I like it-admittedly, for the reason that the type of matches I tend to accept are better-geared towards Pay Day spam under the new system.
-
Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!
-
The leader of this forum is LouisCyphre. The moderators of this forum are JJayyFeather, Mowtom, nightblitz42, TheEver, and TMan87.
-
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.
Data State of the Game - 09/05/2011 (Gym Announcement Post #53, Pay Day HotFix in OP)
- Thread starter Deck Knight
- Start date
- Status
I cant say i can agree with requiring a win for pay day to be effective, in a match where you have time to pay day its already a one sided affair, since pay day is pretty much a free action for your opponent since the damage it deals is almost nonexistant and it has no beneficial side effect at all. In a close match where your actually going to have to try to win, theres no way you will be able to fit it in, effectively making it completely unusable unless your in a match thats going to be a 2 round crush the opponent. I cant say im exactly sure about how to fix the problem that will work for all, but i know that requiring a win will just stamp Pay Day out of usability.
/rambling
/rambling
@Ragnarokalex
...If using the move pretty much ensures a loss, it's not competitively viable, is it? And if it's not competitively viable, why would anyone have an incentive to use it in a fairly competitive game? I'm trying to make it so a strategy of intentionally losing or sabotaging the chance of victory is a fairly bad idea. I would much prefer a consistently competitive game over the alternative.
...If using the move pretty much ensures a loss, it's not competitively viable, is it? And if it's not competitively viable, why would anyone have an incentive to use it in a fairly competitive game? I'm trying to make it so a strategy of intentionally losing or sabotaging the chance of victory is a fairly bad idea. I would much prefer a consistently competitive game over the alternative.
I think it's going to come down to battles between the candidates.
Pay Day is BS and I fully support any and all nerfs of it. But I have another proposal which aims to make items somewhat more affordable.
Make items half price if purchased entirely with BP
BP were brought in with the sole purpose of being used to buy items. Now I can buy those very same items for the same amount of TC. TC are obtained from just rocking up to a match, where getting 20 BT is two whole runs through the Subway, or winning 20 battles in the Hall. These are not easy tasks and all reward for completing this has been removed by making items purchasable with TC. This gives BP back their legitimacy, but still doesn't make obtaining the more powerful items a walk in the park. A first time Subway run nets me 11 BP, and that is no mean feat. Likewise winning 10 straight battles in the Hall is HARD. Those two tasks should be more than enough to buy me a life orb.
Make items half price if purchased entirely with BP
BP were brought in with the sole purpose of being used to buy items. Now I can buy those very same items for the same amount of TC. TC are obtained from just rocking up to a match, where getting 20 BT is two whole runs through the Subway, or winning 20 battles in the Hall. These are not easy tasks and all reward for completing this has been removed by making items purchasable with TC. This gives BP back their legitimacy, but still doesn't make obtaining the more powerful items a walk in the park. A first time Subway run nets me 11 BP, and that is no mean feat. Likewise winning 10 straight battles in the Hall is HARD. Those two tasks should be more than enough to buy me a life orb.
I think Deadfox's idea is a good one. For a few reasons.
1: It will get more people playing RP's. Lets face it, RP's need to gain more popularity in Smogon's ASB.
2: BP just isn't rewarding. It's just RC, but actually using pokemon. Also this will take Pay Day's popularity down a notch.
1: It will get more people playing RP's. Lets face it, RP's need to gain more popularity in Smogon's ASB.
2: BP just isn't rewarding. It's just RC, but actually using pokemon. Also this will take Pay Day's popularity down a notch.
I agree with Deadfox, BP don't seemt to be worth it when the items can be bought with TC anyway. I say either reduce the BP cost of items OR have siome items that can only be bought with BP; things like choice items and life orb perhaps.
I don't think lowering the cost of items bought with BP is necessary.
Let's examine how you earn TC. In most Battle Tower matches, you will be gaining 2 TC per match. From my experience, these battles normally take about a week to finish if you have an active opponent and ref. You also gain 1 TC per battle completed in the Battle Hall. Assuming that it takes two weeks and seven battles for your Hall Challenge to be completed, which is kind of in the middle, you will have gained 19 TC in two weeks if you have active refs and opponents.
Now let's examine how you earn BP. Let's say that your Subway Challenge takes two weeks to finish (a fair estimate) and you gain 6 BP by losing to Ingo. In addition, we assume the same statistics about the Battle Hall. In two weeks, you earn 13 BP, once again assuming that you have active refs, opponents, and a strong team. Remember, this is assuming that you lose to Ingo every single time!
So, looking at this, it seems as if BP is much harder to obtain than normal battles, especially since the Battle facilities often require trained Pokemon. However, you must also remember that there are more Battle facilities that will be coming. The Factory is currently in its Preparations stage, a rough idea of the Arcade has been developed, and the Castle is [still] making movesets. Even if only one of these facilities end up getting implemented, your net BP gain will be approximately equal to your net TC gain.
In summary, BP is currently pretty scarce, given that there are only two sources to obtain them from. In contrast, there are four sources you can gain TC from (Hall and 3 battles), and this isn't counting Amulet Coin or other such shenanigans. As the other battle facilities get developed, BP will be much more accessible, which is pretty much why I'm against this.
Let's examine how you earn TC. In most Battle Tower matches, you will be gaining 2 TC per match. From my experience, these battles normally take about a week to finish if you have an active opponent and ref. You also gain 1 TC per battle completed in the Battle Hall. Assuming that it takes two weeks and seven battles for your Hall Challenge to be completed, which is kind of in the middle, you will have gained 19 TC in two weeks if you have active refs and opponents.
Now let's examine how you earn BP. Let's say that your Subway Challenge takes two weeks to finish (a fair estimate) and you gain 6 BP by losing to Ingo. In addition, we assume the same statistics about the Battle Hall. In two weeks, you earn 13 BP, once again assuming that you have active refs, opponents, and a strong team. Remember, this is assuming that you lose to Ingo every single time!
So, looking at this, it seems as if BP is much harder to obtain than normal battles, especially since the Battle facilities often require trained Pokemon. However, you must also remember that there are more Battle facilities that will be coming. The Factory is currently in its Preparations stage, a rough idea of the Arcade has been developed, and the Castle is [still] making movesets. Even if only one of these facilities end up getting implemented, your net BP gain will be approximately equal to your net TC gain.
In summary, BP is currently pretty scarce, given that there are only two sources to obtain them from. In contrast, there are four sources you can gain TC from (Hall and 3 battles), and this isn't counting Amulet Coin or other such shenanigans. As the other battle facilities get developed, BP will be much more accessible, which is pretty much why I'm against this.
^^
Tht is an actually pretty strong argument, and quite convincing, since that's actually true, and as a little add, you can't really increase the number of battles you're in (at least for now), while new RPs are coming and new ways to get BP, still i think a little thing should make BP "better" than just TCs, and altough i have no idea what (at the moment the only thing making it better is the cheap items only costing 1 BP rather than 3 TCs), like giving a 10% discount or something like that
Tht is an actually pretty strong argument, and quite convincing, since that's actually true, and as a little add, you can't really increase the number of battles you're in (at least for now), while new RPs are coming and new ways to get BP, still i think a little thing should make BP "better" than just TCs, and altough i have no idea what (at the moment the only thing making it better is the cheap items only costing 1 BP rather than 3 TCs), like giving a 10% discount or something like that
The implementation of Pay Day with 10 TC limit is actually fairly new, it wasn't in the original description. It might be too high and I could consider lowering it to 5. People would probably still end up spamming it, but in doing so they'd basically forfeit a KOC.
Deck, imo, Three extra TC if you win is already generous. The current use of Pay Day is 100% against the ethics of ASB which encourage multiple battles for long term growth, not abuse of broken mechanics to garner a quick profit. 5 is more than twice the value of the regular TC payout, much to high a value. And anyone would gladly lose a KO in exchange for a whopping 5 TC. The current HotFix forces one to be smart when use Pay Day so as that you actually win your match (which differentiates itself from Spamming, which is the key to Pay Day's unethical attributes) and that you can't suddenly generate half of a Life Orb in one battle. Many on IRC also support this current fix, and as it addresses all current problems nicely, I see no reason to change things yet again.
It's always been said that if people were doing ridiculous shit like sending in Pokemon and suiciding them to get counters quicker at the cost of a loss it would be stomped out. This is extremely similar to that; people are going into matches with the goal of purposely losing for the sake of getting extra counters quickly. Perhaps it's not *quite* as bad as the suiciding example, but it's still frustrating to see. Something needs to be done. I don't mind leaving the limit at 10, but only if you need to win to get the extra TC. If you want to leave it as is then the limit needs to come down, because even in a 1v1 a player spamming Pay Day can easily get 5-6 extra TC, and if they make it a 2v2 with two Pay Day users then they're basically guaranteed to get 12 TC plus normal rewards in less time than a normal 2v2 match (which would usually take longer due to both sides actually trying to win). I feel like if this if left as is then we're letting people get away with a form of abuse when we've already stamped out so many others (street brawls, mirror matches, and if anyone did make a match and did nothing but Explode I'm sure it would be nulled).
The first time I saw Pay Day in ASB, I thought it would be similar to in-game in that it goes to the winner, as a way to raise the stakes. It made fighting opposing Meowth on my Leafgreen fun, so that would be a cool add-in, although that could also be abused (I lose for you, then vice versa). 3 seems fair, for the simple fact that you're making it hard for yourself to win (which is the main goal of the battle), being forced to use such a low-power move.
That said, Meowth's got a bit of an advantage, due to STAB and Technician, as well as the plethora of status and disrupting moves.
That said, Meowth's got a bit of an advantage, due to STAB and Technician, as well as the plethora of status and disrupting moves.
stab technician pay day actually does a fair bit of damage...
I'd agree with making pay day go to the winner, in addition to the 3 TC limit. Would probably make the match far more exciting.
I'd agree with making pay day go to the winner, in addition to the 3 TC limit. Would probably make the match far more exciting.
In a battle I recently reffed, (believe it was Arcanite vs. Lord Jesseus), one of the combatants started using Pay Day mid battle (he had two first forms against two second forms) and actually managed to win.
So I completely agree with making Pay Day TCs go to the winner.
So I completely agree with making Pay Day TCs go to the winner.
Yeah, but my slowpoke hardly has better moves yet anyway...
Hey, I was looking at the sub-reffing compensation when one of the battlers in a battle that I was reffing came close-ish to DQ and notived something.
For reference:
What I noticed is that for 3 KO's I'd, in theory, get 3 RC compensation in a DQed battle. However, if I ref a 2v2 singles; which usually have 3 KO's + the winner I'd get 4 RC. So here is myn new proposal.
An example is that if I reffed a 4v4 doubles match, which will most likely have 7 KO's, I'd get 8 RC. However, if I ref a 6v6 doubles for example and there are 7 KO's then a battler DQ's I'd get 7 RC. So, even though I've done a similar workload I'd get less RC then I could have gotten otherwise.
For reference:
Deck Knight said:
What I noticed is that for 3 KO's I'd, in theory, get 3 RC compensation in a DQed battle. However, if I ref a 2v2 singles; which usually have 3 KO's + the winner I'd get 4 RC. So here is myn new proposal.
Metal Bagon's proposal said:
An example is that if I reffed a 4v4 doubles match, which will most likely have 7 KO's, I'd get 8 RC. However, if I ref a 6v6 doubles for example and there are 7 KO's then a battler DQ's I'd get 7 RC. So, even though I've done a similar workload I'd get less RC then I could have gotten otherwise.
I have a possibly controversial, and mostly completely irrelevant proposal.
When a Pokémon has EC and DC maxed out, and has learned all possible moves, a trainer gains 1 TC whenever it is sent out in battle.
I'm thinking mostly about Ditto and the fifth gen Pokémon here who have naturally shallow movepools, and it gives a trainer an incentive to keep using a mon who essentially cannot earn counters for itself (except obviously KOC.) Any thoughts?
When a Pokémon has EC and DC maxed out, and has learned all possible moves, a trainer gains 1 TC whenever it is sent out in battle.
I'm thinking mostly about Ditto and the fifth gen Pokémon here who have naturally shallow movepools, and it gives a trainer an incentive to keep using a mon who essentially cannot earn counters for itself (except obviously KOC.) Any thoughts?
KOC can go into TC aparently. Check the SQSA thread.
I am aware of that, but I mean this as a replacement for the 1 EC, 2 MC, 1 DC etc. when a Pokémon's moves are filled out.
I seriously see no problem with that, it's hardly a big issue since besides ditto (and probably Wobbuffet), most mons have to be really well trained to get thei entire movepools, i think it's not really hard to come by since you're not really winning anything every time a complete pokemon is sen out
There is one thing I noticed, that I think needs some attention:
The Data Audit Thread states that abilities that have either "Can be Enabled" or "Can be Disabled" can only do so if they are the ones ordering first. Two problems arise from this:
-In battles with more than two trainers there is easily a chance one side has to give up on like Sheer Force for the first few rounds because it takes time to order first. It can even happen that someone gets KOd before they would even get the chance to Enable or Disable the ability in question.
-No one is really sticking to this rule, bar for Deck Knight(I guess there are others). Another thing is that people treat Can be Disabled abilities like Normalize as Can be Enabled ones(Refs are usually very strict when a player makes a mistake in their actions, but this one seems to slip mostly everyone's mind). Either this rule needs to made clearer or removed, because as it is now it's not working.
The Data Audit Thread states that abilities that have either "Can be Enabled" or "Can be Disabled" can only do so if they are the ones ordering first. Two problems arise from this:
-In battles with more than two trainers there is easily a chance one side has to give up on like Sheer Force for the first few rounds because it takes time to order first. It can even happen that someone gets KOd before they would even get the chance to Enable or Disable the ability in question.
-No one is really sticking to this rule, bar for Deck Knight(I guess there are others). Another thing is that people treat Can be Disabled abilities like Normalize as Can be Enabled ones(Refs are usually very strict when a player makes a mistake in their actions, but this one seems to slip mostly everyone's mind). Either this rule needs to made clearer or removed, because as it is now it's not working.
- Status