UPNetwork

UPNetwork (http://forums.upnetwork.net/index.php)
-   Suggestions and Inquiries (http://forums.upnetwork.net/forumdisplay.php?f=35)
-   -   Energy & Health (http://forums.upnetwork.net/showthread.php?t=4300)

Jerichi 08-05-2012 05:56 PM

Energy & Health
 
I don't know if it's just me, but ever since the move reformation, battle length and competitiveness hasn't been what it used to be. Type spam is king, even more than it has been in the past. Pokémon are KO'd in 3 rounds. This doesn't seem kosher to me.

Now, I don't have a solution but I'd like to start some focused discussion. Am I crazy? Is this actually a problem? Or am I just a cranky vet who can't change with the times?

DaveTheFishGuy 08-05-2012 06:02 PM

My current match with FW on SPPf:
FW's Armaldo: 4 rounds
My Druddigon: 5 rounds
FW's Ludicolo: 4 rounds
My Pinsir: 4 rounds
FW's Typhlosion: 3 rounds
My Feraligatr: 4 rounds

Admittedly this is with realistic. Neutral matchups aren't as bad, but when there's a type advantage in play matches are stupidly short. Even when one 'mon gets two type pools that are SE on its opponent it can be bad, though only when they're going second.

Then again I'm gunning for the Dark Gym and will have like three 'mon 4x weak to Fighting, so I'm a bit biased.

Mercutio 08-05-2012 06:06 PM

Hmm.

I've actually found it easier to deal with energy. Defined terms mean I make less errors and it's easier to keep track. I find it goes down quicker than I'd like but not that much quicker. It would be better for our metagame to move towards one movers being enforced with stricter energy penalties than to alter the energy system.

Health wise, perhaps. But we're always going to have this problem of swift KOs because people are used to simply using high powered moves. With such movesets as are common, it's easy to find a way to rip through many pokémon's healthbars. I don't think that three round KOs are that common though.

Jerichi 08-05-2012 06:11 PM

>I don't think that three round KOs are that common though.

It was admittedly a hyperbole, but only a couple of years ago, the average Pokémon lasted about eight in a neutral matchup.

Of course, movepools have expanded significantly since then so there are not very many truly neutral matchups. But at the same time, a handful of SE moves in a neutral matchup should only be like a two round difference, not four.

Concept 08-05-2012 06:11 PM

It definitely has changed. I remember winning a 4 vs 4 in 17 rounds being a "oh god I really suck" moment for my opponent and a "did that just happen?" moment from my ref, and I've not even been around that long. I'd be curious to hear input from the likes of Hana and other similar vets who get high ref grades back when Dragonite was as good as it should be and matches lasted a decent length of time.

On the other hand, Dave and I are 19 rounds in and have only lost two 'mon each. But we've been switching a lot.

Mercutio 08-05-2012 06:16 PM

I think that if we were to do anything to change the health/energy scales, we should aim for a 3 HB health and 4 HB of energy ratio. Too much health and suddenly you have to have a large moveset to dent pokémon with many resistances.

Salamencia 08-05-2012 06:18 PM

Personally, I don't think there is a way to help reduce typespam. We've got 3x multipliers, and some people have suggested health increases. But dedicated typespammers would probably just counter this by using a lot of Baton Passers in Switch = KO, to get something with infinite typespam, and let loose, rather than getting their 1 or 2 round KO on 4x weak 'mon by using something that gets a bit of the effective type.

And, frankly, type effectiveness is part of the game. Always has been. I don't remember a time when typespam wasn't the norm. Sure, you had the Rangeets going "WAIT TILL IT'S DONE THEN TYPESPAM TO DEATH", but that's kind of extreme and I think we've got past that with more refs using logic to counter it. Normal old "it has a weakness, so I will exploit it" is... normal. It is exactly what Pokemon, and indeed most games, are about. You take advantages of weaknesses in your opponent; that's strategy in a nutshell, is it not?

IMO, the closest to a solution: Find a type effectiveness multiplier system you like and move on.

Jerichi 08-05-2012 06:21 PM

>Sal

The issue really isn't typespam as a concept. It's the fact that typespam grants a huge advantage, even in a neutral matchup.

Your proposed solution isn't a solution and has been proposed many times, including by me. I'd like to know if we can find another option.

Char 08-05-2012 06:24 PM

If this becomes a big issue just implement Zorules Scale, 1.5x/2.5x, or 1.5x/3x instead of changing around the health/energy. You won't mess up the damage scale terms on the site, and battles will be fairer towards those about to get type-spammed into oblivion. Also 4x weak Pokemon will actually be more usable and not ref dependent.

I still like 2x/3x as a scale though.

Also Muyo is king, so we could just follow his opinion ;P

Jerichi 08-05-2012 06:27 PM

Every time I suggest x1.5/x3, there's a huge shitstorm.

Mercutio 08-05-2012 06:30 PM

*sigh*

If people thing 1.5x would work, let's do it. It would instantly render my gym extremely easy to beat but that's a little thing and could be dealt with by some poképhysics manipulation. I think that 2.25x is too much of a jump, though. And it's needlessly complicated.

Jerichi 08-05-2012 06:33 PM

>It would instantly render my gym extremely easy to beat but that's a little thing and could be dealt with by some poképhysics manipulation.

Hardly; it works both ways and x1.5 Blizzard is still a shitton of health.

Charminions 08-05-2012 06:35 PM

I support the idea of harsher energy penalties, it would make people less willing to pull out big typespammy moves, but I'm just a newb so.

Mercutio 08-05-2012 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerichi (Post 369451)
>It would instantly render my gym extremely easy to beat but that's a little thing and could be dealt with by some poképhysics manipulation.

Hardly; it works both ways and x1.5 Blizzard is still a shitton of health.

Eh. Extremely is perhaps a strong word, but I still feel that Normal types are rendered much less powerful when they are deprived of that deterrent. But hey, I'm not a leader to just type spam everything.

Also I'm switching gyms so.

Salamencia 08-05-2012 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerichi (Post 369438)
>Sal

The issue really isn't typespam as a concept. It's the fact that typespam grants a huge advantage, even in a neutral matchup.

This is true, but I don't really see a large difference from before, which you claim to have witnessed. Now, granted, I actually started ASBing in Gen IV, so I can't speak for previous Gens, but this problem certainly didn't start with the move/energy reforms. Striking an opponent with SE moves has provided massive benefits in the ASB for as far back as I can remember. If it has become more beneficial, it's most likely the better movepools.

Although, I concede that truly neutral matchups are really hard to come by, and this can be really irritating. And it gets worse with time.

Quote:

Your proposed solution isn't a solution and has been proposed many times, including by me. I'd like to know if we can find another option.
I know it's been proposed before; my point was that using type effectiveness is just another form of basic strategy; not quite understanding your point, I admit. If your main problem is with neutral matchups not being so neutral, perhaps weakening off-type attacks, with less "familiarity" giving a weaker attack, might do the trick? It may also help to actually define type energy limits, rather than leaving it up to the refs.

I'm personally not happy with weakening type effectiveness in general, other than a 2x/3x or 1.5x/3x scale, purely because it is part of basic ASB strategy, and the effectiveness scale changes should be enough to keep SE attacks, in general, as balanced as it really can be without being pointless.

DaveTheFishGuy 08-05-2012 06:44 PM

Personally I'd be more in favoure of increasing health/energy than decreasing type effectiveness. Even on 2.25x, Focus Blast still wrecks a Bastidon. If we increase health and energy then it'll be less noticable.

But I'm crazy.

Jerichi 08-05-2012 06:49 PM

> I'm personally not happy with weakening type effectiveness in general, other than a 2x/3x or 1.5x/3x scale, purely because it is part of basic ASB strategy, and the effectiveness scale changes should be enough to keep SE attacks, in general, as balanced as it really can be without being pointless.

I see this argument as kind of silly. I've reffed with this scale for a looooooong time now, and I haven't had any complaints. In fact, I am and continue to be an A- ref. I'm not saying your opinion isn't valid, but this proposed system works perfectly fine for me and at least deals with the issue partially.

I think part of this is non-fixable since it's the nature of the game, but curbing it somewhat so there's more strategy than just TYPESPAM TO DEATH will make the ASB a lot smoother.

Salamencia 08-05-2012 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerichi (Post 369459)
I see this argument as kind of silly. I've reffed with this scale for a looooooong time now, and I haven't had any complaints. In fact, I am and continue to be an A- ref. I'm not saying your opinion isn't valid, but this proposed system works perfectly fine for me and at least deals with the issue partially.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting this response, but I said "I'm not happy with weakening [it] other than [the mentioned type effectiveness scales]". In other words, I don't mind (and, in fact, favour) non-"standard" scales. I tend to prefer 2x/3x, but 1.5x isn't a massive deal to me and this is a little beside the point.

>I think part of this is non-fixable since it's the nature of the game, but curbing it somewhat so there's more strategy than just TYPESPAM TO DEATH will make the ASB a lot smoother.

I'd agree, to a point. My problem is the "neutral" matchups, really. If you've got a Mantine up against a Pikachu... well, you have your work cut out for you anyway, no matter what scale your ref uses. But when you've got, say, a Seel vs. a Staryu, it ought to be close and entirely decided by who is the better strategist, rather than off-type moves dominating entirely. Which is why I'd proposed off-type attacks not being as strong as normal. Now, if it's all typespam you want to avoid... that's always going to be tricky without rendering it virtually useless, and the above "off-type attack nerf" suggestion would probably do more bad than good, as it'd stop the victim fighting back with what might be their only SE type. Without increasing energy/health or forcing a 1.5x/3x multiplier (or similar), I genuinely see no real solution to general typespam.

zerozoner 08-05-2012 07:14 PM

The only thing that resembles a solution to me is hidden squads since it prevent planned type spam to a degree since you don't know what your opponent might have waiting for you in the shadows.

Jerichi 08-05-2012 07:15 PM

No, that's my bad. I didn't read your post closely enough.

And as for your second suggestion...

Maybe it would be a good idea to introduce STAB?

> The only thing that resembles a solution to me is hidden squads since it prevent planned type spam to a degree since you don't know what your opponent might have waiting for you in the shadows.

If you can't plan your squad accordingly, that's your inability as a battler.

DaveTheFishGuy 08-05-2012 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerozoner (Post 369468)
The only thing that resembles a solution to me is hidden squads since it prevent planned type spam to a degree since you don't know what your opponent might have waiting for you in the shadows.

This is what's happened with me vs FW. Started out with Armaldo vs Druddigon, which is neutral, but Druddigon has a nicely anti-Armaldo movepool. Then he sent out Ludicolo, which I answered with Pinsir, then Typhlosion and Feraligatr, now Furret and Gallade...

Then again when you're up against a squad like mine you never know what to expect. Hell, even I don't until I actually send the PM.

Concept 08-05-2012 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveTheFishGuy (Post 369471)
Then again when you're up against a squad like mine you never know what to expect. Hell, even I don't until I actually send the PM.

If you're anything like me, you probably forget five minutes after you've sent it too.

zerozoner 08-05-2012 07:30 PM

>Maybe it would be a good idea to introduce STAB?

Makes sense to me that a Fire type using Flamethrower would overpower another Flamethrower being used by a different type. Sure it might complicate things for awhile, but there is some sound logic behind it and I give it my vote *how little it might mean from a new guy* for a trail run.

DaveTheFishGuy 08-05-2012 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZoraJolteon (Post 79415)
Lets just half the effects of all weaknesses and resistances.

Now all is good. Your silly discussions may end.

In a shocking turn of events, I agree with Zora.

VOTE PINACLSAUR etc. etc.

XanderKetsu 08-05-2012 07:43 PM

I concur!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.