UPNetwork  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-19-2014, 06:39 AM   #26
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,328
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
Fakemon would imply it's still not the exact same pokemon at heart. Even with the league as it is, I'd challenge you to find a squad composed of more than 10% of typechanged pokemon.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 06:58 AM   #27
Escalion
Getting married! :D
 
Escalion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,103
Send a message via Skype™ to Escalion
I might be a noodle in ASB, but I love giving opinions especially when (indirectly) asked XD

Personally I'm with 1.

First of all I think all type combinations that are already a thing in the games etc, should be able to exist anyways, and combinations not yet official should be possible too (lets be honest, by the time Gen 8 comes around GameFreak will probably have used all possible combination already).
But these changes should be dealt with in a sensible way. Like with a good explanation the Turtwig line could be changed to say Grass/Rock, while with all the explanation in the world it makes subzero sense to change the Hoppip line into Grass/Rock.

Also, with a good explanation I don't see a problem with a Grass/Fire Snivy line, and I also don't see a problem with a Grass/Fire Cacnea line as they usually live in the scorching deserts of the Pokémon world anyway. But neither would Grass/Water cause that's what cactuses do, store water. And there are a lot more I think of that way.
Same with Ghost-typing. I don't buy in the theory that every Ghost Pokémon is dead or has died. There are enough Ghost-types that do not fit into that generalization. Golett is manufactured and brought to live. It never lived so it cannot be dead by default.
Honedge is a possessed sword, Banette is cursed doll and what Rotom is no-one knows but it certainly ain't dead. I don't see why you can't have a cursed/possessed Type/Ghost [Pokémon], and even is a Pokémon has died I don't see the problem if the story is good and it fits the Pokémon.

The one thing needed is that the balance should be good regardless of the type change. No matter what sig, a Pokémon should come out of it being better than before without being overpowering. So don't ban type changes or certain combination by default. Just look at stuff on a case-by-case basis, have the type change make somewhat sense on the Pokémon in question backed up with a good story and don't have it too OP.
__________________
Escalion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 11:50 AM   #28
Slash
Poison Jam
 
Slash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Tokyo Underground Sewage Facility
Posts: 6,019
Send a message via Yahoo to Slash Send a message via Skype™ to Slash
I'm big on number 1. I've always loved how the league is a place where you can make a Pokemon truly yours. I was infamous for type changes for awhile, and I slowed down, I think you'll find many newbies who try them a lot now will do the same.

One notable thing I have learned from writing type-change sigs is how not to write one. You don't just write a small paragraph of bio and call it enough when you're going for anything major. Sure, that's probably enough for some type changes, like Bug/Water Masquerain, or Pure Fire Numel, but not for most. The bio and drawback must fit the sig in general.

I'll continue this later. Gotta go.
Slash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 11:59 AM   #29
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
So I'll lay out my general opinion here. Once discussion has died down in a few days I'll start responding to points people have made directly and seeing if I can't tease out some more sophisticated solutions.

I've probably forgotten something but I'm doing it while I do something at work that requires only half an eye.


I think type changes are stupid. They're a relic of a bygone era when there were 250 pokémon, very few examples of many types i.e. Dragon, Steel, and none of those pokémon learned anything useful. They were necessary to keep things fresh and interesting. Now, there are upwards of 700 pokémon and every type has a half dozen pokémon that can be considered usable, either in a mono team or in tandem with other types. Sure, there are many type combinations that don't exist, but the fact is that the maximum amount of potential variety in types has always been on the up, particularly now that we have a Fairy type.

Now, you might say that many pokémon are unusable, or at least difficult to use, in the ASB. Sure. Grass types are hard to use because of their type chart and because of how the ASB does support moves. Bug types are generally pretty fragile. Steel pokémon aren't always the best offensively. So the ability to change type breathes new life in to pokémon like Sceptile and Golem and Masquerain that otherwise might never see the light of day. To that, I say that type changes are a lazy cop out. There are plenty of ways to spice up such pokémon, be that by giving them new moves or resistances or energy. You can create signature moves or abilities that remake the entire strategic set up of a match if you want and you can certainly use arenas to do the same. Type changes, to me as a sig approver, are dull. Bug/Water Masquerain is dull, and demonstrates that a lot of people in the ASB don't really know how to use fragile Flying types. They're also difficult to approve or reject from a balance stand point because there's so many variables to consider that most people just don't think about when they look at type changes.

It's also completely without evidence in the animé or games. We've had, what, a Crystal Onix, a telekinetic giant Tentacruel, and a few indirect things from which you can infer minor details. That's not enough to me. What you're basically doing is creating fake pokémon. Which is fine, but ASB doesn't really do fake pokémon. Learning new moves or abilities isn't quite on a level with changing something fundamental about your pokémon. Charizard is not a Dragon type. Ok fine it looks like a Dragon, learns loads of Dragon moves and can mega-evolve in to a Dragon type. That's beside the point. Masquerain is not a Water type for a reason.

For these and probably some other reasons, I am for Option 3 and want to get rid of type changes in the current system.


However, if we assume for a moment that I like type changes, then I'm for Option 1. I don't buy this idea that some type changes should be off limits. For balance reasons? Sure. Water/Dragon Dragonair is never going to happen despite the fact that it makes a lot of sense. Making stuff Dark/Poison or Bug/Steel is always going to be problematic because from a game play stand point they're good types. But to say that a particular type change doesn't fit with the spirit of pokémon? Fuck off. Grass/Fire Servine makes exactly the same amount of sense as pure Steel Aggron. However you slice it, however you dress it up with "but it makes sense" or "but then the pokémon is so much better", you're still ok with fundamentally altering a part of your pokémon in a way that directly conflicts with the lore. I hate to break it to you guys but Salamence is not actually a Fire type. Sceptile is in no way reminiscent of a Dragon type. If you're ok with giving these pokémon cool new types for any reason at all, you have no grounds to dislike someone wanting to make a Cacturne that's full of oil and can spew fire out of its arms. Does that make any sense? Nope. But neither does Dragonite, the bastard child of Puff the Magic Dragon and a Moomin, a pokémon which learns basically everything, can spontaneously generate fire and water and electricity and snow and can literally split the ground asunder, and also fly on tiny ridiculous wings. Pokémon makes no sense. Drawing arbitrary lines around what makes sense based on weird and wonderful combinations that Gamefreak hasn't done yet is bullshit.

We also used to have rules in place like "no types that give you immunity" or "no Dragon or Steel changes". Fuck that. If you have some imagination you can happily write a balanced Dark sig. First thing to do is to say "Croagunk is Poison/Dark with all the weaknesses and resistances that entails but also is weak to Psychic moves". Job done. Grass/Dragon Sceptile? Fine, it's still 4x weak to something and has rubbish offensive STAB, give it some good drawbacks and that's completely ok.

...

So what I actually propose is to keep type changes exactly as they are but make them in to Reed-iculous sigs. On the low heat of our back burner is making Reed-iculous matches a popular thing again. Well, type changes give the league a sense of individuality and uniqueness and let you do cool things with pokémon that Gamefreak will never let you? Cool. Let's make them Reediculous. It would make my life as a sig approver a hell of a lot easier, inject some life in to a concept that has been dead for years and allow people to have their cake and eat it. Have type changes and use them loads but also have the ability to never do them ever.

And quite frankly, type changes are not what makes the ASB unique. We are unique because we have a great sense of community, we try to bring in new people even if we don't always succeed and we let you battle like you're in the animé. I don't need my pure Steel Aggron to have a good time in the ASB, Aggron is plenty good at literally ripping something's arm off without that. I have an imagination, as a battler and a ref. That's what makes us unique.

Last edited by Mercutio; 03-19-2014 at 12:09 PM.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 12:05 PM   #30
Jerichi
本✚能
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,491
I mean I'm totally biased but would you object to a heavy version of 2 where we allow for a small set of pre-specified type changes and relegate the rest to Reediculous?
__________________


気紛れを 許して 今更なんて思わずに急かしてよ
もっと中迄入って あたしの衝動を 突き動かしてよ

asbwffb

[jerichi]
Jerichi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 12:11 PM   #31
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Yes. You create so much more work for us as LOs that isn't necessary when you can just tell people to write other sigs and you're still doing exactly what I've complained about in smaller doses.

However I'd probably not argue that strongly against it because it would be an improvement.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 01:10 PM   #32
Jerichi
本✚能
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,491
Literally saying "This is a list of the 10 type changes that we deem to be acceptable in order to give certain Pokémon slight improvements" is in fact no more work in the long run than it is banning them outright.
__________________


気紛れを 許して 今更なんて思わずに急かしてよ
もっと中迄入って あたしの衝動を 突き動かしてよ

asbwffb

[jerichi]
Jerichi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 01:15 PM   #33
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
I don't agree. A ban is clear cut. Saying there's 10 changes that are ok is not, because there's the constant question of why one thing but not another, why is that change ok, oh can you change the list because Sceptile learns another Dragon move now. You have to constsntly recheck the list, make sure it still works, and deal with the people all making that sig in a way that doesn't bore everyone to tears. You also have to write the list in the first place. It's just not a very sensible compromise.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 01:24 PM   #34
DaveTheFishGuy
Primordial Fishbeast
 
DaveTheFishGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,257
Send a message via Skype™ to DaveTheFishGuy
>Bug/Water Masquerain is dull, and demonstrates that a lot of people in the ASB don't really know how to use fragile Flying types

I already have a Yanmega and Ledian. Masquerain is basically Yanmega with Water and Ice attacks instead of Rock and Psychic ones. Being part Water makes it different enough for me to consider using.

Personally I guess I'd be a 2? I only have three typechanges (now) and think they all make sense. Bug/Water Masquerain because it evolves from a Bug/Water-type. Pure-Dark Weavile because the Ice-type cripples it, and Ground/Steel Rhyperior (with adjusted resistances) because when it gets right down to it metal is basically refined rock. I could go ahead and slap typechanges on everything I have with a 4x weakness, but that's just boring so I try to keep it to extreme circumstances.

Could I cope without typechanges? Sure. I just feel like they make these three Pokémon in particular more useful.

Just take each on a case-by-case basis. At first I was glad that they've become a bit more lenient, but a few (already mentioned) examples have made me want them to become a bit more restricted again.
DaveTheFishGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 06:16 PM   #35
deh74
~Smelly cat, smelly cat~
 
deh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: United States/Germany
Posts: 1,058
I honestly prefer option number two but it wouldn't affect me much if it remained one.
__________________
The Whistling Sound of Impending Doom.



Check out my PASBL stuff!
Former C+ Grade ref, currently ungraded.


Need a battle reffed? PM me.
deh74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2014, 08:27 AM   #36
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sneezey12 View Post
'Twas a joke, Kushtie. Though I do still think your logic behind limiting typechanges is incredibly flawed.
Challenge accepted!
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2014, 02:01 PM   #37
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
So it seems that most people are digging a hybrid of mostly option 2 and 1, but there's a few outliers who mostly want them gone. So.

a) If we restrict the type changes that are available to trainers, how should we decide what is and isn't acceptable? Should we preset such restrictions?

b) Should there be any type changes that are absolutely never allowed? State a good reason or be ignored.

c) Should there be any type changes that should always be easy to get? As above.

d) If we were to create a mechanism of battling with type changes turned on or off, possibly in a similar fashion to the ability to turn off items, would your opinion on type changes generally change? What if they were restricted to Reed matches or their own type of match?
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2014, 02:05 PM   #38
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Added a fourth.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2014, 03:55 PM   #39
Salamencia
UPN's very own Houdini
 
Salamencia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not here
Posts: 2,532
Send a message via Skype™ to Salamencia
Missed this, somehow. Very much a 3 here. If not, I'll start a (semi-serious) petition for changing our name to the "PAIBL". Anime-Inspired is pretty much what this league is at the moment. Not to mention, "pay-bull" is much less of a mouthful than "pee-ay-ess-bee-ell". Anyway, type changes are odd to say the least. They lack any anime evidence and are entirely illogical. Were this league starting today, I can't imagine anyone would even bring up the concept. It's this that does it for me. If they're not proven to exist in the anime and can't be rationally explained, why should we have them? As others have stated, we no longer need the variety they offer. Saying "they're not overpowered so it's ok" is ridiculous. Dwebble used a portal-Rock Slide in the anime, so if I suggest an incredibly energy-inefficient version can we have it implemented? Can I make Thunder Armour a thing? If so, I may consider leaving (in before no-one cares). As for the new questions:

a) Common sense and balance. Use affinities for certain types as a guideline of what is acceptable. Keep it as restricted as is accepted by the community. Don't preset them though, as you can't expect a board of LOs to necessarily identify absolutely every single passable typechange.

b) As of Gen VI, no. It makes absolutely no sense to ban one type outright, as it's clearly not for balance purposes if you can't have a Water/Dragon Magikarp and if a Pokemon has an affinity for a certain type it ought to be able to change to that type (assuming we keep typechanges). I would have suggested Normal, on the basis that it's supposed to be a "plain and boring" type of sorts and anything that has to be typechanged to Normal does not fit that bill, but Heliolisk exists now.

c) No. Individual types are not strong or weak, it's the eventual typings that are. For example: Grass/Rock is a better typing than Ground/Rock but Ground is generally a better defensive type than Grass.

d) For the first part, no. I'd be happier in that I could just tack on "no type changes" on all of my matches, but my general opinion still stands. Reed matches/own type of match, however, I could live with. Reediculous sigs are thoroughly nonsensical anyway.
__________________
PASBL - Trainer Level 4 - B Grade Referee

WF

Yes, I am online. No, I am not ASBing currently. WF takes priority, as it tends to take up less of my time.
Salamencia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2014, 04:23 PM   #40
Emi
ACHILLESSSSS
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Agartha
Posts: 11,153
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
a) If we restrict the type changes that are available to trainers, how should we decide what is and isn't acceptable? Should we preset such restrictions?

To me, its always been on a number of different factors:

1)Does the type change make sense for the Pokemon being given it? For example, Golem doesn't make much sense as a Rock/Water type, as it never lives by the water and its original typing has a massive weakness to water. Changing it to a Rock/Fighting type is more logical, however. It's got a large build, a nice Fighting movepool, and some complimentary anime evidence(in the form of Geodude being allowed to fight in a tournament meant just for Fighting types). In a similar vein, its makes far more sense for Charizard or Gyarados to be a Dragon type than to be a Ground type. I see no reason why we should preset such restrictions, though if you need to do something absolutely mind-boggling in the bio to justify the typechange, I'm not a fan of it passing(then again, my Graveler bio is pretty crazy but that's how I write them :P).

2) Is it balanced? Cause seriously, that's the point. You can cry foul at how type changes aren't in the anime, but so aren't half of the other things we have flying around. There is no Pokemon in the anime that can break Stealth Rock coming in, there isn't a Pokemon that trades weaknesses for resistances, and there is no Pokemon that can do Naruto-esque moves. We allow them, however, cause its in the nature of sigs, and its balanced. The typechange has to be balanced...but it also has to benefit the Pokemon in question. Far too often is a sig passed that ends up making the Pokemon worse off. Typechanges are an often pressed button for new people. Why? Cause its fun. Kush calls it boring but they can be pretty fun on their own. But more often than not, the precedent is "The Pokemon MUST be worse than it originally was," which makes no sense. Why make a sig deliberately make your Pokemon worse? My Zweilous is a Dragon/Ice type. Is it worse than a normal Zweilous? In some ways yes, its kinda crippled against Rock types now and Steel types give it a lot of problems since a majority of its typespam was taken away. But is it worse overall? No. I'd argue its better, as Ice as an attacking type is far, far better than Dark and my experience with Zweilous in matches proves that: it often gets 1.5 KOes or so every time I use it. This doesn't mean the sig is overpowered, it just means I know how to sig well.

C)How bad is the Pokemon in question? This kinda ties in with balancing out a typechange, but I think it deserves its own section because people absolutely refuse to take this into account. While the end product is vitally important, so is the beginning. Take an Aggron that was type-changed into a Pure Steel type. Yes, its undoubtedly better than a normal Aggron, but a normal Aggron is hard to use because of the completely terrible 4x weakness to Fighting and Ground moves, which are found on pretty much any viable Pokemon at that trainer level. Does it mean Aggron is bad? No, but its heavily limited in what it can do. It's hard to get worse than that. It makes the sig unviable. So its justified if the typechange gives Aggron a new life and allows it to be more useful in general. Another example is Gothitelle. Now, there is not a single doubt about it, Gothitelle may not be the worst Psychic type but its definitely in the bottom ranks. Not gonna stop me from having one, but let's say I wanted to typechange it to a Psychic/Dark type. After all, it makes sense given Gothitelle's gothic inspirations and its general devious nature. But, tradition and precedent basically say, "No, this is bad because now Gothitelle gets an immunity." So I say back, "So what?" It's not like a Psychic immunity is especially helpful for Gothitelle. It already resisted the type. The typing also loses pretty much every resistance it had and picks up a 4x weakness to Bug, which is inconvenient. So, why should Gothitelle have to give up its immunity, or just not be able to typechange into Dark? It's kinda crap. It needs the boost.

b) Should there be any type changes that are absolutely never allowed? State a good reason or be ignored.

Ghost, without question. There may be a very, very few that are the exception to the rule(some inorganics come to mind such as Bronzor and Baltoy, but man the justification needed on them makes it so not worth it). Basically, you would have to die and come back for it to work, and honestly that's a very, very weird thing for me. Not to mention that the sig would have to deal with so much other bullcrap like state-changes and other general Ghostiness that it becomes a nightmare for sig approvers cause it introduces so many other factors.

Anything else is fine though. Some types, such as Fire, Steel, Dragon etc should be more limited in scope because they are either harder to justify or just quite frankly great typings.

c) Should there be any type changes that should always be easy to get? As above.

Nope. No typechange should be a freebie. You need to work for them, plain and simple.

d) If we were to create a mechanism of battling with type changes turned on or off, possibly in a similar fashion to the ability to turn off items, would your opinion on type changes generally change? What if they were restricted to Reed matches or their own type of match?

Not really, though I wouldn't mind if you could turn them off, it would definitely be interesting. Better for gyms as well, since some typechanged Pokemon can prove to be significant nuisances.

Last edited by Emi; 03-27-2014 at 04:23 PM. Reason: AHHH SO MUCH BOLD
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2014, 05:54 PM   #41
Lil'twick
Gay Demon Prince
 
Lil'twick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: The Holy See of Ishgard
Posts: 2,768
Send a message via Skype™ to Lil'twick
Let's take a crack at this.

a) If we restrict the type changes that are available to trainers, how should we decide what is and isn't acceptable? Should we preset such restrictions?

Blaze has basically summed up almost all of my thoughts for this question. As long as it makes logical sense, is balanced, and HELPS IMPROVE THE POKEMON, with the worse a Pokemon is the more leeway it can get, than almost any type change SHOULD be allowed. I'm looking at Dragon/Water Dragonair on this, since I can easily see it being passed (Just drop fire off type, evolution, and perhaps even flight. It can be done). Seriously, stuff like Flying/Steel Scyther and Dark/Electric Sneasel don't make too much sense, would require an immense amount of justification, and would just end up worse than before. A type change should be there to not only help improve the Pokemon, but also be something fun to do without limiting too much.

b) Should there be any type changes that are absolutely never allowed? State a good reason or be ignored.

Ghost. Oh so much Ghost should never be allowed. Type changing a Ghost type is fine, but adding Ghost to something should just never be allowed. Everything else should be fine. Stuff like Fairy, Steel, Dark, Flying, and Ground should be fine, even if they give an immunity to a type. Usually these type changes help improve an already horrid mon, or would be something fun to play around with. Besides Ghost, as long as the type would make sense on the Pokemon, let them have it for god's sake.

c) Should there be any type changes that should always be easy to get? As above.
No, not at all. Not even Bug/Water Masquerain should be too easy to get. For the ones that make more obvious since (i. e Bug/Water Masquerain, Pure Dark Weavile, Pure Steel/ Steel/Dragon Aggron,), there shouldn't be as much that would need to be dropped. Like all sigs, type changes require work. Well, probably a lot more work than any other sig, but they shouldn't be freebies like the Rotom movepool sigs or X mon learns Y.

d) If we were to create a mechanism of battling with type changes turned on or off, possibly in a similar fashion to the ability to turn off items, would your opinion on type changes generally change? What if they were restricted to Reed matches or their own type of match?

No. Just. No. If we allow type changes to be turned off, then all sigs must go off. Just having one type of sig turned off isn't consistent, and a lot of people wouldn't like their type changes to be turned off. In the same vain, no one would like having all of their sigs turned off, but if you guys want to have the option, then all or none.

Same goes for the Reed-diculous battles. NO ONE FIGHTS WITH THEM. When was the last time we even had a ridiculous sig submitted? It's just a waste of SP at the current standards, and even if someone gets one now it will have to sit on the queue for a while. All you're doing is trying to limit something more than it already has if you put Type Changes in Reed-diculous. Because seriously, at this point, why have a type change if it means making a mon horrid, and in the near future only available in a battle that requires SP to even partake in.

And those are my thoughts on the matter.
__________________


Ghost Legion
Hawke | Austin T. Willows

Lil'twick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2014, 06:45 PM   #42
Sneaze
#SWAG
 
Sneaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Sigs Hell
Posts: 5,654
Send a message via Skype™ to Sneaze
I'm sorry, but making them Reed Only is frankly an absurd idea considering nobody bothers to do Reediculous matches. Since they were implemented ages ago nobody in their right mind has bothered to keep up on them, and with them now costing SP and needing approval by the LOs, it's just completely and utterly not worth it to use them just for type changes. ESPECIALLY if they were kept anywhere close to as is in the amount of drawback needed.

And do you really want to have to deal with the idea of them being their own seperate matches? It would mean creating a special ruleset. I mean, would any and all typechanges be allowed (God I would hope not)? Would they still require approval (in which case, lawl)? Would the match require LO approval? Would it require SP? Would any combination of those things make most people not want to do the match? Type changes are a wonderful staple of PASBL that seperates the League from other Anime Style Battling Leagues. Taking them and watering them down so heavily would just be one more nail in the coffin of ASB's spirit.

The ability to turn them on/off in the same manner as Tokens basically already is a thing, even if it's just a bit of a "I won't bring X 'mon if you don't bring Y 'mon" thing. It's not going to solve any problem that you see, and will probably only create a larger one. I for one am already quite uncomfortable about how many people joke (and sometimes not so jokingly!) about how Tokens are the worst thing to happen to ASB or whathaveyou, and some are quite the other way around. The League is supposed to have a sense of community, and with each gigantic change it gets split more and more.
__________________
Wild Future - FizzBy
PASBL - Ghost Grass Gym Leader - Dragon Elite Four


Daisy wins at life for making this Battle Cut
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerichi View Post
Whatever Sneasel says is right
Sneaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2014, 06:59 PM   #43
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Well you would assume that trying to make them their own subset of matches would involve changing the rules of that subset anyway. So we would turn Reeds in to something useful. They were only restricted as a way of deterring people from wanting to do them without actually killing them off whilst we dealt with more important things. So we can happily look at what we actually want to do with them and whether they warrant keeping and whether they're an appropriate vehicle for this kind of change.

I'd also caution against equating type changes with other sigs. They're a very different kettle of fish that already have their own ruleset separate from every other kind of sig. Allowing them to be turned on and off would be far less significant than you think it would.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2014, 07:11 PM   #44
Sneaze
#SWAG
 
Sneaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Sigs Hell
Posts: 5,654
Send a message via Skype™ to Sneaze
Don't get me wrong, if you were to change the ruleset on Reediculous matches, it could probably work quite well, and would probably be the thing that brings them into actual relevance. But that said, I'm not a fan of having to pay SP in order to use a type change. Ever. The match needing LO approval is less of a big deal, though I forsee plenty of the matches occuring if it does happen, and easily becoming a bit of a bogged down process.

And I'm aware that type changes are a different kettle. Doesn't change the fact that as is people already piss and moan at the idea of having to not bring tokens or potentially having their opponents bring tokens, despite not that many people actually having that many of them in the bloody first place. Type changes are much more popular by and large, and WILL have people pissing and moaning due to the fact that type changes in a large degree exist to make 'mon either not suck complete ass or make them a hard counter against certain 'mon. Neither of which people will particularly enjoy being taken away from them. ESPECIALLY if, like Tokens, the On/Off switch can still be used for major things like Gym matches.
__________________
Wild Future - FizzBy
PASBL - Ghost Grass Gym Leader - Dragon Elite Four


Daisy wins at life for making this Battle Cut
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerichi View Post
Whatever Sneasel says is right
Sneaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2014, 07:25 PM   #45
Stealthy
A New and Original Person
 
Stealthy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 949
a) If we restrict the type changes that are available to trainers, how should we decide what is and isn't acceptable? Should we preset such restrictions?

Balance and sensibility. Balance includes not just the sig itself, but the 'mon in general. Rhyperior is a fantastic pokemon and a beneficial type change should be a bit harder to get than for the inferior Aggron. But that doesn't mean that Rhyperior shouldn't be allowed to type change, of course. If somebody wants to get rid of those 4x weaknesses by type changing to Steel/Ground, so be it, but they ought to put more work and have tougher standards for balance to get it (longer bio, maybe give up some of steel's resistances, give up more moves, that sort of thing) if that type change is for Rhyperior than if it is for Aggron.

But, from what I can tell, that already happens. The true crux is sensibility. As I said in another post, if the trainer's attempt at justification is that they got kissed by a legendary, then that's a no. If their only way of making sense of the type change is by waving a supernatural wand instead of something that follows a standard of logic (and yes, I get that this is pokemon, but the point is clear), then odds are the type change isn't sensible enough to be permitted. That's just a basic rule of thumb, but obviously other things (infamous Grass/Fire Servine) can be written without saying "But Ho-oh said something nice about me when I was an egg", but that doesn't mean they make sense.

Common sense prevails here.

b) Should there be any type changes that are absolutely never allowed? State a good reason or be ignored.

While maybe, if you were smart about it, it could be justified for a few 'mon, type changing to Ghost is a step too much. Yadda yadda yadda, restating what's already been said as to why, etc. etc.

Also, no bionic mon to try to get a typechange to Steel. Just not gonna happen outside of the long-dead Ridiculous Sigs, but Ridiculous is a land unto itself and has no bearing here. I know (or at least assume) that this is already a rule, just stating that this is one of those things that ought to be upheld.

Bans based on a type providing an immunity shouldn't be a thing. Factor it into balance, sure, but Dark/Flying/Ground/Fairy shouldn't be outright banned because of it. Perhaps for a specific pokemon, if a type change would just make them too powerful unless you absolutely crippled them, you could say no, but that's a case by case basis.

LOs creating a list as to what is and is not kosher is not gonna go well. Don't do it.

c) Should there be any type changes that should always be easy to get? As above.

Easier. Not instantaneous. Bug/Water Masquerain, Pure Steel Aggron, Bug/Fighting Ledian, Pure Electric Helioptile, they can be easier in terms of balance, but they shouldn't be as routine as "Gamefreak is on crack and didn't give Pokemon X move Y" sigs.

d) If we were to create a mechanism of battling with type changes turned on or off, possibly in a similar fashion to the ability to turn off items, would your opinion on type changes generally change? What if they were restricted to Reed matches or their own type of match?

No. This is a bad idea and a bad attempt at a compromise for the anti-Type Changers. Relegating type changes to the long dead Reed matches is as good as writing them out. Yes, let type changes be a helluva lot easier to get in Reed matches, but don't obliterate them from standard play or make them an optional setting.

The reason no items is viable as a setting is because it can help level the playing field similar to equilevel and equiall. It's not used too often, but it's there and okay to use. Badge/token ownership is something that has a fairly significant unequal opportunity of ownership based on longevity (not something that can't be overcome, but it's a fair option). Type changes are available to all members of the league regardless of if they posted their squad last week or if they posted their squad last decade. The ability to turn them off has nothing to do with balance or equity or fairness, and is really just something for people who don't like type changes.

If you're going to institute that option, you'd have to make it a general "No-Sig" option... which is generally kinda dumb (outside of things like Grand Melee where it's to A) preserve the whole anonymity aspect, and B) makes the ref's life easier).



And I'd like to reiterate that, unless balance becomes an issue, I'm against retroactively revoking type change sigs.
Stealthy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2014, 08:16 PM   #46
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Oh sure they'd cease to have those kinds of limitations put on.

Bearing in mind that a few of the old guard already have non sig matches for some reason, I suspect that there would be a way to implement a policy of turning this stuff on and off that would benefit the league. It would deoe depend. This may not be a workable idea at all
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2014, 12:08 AM   #47
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,328
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
Seeing as the questions have been changed, I'll just simply reiterate that I am AGAINST turning off and on, AGAINST putting them in Reed matches, AGAINST banning even any types of type-changes, and, for the same reasons Lost and Blaze have said, I'm very much FOR taking all type-changes based on balance, believability, and betterment. (Heh, alliteration.)

Again, let this be Anime-Inspired battling league. It ALREADY IS. Anime style does not mean Anime, not in the least. Until Gamefreak makes pokemon for each and every single niche, which they haven't, people are going to want to put pokemon in those niches using sigs, and type-changes are a simple, effective, and most of all, fun way to achieve that.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2014, 12:44 AM   #48
EmeraldGoblin
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,762
Something we never really contested or even suggested i think... If type changes remain.. why not limit them to 1 type change per squad?
EmeraldGoblin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2014, 01:43 AM   #49
Slash
Poison Jam
 
Slash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Tokyo Underground Sewage Facility
Posts: 6,019
Send a message via Yahoo to Slash Send a message via Skype™ to Slash
NO.

Seriously, typechanges have been around a long time. They're not broken, they're not OP, and they give Pokemon new life and roles they would not have had otherwise. It's not the only way, of course, but it definitely adds a new dimension and a new way of expressing oneself into their Pokemon.



a) If we restrict the type changes that are available to trainers, how should we decide what is and isn't acceptable? Should we preset such restrictions?

Take it case by case. If it's justified enough, and balanced, fine. Be it Grass/Electric Chikorita or Bug/Ice Masquerain. The limit should be your imagination and whether or not you can justify and balance it.

b) Should there be any type changes that are absolutely never allowed? State a good reason or be ignored.

Nope. Some would need extreme amounts of justification, as well as drawback and not gaining all the benefits of said typing, but that's fine. Probably can't sig anything Ghost with immunity to mentally-affecting Psychic moves and state changes. But sigging a Ground/Ghost Marowak, so long as you keep it balanced and go heavy on the justification? Go ahead. Types with an immunity, 95% of the time if you note they don't gain the immunity, it should be fine if the rest of the rest of the sig is balanced and justified. And sure, the better the sig, the more downside needed. So types like Fairy, Electric, Steel, and Dragon, which give good benefits, should be more difficult to get, and more sacrifice needed, whereas things like Poison are easier to justify, and Grass typechanges would normally carry less downside since Grass is generally a terrible type. Perhaps a blanket rule stating immunities cannot be gained through typechanges, so anything sigged from Poison to Poison/Dark would still be Psychic weak, and Ground to Ground/Steel would still resist Poison? That seems like a good way to keep balance.

c) Should there be any type changes that should always be easy to get? As above.

Well, certain thematic ones of course should be easier, even if just a little. Especially if an evo, prevo, or Mega in the line gets it. I don't think Water/Dark Gyarados should be as difficult to sig as, for example, Water/Fire or Water/Dragon. Adding Water to an Ice-type, Ice to a Water, or changing from one to the other on a dual-type shouldn't be too difficult, such as an Ice/Psychic Starmie or an Ice/Water Cubchoo. Fire/Dragon Charizard shouldn't be pulling teeth to get approved. Fighting and Poison shouldn't necessarily be easier to get as far as balance, but they tend to be easier to justify. I see no problem with any so-called contradictory type combos. We've had enough seemingly incompatible type combinations in the games, even ones that seem volatile. Hell, we have a Psychic/Ghost and a Water/Fire legendary Pokemon this generation. Ground/Flying types since GSC. Normal added to what, eight types now? Removing Normal from a dual-type should be simple, and one of the only ones that should be called "easy" to get. Other than that, easier, but you still need to justify and give sufficient drawback.

d) If we were to create a mechanism of battling with type changes turned on or off, possibly in a similar fashion to the ability to turn off items, would your opinion on type changes generally change? What if they were restricted to Reed matches or their own type of match?

This is a terrible idea and I hate it immensely. I don't even like the option to turn tokens off, an option to turn typechanges off is terrible. Reed matches are an even worse idea. They cost SP currently, and, realistically, do you ever actually see Reed sigs working out well? When the Reed rules were renewed for newer ASB culture, only a couple people submitted reed sigs, and they were never gone through. By relegating them to Reed matches, not only are you adding more to that workload, Reed matches will need to be completely revamped, again, they don't count for anything, so the sigs would not feel real at all, and it would completely devalue type changes AND Reed matches.

Also coming down on the side of not retroactively eliminating sigs.
Slash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2014, 01:46 AM   #50
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,328
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
I don't get why people put so much stress on immunities in the ASB. Resistances are basically immunities in the ASB, nobody's ever going to use a move their opponent resists.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet 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 03:12 PM.


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