UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > Independent Forums > PASBL > Suggestions and Inquiries

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-07-2011, 09:50 PM   #26
Tyranidos
beebooboobopbooboobop
 
Tyranidos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Krusty Krab
Posts: 3,808
Send a message via AIM to Tyranidos Send a message via MSN to Tyranidos
I'm up for tournament ban to keep things running nicely, but other than that I really don't think its a problem. Though if there is a consensus among the PASBL body, then I wouldn't really mind the change.
__________________
Tyranidos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 09:56 PM   #27
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Well. Can we not just treat it as an additional rule? When posting a match in challenges you may list 'Explosion clause' as one of the stats? Thus I people want it, they get it, and if not they don't.

Or flip it, so you post 'no explosion clause' if youndont want it, but otherwise it's the default.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 09:59 PM   #28
Char
Banned
 
Char's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Patches made this cool Charmander pumpkin
Posts: 1,173
I was trying to win with Explosion in Steelix vs Ludicolo, last Pokemon left, since hard to do 3HB power move combo. Tied instead, had enough health initially to live through Explosion until Ludicolo got his move off kinda.

So I would've lost if this change happened and the situation reappeared. Hm.

And while I was "winning" in terms of health, I had a type disadvantage, and Explosion seemed like the best option to end it quickly.

Dunno how I feel about this proposed rule change
Char is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:02 PM   #29
Weebos
TOO SLOW! LOL
 
Weebos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Ankh-Morpork
Posts: 1,569
Send a message via AIM to Weebos Send a message via MSN to Weebos
While I do like the idea of Explosion clause being something added to the match description, I feel like it sets a bad precedent for other issues.
__________________

Trainer Level 5 - KOs:106 TP:274.5 SP:7.5 C+ Referee
Fighting Gym Leader
39 - 23 - 13
Weebos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:04 PM   #30
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
You mean like that 'nongroubd moves' match in challenges? I guess.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:10 PM   #31
Weebos
TOO SLOW! LOL
 
Weebos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Ankh-Morpork
Posts: 1,569
Send a message via AIM to Weebos Send a message via MSN to Weebos
I mean more like "1.5/3x scale only" and "No switching moves" or something silly.
__________________

Trainer Level 5 - KOs:106 TP:274.5 SP:7.5 C+ Referee
Fighting Gym Leader
39 - 23 - 13
Weebos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:11 PM   #32
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Oh. Fair.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:16 PM   #33
Firewater
Volcano Badge
 
Firewater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,726
Send a message via Skype™ to Firewater
would perish song count in this ruling too?

edit- no to perma-explosion clause, yes to banning of those type of moves in tourneys/gym matches.
__________________
PASBL: Record: 61-55-8, 361.5 TP, 174 KO, 2.5 SP, Trainer Level 5
My ASB pokes
Firewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:18 PM   #34
Ethereal
Creepy Hand Person
 
Ethereal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,988
Send a message via AIM to Ethereal Send a message via MSN to Ethereal Send a message via Skype™ to Ethereal
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveTheFishGuy View Post
If a trainer forces a tie (at the end of the battle) by use of Explosion, Selfdestruct, Perish Song or Destiny Bond, they lose the battle.
__________________
asb|wf
TL-2 • B Grade Referee
Former Bug and Water GT
Ethereal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:19 PM   #35
Firewater
Volcano Badge
 
Firewater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,726
Send a message via Skype™ to Firewater
missed that, but I'm kinda ok with that, but at the same time, I know that it's a strategy. At the same time, I'm against this rule in non important matches (Tourneys/Gym/Legend/ect.)

also I'm guilty of using explosion to force a tie that I should have lost.
__________________
PASBL: Record: 61-55-8, 361.5 TP, 174 KO, 2.5 SP, Trainer Level 5
My ASB pokes
Firewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:23 PM   #36
Weebos
TOO SLOW! LOL
 
Weebos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Ankh-Morpork
Posts: 1,569
Send a message via AIM to Weebos Send a message via MSN to Weebos
I don't think I used explosion, but I used Earthquake in the Mine arena.
__________________

Trainer Level 5 - KOs:106 TP:274.5 SP:7.5 C+ Referee
Fighting Gym Leader
39 - 23 - 13
Weebos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:31 PM   #37
Loki
Savage
 
Loki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,027
I know I'm not a big participant in the recent... uh.... 2011 year, but in most situations, the moves listed are fairly unlikely to win you a tie in a losing match.

All are fairly energy heavy to use, making them sell likely to be successful in situations where the user is tired. In addition, Perish Song requires several turns, making it almost impossible to actually work unless both participants want it to work (which happens in friendly situations). And Destiny Bond being used first is the only one likely to succeed. Using it second is a completely random shot in the dark. With the low chance of success, if you can pull off a random win from it, good for you!

So the only real situation where someone might win with this is you switched in a fresh Pokemon, took some 75% damage hit and on your last quarter of health and full energy, do one of the listed moves (except PS) and hope for a win. I don't know. Sounds okay to get a suicide tie for me.
__________________
Loki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:34 PM   #38
Firewater
Volcano Badge
 
Firewater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,726
Send a message via Skype™ to Firewater
...I remember that, but that's a specialized situation?
__________________
PASBL: Record: 61-55-8, 361.5 TP, 174 KO, 2.5 SP, Trainer Level 5
My ASB pokes
Firewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:45 PM   #39
Weebos
TOO SLOW! LOL
 
Weebos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Ankh-Morpork
Posts: 1,569
Send a message via AIM to Weebos Send a message via MSN to Weebos
Also another thing, ties aren't detrimental to anyone and result in love and sharing.
__________________

Trainer Level 5 - KOs:106 TP:274.5 SP:7.5 C+ Referee
Fighting Gym Leader
39 - 23 - 13
Weebos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 10:55 PM   #40
S_M
Volcano Badge
 
S_M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 2,192
Send a message via AIM to S_M
I've had Explosion et al used on me to force a tie. I still highly dislike this rule. They're viable strategies and you should be prepared for them. If I say have a Charizard with a significant amount of energy, and an opponent with a significant amount of health, and I use Flamethrower, how is it any different? Should there be a rule against using all your energy? Or recoil moves, let's ban them too?

Again I think the fact that the moves aren't like hiding or anything in the opponent's movepool and the fact that you should be prepared (even a long term Agility early in the matchup would suffice in many cases) overrun this. Further Destiny Bond is nigh useless unless used first so it's not like you can't prepare accordingly.
__________________
TL6 - Former B+ Ref
Former Dragon and Prehistoric Gym Leaders
57 - 18 - 6
156 KOs - 376 TP - 10.75 SP
S_M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2011, 11:06 PM   #41
S_M
Volcano Badge
 
S_M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 2,192
Send a message via AIM to S_M
That being said if you want to put an Explosion Clause in the specs for battles and make it optional I'd have absolutely no problem with that.
__________________
TL6 - Former B+ Ref
Former Dragon and Prehistoric Gym Leaders
57 - 18 - 6
156 KOs - 376 TP - 10.75 SP
S_M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 12:14 AM   #42
Kindrindra
大事なのは自分らしいくある事
 
Kindrindra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Determined
Posts: 5,835
I like this for Torneys to keep them moving, but other matches?

Eh, no.


As for gym matches- in the event of a tie, doesn't the GL decide whether or not the trainer deserves the badge, anyway?
__________________
PASBL(TL: 4 RL: B-) --- FB (Kin Blackstone) --- WF (Adelie Fleur)
Quote:
Originally Posted by captainmisato View Post
People should watch what they enjoy regardless of what others think, even if it's a terribad guilty pleasure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
Though, I also dislike the concept of lamenting the current day while wishing to re-experience the past. At least, my modern attitude is to try and make each new day magical even if it's not, since exclusively reminiscing about the past is too pathetic.
Kindrindra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 12:30 AM   #43
Shadowshocker
used First Impression
 
Shadowshocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,037
Also chipping in to agree that the rule doesn't seem to have a point. The whole idea of those moves is to force a tie so that - to paraphrase the argument used in the Super Effectiveness scale debate - you're not completely screwed even if statistically odds are against you. SM's hit the nail on the head; there's a reason why I arse to write Experiments, lads, to condense the information from SPP/Psypokes/whichever.

That said, Loki's got generally striking points as well. As they are the "last hurrah" moves don't have the best chance of working precisely because of their incredible energy requirement. Explosion doesn't usually get off because of the charge time where a fresher foe can easily faint the user. Destiny Bond is a joke because even if it falls under the 75% chance of working when you go first, when's that going to actually work? Your opponent will clearly not push you over the edge in the 3 out of 4 chance it does work, meaning that the only likelihood of it being viable would be when you're forcing a suicide by energy loss - in which case, most refs would either make it not work due to the energy, or give it horrible odds which would result in it not working anyway. Perish Song typically really only works under the conditions of horrible refs (coughDragon11cough).

Arguably, Selfdestruct could be considered the viable exception to this because - if memory serves, since I'd asked Jeri about this years ago in my first match which involved a nearly-dead Koffing - Selfdestruct doesn't have a charge time. In which case, some might argue that Selfdestruct needs such a clause, but on the other hand, Selfdestruct is already balanced precisely because its usage automatically guarantees that the user faints, and isn't as widespread outside of Generation I.

At the end of the day, though, the question should be asked: what are the conditions defined such that a ban/nerf is necessary? If you're winning and yet, you're in a situation in which a (say) 2HB-strong Selfdestruct forces a tie, I wouldn't call that dominating. You're not winning by an incredible margin in which losing to a suicidal, last-ditch strategy seems completely unfair. It would be as though you had a health lead, and yet the opponent uses a super-effective Fire Blast that kills you. (This is debatable, of course - how far do you have to be ahead to be considered dominating?) And on the other hand, to reiterate the point of "do your research", people prepare for such moves. It's not like we haven't already adopted "if he uses a [insert whatever characteristic] move, then Agility like mad" strategy (though, if anyone wants to bring up the "zomg this is bad and you should feel bad" sentiment, fair enough). In the strange scenario in which you are dominating, and the opponent is slowly waiting for health to dwindle so that there's enough energy for a viable boom, then I'd like to suggest this: Toxic the bugger, and run like hell. (Of course, Metagross likes this strategy, but if stalling to go boom is your primary winning strategy with a Metagross then, as Jeri says, you deserve to lose.)

Tournament matches work differently mostly because of the sentiment of using only 1 Pokemon, but again, research should be exercised. If in PokeBowl scenario this occurs, then my guess is that you're probably dealing with a neutral or resisted matchup, and will be less likely to have an extremely huge difference in how much you're dominating the match. (If you have consistent SE STAB then you're much more likely to faint from that damage.) This brings me back to the aforementioned point - what's wrong with using an existing, viable but extremely risky strategy?

Last edited by Shadowshocker; 07-08-2011 at 12:33 AM.
Shadowshocker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 06:22 PM   #44
Jerichi
本✚能
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,534
I think, at the end of the day, if you want to come to a gentlemen's agreement about it, that's cool, but at the same time, I don't want to instate it as a universal change. I've been on the receiving end of this and it sucks but at the same time you should be wary of it and refs should be good enough to compensate for some of the drawbacks associated with the move.

For Tourneys, however, because of the mess this causes, I'm all for its banning - that just saves time and trouble.

>Tournament matches work differently mostly because of the sentiment of using only 1 Pokemon, but again, research should be exercised. If in PokeBowl scenario this occurs, then my guess is that you're probably dealing with a neutral or resisted matchup, and will be less likely to have an extremely huge difference in how much you're dominating the match. (If you have consistent SE STAB then you're much more likely to faint from that damage.) This brings me back to the aforementioned point - what's wrong with using an existing, viable but extremely risky strategy?

It's less about that and more about avoiding time-consuming ties that could be otherwise avoided.

Last edited by Jerichi; 07-08-2011 at 06:27 PM.
Jerichi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 06:25 PM   #45
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
In that case, may I suggest we instate it as an optional rule and list it on the site with all the other info like how to switch etc?
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > Independent Forums > PASBL > Suggestions and Inquiries


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:19 PM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.