can be done prettier.
First of all, this was never a decision between "Z-Outrage" and "190-BP Devastating Drake from Outrage"; I apologise if I didn't make that clear at first, but we're not gonna be any wordier than we need to. And generally we indeed don't need to be wordy either.
The dilemma we're faced with is the following. On the one hand, the argument for keeping the Game Freak names is because it's what we should do if we very reasonably can, since we're simulating their game. On the other hand, the argument for changing to Z-<base move> would be that, in the practical context of our analyses, the Game Freak names would cause too much ambiguity and would force us to resort to unwieldy circumscriptions too often. Whether or not we should make this change depends on whether or not the latter is true. The one textbook example is Manaphy, whose Hydro Vortex can break through Unaware Clefable (under rain) and Ferrothorn (at +3), but only if Surf is used as the base move; Hydro Vortex from Scald is just a bit too weak. Let's analyse how prevalent this problem would be in more detail.
Look, "cases like the Manaphy one" is a good reason to throw out the official standard. But "the Manaphy case" alone is not, circumscribing it in that case only is but a small and highly situational inconvenience, nothing we'd even bat an eye for if we didn't have the alternative of "Z-Scald" available. Quite frankly it's pretty annoying when people are clamoring for us to make a significant change to the standards because "ambiguity and overly complicated wordings galore" and then are unable to provide any valid scenarios where it'd actually be a problem. I know this is partly theorymon, but to reiterate, for an actual number, among all relevant one-on-one Pokemon matchups in the entire current OU metagame, there seems a grand total of two where the Game Freak Z-move names don't suffice. Not to mention that, due to the burn nerf, Scald is falling out of favour on Manaphy anyways.
Throwing out an official move name is not something to be taken lightly. In theory, there is a risk of ambiguity here, and when that indeed manifests itself every couple analyses or when we continuously need to write "175-BP Hydro Vortex from Surf" then god get those Game Freak names out of here. But when literally the only practical case where it poses an issue that we have been able to find is the Manaphy one, there is nothing wrong with the official names that we haven't seen (frequently) before. We 100% agree that Z-<base move name> is very much superior from a pure GP standpoint, but that's not too relevant if there is no problem with the Game Freak names to begin with; at that point, we're no longer changing Game Freak names to Z-<base move> because "Game Freak names are inadequate for what we're doing here", but because "we can do this prettier than Game Freak did it". And that's just not happening, sorry, not as long as it's their game we're simulating and analysing.
---------------
Since the GPers were (very understandably) concerned about ambiguity and wordiness when I polled them, here's some pointers on how to deal with Z-moves in the future. If you have any further concerns please feel free to ask us.
-----------------
Because I love spending six hours writing a post and then giving people a way to skip the whole thing while still taking in all the info, here's a bulleted tl;dr:
That's it.
I went into the Z-move debate assuming the following two premises:
- We generally default to in-game / official spelling / phrases.
- We set our own standards if Game Freak's are excessively unwieldy / ambiguous or just plain don't exist (like Silvally-Water over Silvally, type: Water or whatever the official name would have been) or if there are small inconsistencies with previous precedences that we can remove without violating the spirit of the name (like how we normalised the outlier-y in-game spelling Shield Forme and went with Shield forme instead). We set our own standards when we need to or when what Game Freak gives us is inadequate, not when we can or when what Game Freak gives us can be done prettier.
Ambiguity is in the perception of the reader. Even if a given phrase technically has sixteen possible interpretations, if (most) everyone defaults towards the same, there is no ambiguity that we need to resolve—why would we specify something any further or word it any differently if, in a practical scenario, there's no confusion to clear up in the first place? Let's take a look at a very common kind of technical ambiguity we've seen in analyses since the beginning of time; consider a phrase like "Manaphy's Scald". Whether it's because Manaphy is an offensive Pokemon or because they'll be assuming a worst-case scenario, most everyone will be assuming Manaphy is running full Special Attack investment if they read a sentence like "Victini has trouble tanking Manaphy's Scald." (I did not run any calcs here.) However, not every Manaphy's Scald will be fully invested—Manaphy has (used to have) a perfectly viable Calm Mind set too, which doesn't run Special Attack investment, so in any XY analysis, "Manaphy's Scald" could very reasonably refer to unboosted 0 SpA Manaphy's Scald. So in a case like that, we'd specify it as "Manaphy's uninvested Scald" or "Calm Mind Manaphy's unboosted Scald" or whatever, but that's absolutely no reason to write "Manaphy's fully invested Scald" in cases where everyone will be assuming that's what we're talking about anyways. And I completely fail to see how the ambiguity in "Z-Surf" vs "Z-Scald" is fundamentally different from the one in "252 SpA Scald" vs "0 SpA Scald".
First of all, this was never a decision between "Z-Outrage" and "190-BP Devastating Drake from Outrage"; I apologise if I didn't make that clear at first, but we're not gonna be any wordier than we need to. And generally we indeed don't need to be wordy either.
People are less aware of this than I assumed at first (sorry about that fwiw), but offensive Z-moves only deal damage and don't have drawbacks or added effects, they are only differentiated by Base Power—so literally the only difference between "Z-Outrage" and "Z-Dragon Claw" is that the former is stronger, that's it. There is no reason, at all, to use Dragon Claw over Outrage as a Z-move under any circumstances. Furthermore, the analysis in question was (explicitly) written under the assumption of Outrage being used as the Z-move, and there was no mention whatsoever of Draco Meteor being used as such. So any mention of "Devastating Drake" could only reasonably have had Outrage as the base move, and there was no need for additional prose. "Z-Outrage" would not have been any more concise, and the Game Freak name being the standard didn't pose an issue.
There's really no need to be that specific. Tri Attack is the only attacking Normal-type move that P-Z commonly runs, and since this is a P-Z analysis it should be right there on the set anyway. "Porygon-Z can use Normalium Z for either Z-Conversion to set up or Breakneck Blitz to deal a lot of damage to the foe" provides the reader with all the info they need. "Z-Tri Attack" over "Breakneck Blitz" is not a noticeable improvement.
The dilemma we're faced with is the following. On the one hand, the argument for keeping the Game Freak names is because it's what we should do if we very reasonably can, since we're simulating their game. On the other hand, the argument for changing to Z-<base move> would be that, in the practical context of our analyses, the Game Freak names would cause too much ambiguity and would force us to resort to unwieldy circumscriptions too often. Whether or not we should make this change depends on whether or not the latter is true. The one textbook example is Manaphy, whose Hydro Vortex can break through Unaware Clefable (under rain) and Ferrothorn (at +3), but only if Surf is used as the base move; Hydro Vortex from Scald is just a bit too weak. Let's analyse how prevalent this problem would be in more detail.
With how offensive Z-moves work, it's clear that the only potential issue with plain "Devastating Drake" or "Inferno Overdrive" is ambiguity regarding the Base Power. So, in order to see if the problem is indeed too big, let's take a look at what people use offensive Z-moves for. They are used as:
- lure moves, like Bloom Doom on Heatran;
- nuke STAB / main coverage moves, like Supersonic Skystrike on Landorus-T and Salamence, Devastating Drake on Zekrom, and Corkscrew Crash and All-Out Pummeling on Kartana.
In the case of lure moves, we can assume that those moves are being run almost exclusively with the intent of being used as Z-moves. Hence, the only base move option that makes sense is the highest-Base Power one, since its Z-move objectively outclasses those of weaker base moves, and that's the only metric we can base the choice for the Z-move on. There is no ambiguity as to what base move we're using, and there's no need to bother with extra prose to clarify.
In the case of super powerful STAB / coverage moves, (Supersonic Skystrike is basically in the same boat as the lure moves and) logic dictates that the base move would be the Pokemon's "best" move of that type, since it'll be using it as a main attacking move as well. For instance, Thunder may be stronger, but under normal circumstances, any special Electric-type will be running Thunderbolt as its main attacking move, so "Xurkitree's Gigavolt Havoc" _probably_ has Thunderbolt as the base move. Even in the event there's some that do run Thunder, in the absence of further specification, Thunderbolt is the assumption everyone will make. And if you do run Thunder, clarify it, just like you'd clarify 0 SpA Manaphy's Scald. Under normal circumstances, though, there is no ambiguity as to what base move we're using, and there's no need to bother with extra prose to clarify.
This leaves us with the following two cases where "implied additional data" is not enough to help us out and where potential ambiguity indeed comes in, meaning the Z-move alone does not tell us which move we're talking about:
- A Pokemon has multiple viable sets and no clear-cut "best" STAB move, like Manaphy, which can viably use Hydro Vortex from both Surf and Scald;
- A Pokemon runs both a physical and a special move of the same type on the same set, like that Zekrom if it actually uses Devastating Drake from Draco Meteor.
However, both of those cases are incredibly rare. This has already been shown in practice with how very few legit problems this has caused so far (the Manaphy Hydro Vortex one in OU Clef is the only one I'm aware of) and can also be seen in a couple theoretical ways. As for the former case, most types have a very clear-cut "best" move, like Fire Blast for Fire-types and Thunderbolt for Electric-types (this is compounded further by the fact that Pokemon running Z-moves will be offensive ones, meaning move pairs like Flamethrower vs Lava Plume realistically won't be causing any trouble); ambiguous pairs like Surf vs Scald (which in most other cases will be outclassed by Hydro Pump anyways) will be rare. Psychic vs Psyshock is another one, but that should be more or less it. This would also come into play only if the Z-move is referenced in a different Pokemon's analysis; after all, in a Manaphy analysis, you'd have the set, with only one of Surf and Scald, right there. Furthermore, keep in mind that it's only needed to specify this in cases where the power difference is actually significant; e.g., there's no need to state whether you're talking about +3 Hydro Vortex from Surf or Scald when you use it against Heatran, since it gets killed stone dead either way. Note that even for Manaphy, the one textbook example of ambiguity, there's a grand total of two foes where the power difference between "Z-Surf" and "Z-Scald" matters: Ferrothorn and Unaware Clefable under rain. In all other cases, plain "Hydro Vortex" will be all you need. As for the latter case, mixed attackers that run two STAB moves of the same type are essentially nonexistent as is, so this won't come into play often, if at all, either.
- lure moves, like Bloom Doom on Heatran;
- nuke STAB / main coverage moves, like Supersonic Skystrike on Landorus-T and Salamence, Devastating Drake on Zekrom, and Corkscrew Crash and All-Out Pummeling on Kartana.
In the case of lure moves, we can assume that those moves are being run almost exclusively with the intent of being used as Z-moves. Hence, the only base move option that makes sense is the highest-Base Power one, since its Z-move objectively outclasses those of weaker base moves, and that's the only metric we can base the choice for the Z-move on. There is no ambiguity as to what base move we're using, and there's no need to bother with extra prose to clarify.
In the case of super powerful STAB / coverage moves, (Supersonic Skystrike is basically in the same boat as the lure moves and) logic dictates that the base move would be the Pokemon's "best" move of that type, since it'll be using it as a main attacking move as well. For instance, Thunder may be stronger, but under normal circumstances, any special Electric-type will be running Thunderbolt as its main attacking move, so "Xurkitree's Gigavolt Havoc" _probably_ has Thunderbolt as the base move. Even in the event there's some that do run Thunder, in the absence of further specification, Thunderbolt is the assumption everyone will make. And if you do run Thunder, clarify it, just like you'd clarify 0 SpA Manaphy's Scald. Under normal circumstances, though, there is no ambiguity as to what base move we're using, and there's no need to bother with extra prose to clarify.
This leaves us with the following two cases where "implied additional data" is not enough to help us out and where potential ambiguity indeed comes in, meaning the Z-move alone does not tell us which move we're talking about:
- A Pokemon has multiple viable sets and no clear-cut "best" STAB move, like Manaphy, which can viably use Hydro Vortex from both Surf and Scald;
- A Pokemon runs both a physical and a special move of the same type on the same set, like that Zekrom if it actually uses Devastating Drake from Draco Meteor.
However, both of those cases are incredibly rare. This has already been shown in practice with how very few legit problems this has caused so far (the Manaphy Hydro Vortex one in OU Clef is the only one I'm aware of) and can also be seen in a couple theoretical ways. As for the former case, most types have a very clear-cut "best" move, like Fire Blast for Fire-types and Thunderbolt for Electric-types (this is compounded further by the fact that Pokemon running Z-moves will be offensive ones, meaning move pairs like Flamethrower vs Lava Plume realistically won't be causing any trouble); ambiguous pairs like Surf vs Scald (which in most other cases will be outclassed by Hydro Pump anyways) will be rare. Psychic vs Psyshock is another one, but that should be more or less it. This would also come into play only if the Z-move is referenced in a different Pokemon's analysis; after all, in a Manaphy analysis, you'd have the set, with only one of Surf and Scald, right there. Furthermore, keep in mind that it's only needed to specify this in cases where the power difference is actually significant; e.g., there's no need to state whether you're talking about +3 Hydro Vortex from Surf or Scald when you use it against Heatran, since it gets killed stone dead either way. Note that even for Manaphy, the one textbook example of ambiguity, there's a grand total of two foes where the power difference between "Z-Surf" and "Z-Scald" matters: Ferrothorn and Unaware Clefable under rain. In all other cases, plain "Hydro Vortex" will be all you need. As for the latter case, mixed attackers that run two STAB moves of the same type are essentially nonexistent as is, so this won't come into play often, if at all, either.
Look, "cases like the Manaphy one" is a good reason to throw out the official standard. But "the Manaphy case" alone is not, circumscribing it in that case only is but a small and highly situational inconvenience, nothing we'd even bat an eye for if we didn't have the alternative of "Z-Scald" available. Quite frankly it's pretty annoying when people are clamoring for us to make a significant change to the standards because "ambiguity and overly complicated wordings galore" and then are unable to provide any valid scenarios where it'd actually be a problem. I know this is partly theorymon, but to reiterate, for an actual number, among all relevant one-on-one Pokemon matchups in the entire current OU metagame, there seems a grand total of two where the Game Freak Z-move names don't suffice. Not to mention that, due to the burn nerf, Scald is falling out of favour on Manaphy anyways.
Throwing out an official move name is not something to be taken lightly. In theory, there is a risk of ambiguity here, and when that indeed manifests itself every couple analyses or when we continuously need to write "175-BP Hydro Vortex from Surf" then god get those Game Freak names out of here. But when literally the only practical case where it poses an issue that we have been able to find is the Manaphy one, there is nothing wrong with the official names that we haven't seen (frequently) before. We 100% agree that Z-<base move name> is very much superior from a pure GP standpoint, but that's not too relevant if there is no problem with the Game Freak names to begin with; at that point, we're no longer changing Game Freak names to Z-<base move> because "Game Freak names are inadequate for what we're doing here", but because "we can do this prettier than Game Freak did it". And that's just not happening, sorry, not as long as it's their game we're simulating and analysing.
---------------
Since the GPers were (very understandably) concerned about ambiguity and wordiness when I polled them, here's some pointers on how to deal with Z-moves in the future. If you have any further concerns please feel free to ask us.
-----------------
Because I love spending six hours writing a post and then giving people a way to skip the whole thing while still taking in all the info, here's a bulleted tl;dr:
That's it.
