Hax In Pokemon Battles

Status
Not open for further replies.

DougJustDoug

Knows the great enthusiasms
is a Site Content Manageris a Top Artistis a Programmeris a Forum Moderatoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
Exciting news!

After deliberating with the other admins, we have decided to add the Anti-Hax Clause into the Order of Operations, effective almost immediately. The private testing feedback has been extremely positive, the code is virtually bug-free, and we think it's time to let the general public see what it is like to play competitive pokemon without the fear of being screwed over by extreme swings of bad luck. And like they say, "There's no time like the present!"

I had already planned to upgrade the Smogon University server on March 29th, in order to put in several move fixes - most notably a fix to Trace which will remove a glitch that prevents Trace from being used effectively against Swift Swim pokemon in the rain. This Trace fix, gained additional importance with the advent of Manaphy testing. I have most of the fixes in working order (they have been on the private Anti-Hax server for a while now) -- and I want to get them on the main server before Manaphy testing is completed.

So, in order to make all the changes in one fell swoop... a new "Anti-Hax Ladder" will be added to Smogon University on March 29th! This new ladder will allow the general public a chance to play with the new Anti-hax formula that has everyone so excited! The ladder will be put in after the close of ratings (11:30pm PDT) on the 29th. If testing goes well, we will add the clause to all ladders in the future.

Since this clause is unlike any other "suspect" we have tested or considered testing -- we do not know how long we will conduct the test, nor do we know how we will structure the requirements for voting privileges. We'll post more information here, as it becomes available. Also, expect to see a "np: Anti-Hax" thread in Stark mountain on March 29th, for community discussion.

In the meantime, I still encourage the private testers to continue battling on the anti-hax server. Let me know if we need to tweak anything before moving this whole party over to SU.

Good luck!

Actually I guess I don't need to wish you good luck -- the clause guarantees your luck won't be TOO bad! ;-)
 

Syberia

[custom user title]
is a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Sounds good; after reading the experiences of users on the private server, I am quite anxious to try this out. Forget everything I said before.

Is a suspect test for this necessary? It can't break the metagame in any form, so all it would really be testing is "is it fair," and from what I gather so far, it seems to be.
 

Lorak

*leekspin*
is an Artist Alumnus
Exciting news!
Wait a second. I'm not one who usually even plays on Shoddy, but doesn't this seem to be... a bit hasty? I mean it in both senses of the word, the actual meaning, and the Pokemon one. We're really going about this too fast, and making the process of decision-making too vulnerable (+Speed, -Def :V). Isn't there supposed to be some sort of approval process before we make fixes? What about the weather glitch situation? Isn't something game-breaking more important to work out the kinks on than tinkering around with this "anti-hax formula"? It's a nice idea and all, but still, why can't we come to a conclusion on more important issues?
 

maddog

is a master debater
is a Contributor Alumnus
Wait a second. I'm not one who usually even plays on Shoddy, but doesn't this seem to be... a bit hasty? I mean it in both senses of the word, the actual meaning, and the Pokemon one. We're really going about this too fast, and making the process of decision-making too vulnerable (+Speed, -Def :V). Isn't there supposed to be some sort of approval process before we make fixes? What about the weather glitch situation? Isn't something game-breaking more important to work out the kinks on than tinkering around with this "anti-hax formula"? It's a nice idea and all, but still, why can't we come to a conclusion on more important issues?
I disagree with you. Its a formula that we have been working on for some time and it has been perfected over the last couple of weeks. After I asked Doug for the private server information a few days ago, I checked out how the formula worked by battling on the server, and I was impressed. This isn't something that is like the weather glitch, where we have to figure out what to do, but it completed, done and ready to go. I don't see why testing it quickly as an entire community is as big of a deal as you seem to think it is.
 

TAY

You and I Know
is a Top Team Rater Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
OK now that I'm back from NYC I got a chance to try this out and...

it's pretty cool.

I can't say it is absolutely perfect - in fact there is one (maybe two) very pressing issue which I will address shorty - but in general, the better player won most of the matches I played. In most cases the better player did wind up being the one who took out the opposing team. I think that a lot of players are greatly overstating the effect this is having on the game, because honestly it has not been horribly different from what it was before.


The one major problem I see with the formula's current state is that it weighs early and late game hax equally. In any battle, this is absolutely never the reality of the game. To take an example which is familiar to me: On my suspect team, my main counters for Gyarados are Passho Berry Claydol and Skarmory (it is my team's worst nightmare x_x). If Claydol gets critted on turn two, I still have Skarmory to deal with Gyarados if it shows up later in the game. However, if Claydol feints in the regular course of the match and it comes down to me having a 4-1 advantage against my opponent's Gyarados, then obviously the fact that it flinched my Skarmory twice in a row is much more vital than if it had happened early game (since I would have known to save Claydol in that case). Since the ability to predict the opponent's team is fairly limited, this absolutely needs to be accounted for. I imagine it wouldn't be horribly difficult: the "weight" of the hax could be increased if it occurs when the player on the receiving end has fewer Pokemon left, though it would also need to take into account each pokemon's remaining HP, and whether certain Pokemon are "essentially KOed" (e.g. an 11% Scizor with SR down and no spinner).

Another possible problem - possible in that I am not sure if it is already addressed - is how to deal with "useless" hax. Obvious examples are CB Tyranitar critting Azelf with Crunch or (in most cases) a critical hit from Rapid Spin, but there are other more infrequent situations which should be taken into account. For example, if a Gyarados with 5% health misses a Bronzong with 5% health with Ice Fang and subsequently faints, we need to be sure that this hax is not considered if Hail is going, but is considered if there is no hail. Also, in certain situations hax can be beneficial, but as this forumula is really still in its developmental stages, I think we can ignore that for now (those situations are extremely rare anyway).

So yeah, I know those last two paragraphs sounded pretty critical, but this is actually a really cool endeavor. I think the biggest thing that anyone could take away from what I am saying is that this win formula affects the outcomes of games a lot less than you might think. In most cases, the player who eliminated the opponent's team won anyway.
 

Lorak

*leekspin*
is an Artist Alumnus
I disagree with you. Its a formula that we have been working on for some time and it has been perfected over the last couple of weeks. After I asked Doug for the private server information a few days ago, I checked out how the formula worked by battling on the server, and I was impressed. This isn't something that is like the weather glitch, where we have to figure out what to do, but it completed, done and ready to go. I don't see why testing it quickly as an entire community is as big of a deal as you seem to think it is.
I'd also say the people are being naive (+Speed, -Sp.Def) about the situation. Isn't testing supposed to go on a bit longer than this, if the thing's worth testing in the first place? I can't see why anyone would be so adamant (+Atk, -Sp.Atk) about wanting an anti-hax clause to overturn wins and losses. A battle is just a battle. It might knock your rating for a little bad luck, but skill should allow you to bring it right back up, unless you just have a large number of unlucky battles in a row.
 

maddog

is a master debater
is a Contributor Alumnus
Why are you being so sassy (+Sp. Def, -Speed) about the entire situation? (I don't mean your actually sassy, i just wanted to use the natures like you did lol). In my view, as long as the formula is working correctly, what is the reason we need to wait? If its doing what it is intented to do (which I would say it is, based on my experience), then there is no real reason to wait a long time. If its working well, then it should be added on to the server quickly, so that we can start seeing the benefit of the anti-hax formula sooner rather than later.
 

Lorak

*leekspin*
is an Artist Alumnus
Why are you being so sassy (+Sp. Def, -Speed) about the entire situation? (I don't mean your actually sassy, i just wanted to use the natures like you did lol). In my view, as long as the formula is working correctly, what is the reason we need to wait? If its doing what it is intented to do (which I would say it is, based on my experience), then there is no real reason to wait a long time. If its working well, then it should be added on to the server quickly, so that we can start seeing the benefit of the anti-hax formula sooner rather than later.
I can't help but be defensive about the situation. It's just a shame that other people are being quiet (+SpAtk, -Speed), slow to act about this, but probably just as willing to attack the situation, and indeed quiet by being unable to post in Policy Review.

The key words are, first, "doing what it is intented to do", and second, "based on my experience". Just because a bunch of people can't hit a bullseye on a dartboard doesn't mean that it can't be done.
 
I'm with you here Lorak, so no need to feel Lonely (+Atk, -Def) anymore. The point isn't that the formula is a bad thing necessarily, it is that everyone is so blindly supportive of the idea that they are choosing to plainly ignore all the legitimate concerns that us skeptics have rather than seriously discussing them with us before making any firm decisions. Isn't this what Policy Review is for?

That said, I won't completely lose my respect for Smogon's policy makers as long as they do not remain stubborn about the formula in the same way that Gamefreak were with the EVs / nature system back in ADV. That being, if we're going to introduce a new game-changing mechanic, at least make it completely public for everyone to see and abuse as they wish.

One question though: is this new ladder going to be for OU only, or will there be an "Anti-Hax Ladder" for Ubers and UU as well?
 

Tangerine

Where the Lights Are
is a Top Team Rater Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Let's stop with the silly Pokemon jokes - This really is serious and I feel like you guys are essentially mocking it and ridiculing it with those kinds of exchange...

From my few days worth of experiences in the server... I think it's a very good thing in that it promotes more thinking. Luck based strategies aren't as viable anymore... mostly because in the long run they lose. I think with this clause on, I would be 100% in support of Evasion and OHKO being unbanned... simply because it allows statistical expectations to do their job... and in the long run, relying on such moves are unviable strategies. It definitely makes you think more in that you have to think of actual strategies and outplaying your opponent, instead of just bluntly attacking stuff until they die.
 
Someone apparently isn't very jolly(+Speed, - Sp. Atk)

And yes, I think this is a joke. Seriously, WHAT THE FUCKING HELL guys. While playing on the test server I won more battles than ever. Of course, it's Charlie's Angels, and generally it loses when something retarded happens(aka gets Flinched by Gyarados[ahem BLUE KIRBY ._.]), but it's changing the original way the battle was intended: critical hits and flinches were put into the game so that people COULD be lucky, so it shouldn't punish them to be so. At least when you get haxed, you can come back, but when you actually hax the opponent what do you do? the way the formula is set up you can't do anything: if you knew you wouldn't have won, you might as well give up compared to being haxed since all you can do is ask the opponent to hax you back.

Seriously fuck you all. Battling with this has only shown me how more opposed to this fucking idea.
 
x= i think this is an awesome idea personally.

Articanus, this isnt going to be implemented into ladders right away, there will be a seperate ladder to test it before we decide.

I think this is a step in the right direction of turning the game as competitive as possible.

At least when you get haxed, you can come back, but when you actually hax the opponent what do you do? the way the formula is set up you can't do anything: if you knew you wouldn't have won, you might as well give up compared to being haxed since all you can do is ask the opponent to hax you back.
this isnt true, you must take into account all of the little things like damage percentages and early game crits as well. also, if you hax a player extremely but you still would have won, it recgonizes this and still gives you the win (or at least thats how i heard it was set up).

i think its about time skill was the central focus of the game rather than luck changing the course of a match every single time x=.

and if you cant beat players because you cant rely on luck anymore, its about time for you to get a team change. pokemon is meant to be a game where you should carefully and soundly construct your team, not just use a happy go lucky team and ease your way up with hax.
 

Articuno64

1 to 63 were taken
is a Tournament Director Alumnusis a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Programmer Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
Even though I don't play pokemon anymore (things can't have changed that much since ruby and sapphire), I almost wish I did because this is a truly monumental leap forward in competitive pokemon.

Right from the game's release, luck has been the one thing that held pokemon back. Sure, I can catch 150 pokemon and trade them with my friends. But can I play pokemon as a serious, competitive game? We've tried. Ever since Blizzard's PBS was released in 2000 (or was it 1999?), we've been trying to make this game "real". We carefully banned moves like Double Team and Horn Drill to craft this game into what it was... but there was always something missing, something that caused great players such as myself to eventually drop off one by one. No matter how much you prepared, no matter how well you played, you could never master the game. Luck stood in the way.

And it was humiliating. How many times can you have your Tauros frozen by a Cloyster's Blizzard and still keep a cool head? And the lucky newbies were just unbearable. The way they sarcastically say "lol gg :)" at the end of a match where your Exeggutor's Sleep Powder just missed twice in a row. It was not uncommon for me to quit for weeks at a time during events like this, and I eventually had just had enough.

But now we've fixed all that. Thanks to the brilliance of the collective Smogon mind, the pokemon franchise can finally become what we've been trying to make it all these years. This was certainly a long time coming.

If you disagree with this formula, you must hate innovation. Plain and simple. Smogon has a history of innovation with this game, and this formula was an inevitable move. OPEN YOUR EYES, PEOPLE! THIS IS BIG! Trust me, I've been playing a lot longer than you have.

In fact, this is so big, that I'm even contemplating returning to pokemon. What do you guys think about that? It would probably only take me a few days to get caught up. I've heard about that new Sneasel evolution and I'll bet I can subtract some serious hit points with it.
 

obi

formerly david stone
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Programmer Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Researcher Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
In fact, this is so big, that I'm even contemplating returning to pokemon. What do you guys think about that? It would probably only take me a few days to get caught up. I've heard about that new Sneasel evolution and I'll bet I can subtract some serious hit points with it.
I highly recommend it. As I'm sure some people have noticed, I've been on Shoddybattle again recently. This just so happened to coincide with the arrival of the hax test server (I was on both =) ). You shouldn't get your hopes up too high just yet: right now the hax formula doesn't seem strong enough. In fact, I haven't seen it overturn a single battle yet, and although I wasn't in a particularly hax-filled battle, I did lose to a couple of early-game flinches. It was an uphill battle the rest of the way, but I couldn't quite overcome it.

In other words, I think we'll need to beef up the formula a little bit before we can really declare victory, but yes, we are well on our way.

Have fun using Weavile! :toast:
 

Blue Kirby

Never back down.
is a Top Tutor Alumnusis a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Programmer Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnusis a Past SPL Championis a Three-Time Past WCoP Champion
After the amount of time I've spent on the private server testing away, I feel it's time to give my opinion as it stands. I do tend to agree with Obi - although the formula has overturned haxy battles, I'm somewhat surprised at how much still slides. What I'm talking about here is something that people seem to overlook far too much - and that is the classic damage rolls I know we have them included them in the formula, but I do not feel that they are being given enough weight when determining the amount of hax that took place in a battle.

As I found out when I looked into one of my battles with RB Golbat, although a particular match was overturned in my favour as a result of an accumulation of hax (flinches, critical hits) - there was a ridiculous amount of damage rolls that went against me in terms of how much damage I was dealing. I have now begun keeping track of the damage I'm dealing and receiving (and chatting with my opponents after a game where I'm not 100% sure of the EV spread I was facing). I have come to the conclusion that damage rolls are not being given enough weight at this point - it seems to take 7 or 8 near minimum damage rolls for me/near maximum damage rolls for my opponent to even have a bearing on the outcome. I do not believe you factored this into our battle you referred to earlier, Articanus. Luck was clearly against me in that instance.

Of course, I say all this without a complete understanding of the formula - at this point this is just a speculation of mine. Have any of you guys been noticing the same thing?
 
Even though I don't play pokemon anymore (things can't have changed that much since ruby and sapphire), I almost wish I did because this is a truly monumental leap forward in competitive pokemon.
Arti, you're the last person I thought I'd hear this from.

I'll go make another alt and test this, but I doubt I'm going to like it since I disagree with the very concept itself.
 

DM

Ce soir, on va danser.
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnus
In fact, this is so big, that I'm even contemplating returning to pokemon. What do you guys think about that? It would probably only take me a few days to get caught up. I've heard about that new Sneasel evolution and I'll bet I can subtract some serious hit points with it.
I think that would be a great thing Arti, for you (to get back into something that you enjoyed for so long) and for Smogon (to have one of the oldest figureheads active again).

I've been following this formula discussion quietly up until now, but I would like to come out and say that I am very intrigued by the idea, and if implemented correctly it will definitely improve the pokemon battling experience for everyone. I myself have tried numerous times to get into pokemon (going all the way back into early Netbattle days), but it seems like every time I battled I got discouraged because of hax.

I distinctly remember a battle against Skarm, who was then an admin; if I won the battle I would gain halfops in #smogon (so I obviously had more than the usual motivation to win). In my corner I had alex/LordS, Roy and Brain walking me through the battle, telling me which pokemon to switch to and which moves I should use. Even then, with three great pokemon players in my corner, I still lost.

And it wasn't solely because Skarm was a great battler, though he was. At least three times in the battle something negative would happen (my move missing, his hitting, etc.) where the guys in my corner said "oh man, that shouldn't have happened." After the battle was over, even Skarm told me he really shouldn't have won. As a novice pokemon player trying to get into the game, how do you think I felt about sticking with it?

It's now a couple years later, but I still have the itch to get into pokemon for real. With a new game coming out the interest is at a fever pitch, and I think releasing this anti-hax formula to coincide with Platinum is a fantastic idea and will do wonders for Smogon.
 
I'm not sure I like that the exact details of the formula are being kept a secret. This implies that the formula is easily abusable and if anyone managed to reverse engineer it, they could dominate the ladder. Are the details only going to be kept secret for the duration of the test? Or do you plan to keep them secret forever?

If the formula is so weak that it requires security through obscurity, I'm don't think I want to have anything to do with it.
 
I'm guessing you don't like the suspect test's hidden requirement then?

Because they are both the same principle.
I don't see how. AFAIK, the hidden requirement on the suspect tests is just an extra condition to allow for a greater voting pool, i.e. does not negatively impact anyone making the real requirements.

This is clearly different, as this formula potentially decides whether you win or lose a match, and therefore has a clear competitive influence on a match-by-match basis. The problem with such an unknown formula is that whether you win or lose becomes dependent not on a fixed condition that you can consciously aim to reach, but effectively dependent somewhat on chance, which defeats the initial purpose of the formula itself. If extra knowledge of such an obviously influential factor gives you a competitive edge, then it is clearly your duty as a competitor to seek out that knowledge. Keeping the details of the formula secret doesn't completely prevent exploitation anyway, it just makes the process more time-consuming and uncertain. I'm talking about cross-referencing and analyzing a significant amount of logs with both real and overturned outcomes. It is certainly something that I'll be looking in to once this is implemented on a ladder that I play regularly, to see if any competitive gains can be made. Such scrutiny might actually help to improve the formula as well, so do not think that it would be a way of ridiculing the process, not at all. In fact I find such rash assumptions to be both insulting and demeaning.

That is all I'll say about this matter for now until I actually battle with the system first-hand, as it is abundantly clear that this discussion is making the people involved extremely aggravated. I'm quite frankly shocked at the level of immaturity currently shown by the senior members regarding this issue. All I wanted was to have my concerns addressed and discussed in an intelligent and polite manner.
 

DougJustDoug

Knows the great enthusiasms
is a Site Content Manageris a Top Artistis a Programmeris a Forum Moderatoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
I am posting the script here, so I can link to it from the Curtain Call thread.

DougJustDoug on March 7th said:
It looks like there's lots of interest in "The Win Formula" as an April Fool's joke. And since I seem to be ringleading this particular idea, I might as well do it right. This joke needs a lot of setup, otherwise it will probably fail horribly. This needs an organized approach. I'm going to treat this like a performance -- an "April Fools Play", if you will. And like any good performance, we need a script and we need a cast.

For those of you who hate tl;dr and don't really want to get too deep into this -- just skim the script and cast, you'll get the gist of it.


Here's the general outline of the script:

Introduction
(~March 10th)
X-Act makes a new thread in Policy Review. The OP follows this general outline:
  • Smogon has had a long-standing dislike of hax, and has used clauses and bans to curb luck's influence over battle outcomes
  • He has an idea for a mathematical formula that could be used to ensure battle outcomes are more fair
  • The formula would be calculated at the end of a normal battle, and would be used to declare the winner.
  • "Fainting your opponent's team will end the battle -- but it will not necessarily mean you won the match." The formula will determine the winner.
  • List general variables and assumptions for the formula
  • Ask for input and help
  • Do not make any assumptions about the formula being implemented on the battle server. Just get the conversation started.

Act 1
(March 10-15)
Badgeholders comment on X-Act's proposal.

  • Since this is so controversial, almost everyone needs to express initial hesitance about this idea. But two things should be the foundation for optimism:
    • A total hatred of hax
    • Confidence in X-Act and others that the problem can be solved
  • The early discussion should focus on the primal question, "Is hax an inherent part of competitive pokemon?". This question is debated from time to time anyway, so I don't think you guys will have much trouble putting on a good show here.
  • Later in the week, we need to introduce some of our "Heroes".
  • Early on, heroes will not get emotional in the debate, but will focus on wanting to help develop the formula.
  • Heroes need to have a history of contributing in detailed Smogon projects

We need to make sure not to post too much in the early going. It needs to be realistic. If X-Act really posted something like this, many of you would probably ignore it or pass it off as stupid math mumbo-jumbo. So that's exactly what we are going to do here. Things will start heating up in Act 2.

Act 2
(March 16-22)
This is where we start talking about implementing some form of win formula on the Smogon University server.

  • I'll make a post that I've been thinking about something like this for a long time, and X-Act's formula has piqued my interest. I'll say that I'd love to implement it, if we can make a workable formula.
  • As soon as I "jump the gun" and start talking about implementing it, that's where we introduce our "Villains".
  • These people may have commented in the previous act, but preferably not.
  • They are going to be vehemently opposed to the idea.
  • They've ignored the idea because it's dumb. But now that it's getting serious, they have to speak up.
  • Comments should not get too nasty at this point, since nothing has been committed
  • The Heroes will continue to develop the formula -- introducing new variables, and working out the specific mechanics of the equation. By the end of Act 2, the formula should have the appearance of being quite thorough and robust.
  • The regular "Hax vs No-hax" debate should continue normally. People with a history of playing quote-reply ping pong in PR debates, should do so here. It helps spam up the thread sufficiently to make it difficult for the general public to really get any good grasp of what the hell is going on.
  • For the casual, uninterested Smogoner, the thread should look like some "boring theorymon debate in PR".

Act 3
(March 23-31)
Here's where the setup really gets some momentum.
  • The Admins (preferably Jumpman and Aeolus) decide that this idea has enough community interest to warrant testing. It will be inserted in the order of operations.
  • It will be mentioned that it would not impact any current suspect testing, so it could take place in parallel on the Suspect ladder.
  • To really light the afterburner on this, The Admins decide to implement the Win Formula on the Suspect ladder after the close of monthly stats.
  • People need to be careful to avoid specific mention of the date "April 1st" -- it's too much of a reminder about April Fools Day. Instead, use phrases like "beginning next month", "when the new ladder opens", etc.
  • The Villains kick into high gear in the latter parts of Act 3. As it becomes imminent that this is really going to happen, the Villains need to turn up the drama.
  • Near the end of Act 3, The Admins will announce how long the test will take place, and it will be very short.
    "Since the community response has been so positive, we do not need to test this for very long. We will implement it on the Suspect ladder for the first week or two of April, just to work out any of the bugs that remain. And to allow for the remote possibility that the general Smogon community will be opposed to the idea. Assuming everything goes as planned, we will then implement the Win Formula on all SU ladders on April 12th."
  • The short timeframe and the assumption of community support should piss off the silent majority to no end.
  • A strategically-placed thread should be opened in Stark Mountain by someone without PR access who opposes the idea -- if it doesn't happen naturally. Let the thread get a couple of posts and then lock it, with some heavy-handed comment by a moderator.
  • At this point, we should dust off a few "Wise Old Veterans". They will lament about the historical impact of hax on the metagame. They will reassure the community that this formula is simply the latest step in a long line of measures Smogon has taken over the years to ensure that skill is the primary deciding factor in competitive play. Phrases like "Even though I don't play Pokemon any more..." and "I remember back in GSC..." -- will probably be used liberally.

Closing Act
(April 1st)
  • As an April Fools red herring, the Smogon front page will be translated into Portuguese.
  • Jumpman will make an official discussion thread in Stark Mountain titled "np: Anti-Hax Clause". This will be the thread for the general public to discuss the new "Win Formula".
  • The OP of the thread will contain the first mention of a "unpublished variable" in the formula.
    "It is 100% objective, but if known publicly, the variable could be abused to unfairly engineer wins. Therefore, we are keeping the variable hidden to ensure the integrity of the metagame."
  • A new clause will be implemented on the Suspect Ladder.
Some badgeholders have been confused about the clause that will be implemented, so let me be clear -- we WILL NOT implement any fancy formula in Shoddy battle. We WILL tell the community that we have implemented the elaborate formula on the server. What we will REALLY implement is a very simple formula that does the following:
If the battle ends 2-0 or 1-0, the system will randomly choose the winner - each player has a 50-50 chance. That's it. No complicated math, no logic whatsoever.

The first time a player "loses" a match where they fainted the opponents team -- they will go ballistic. The "winner" will likely defend the "quality of their play", and accuse the other side of "getting too much hax". Others will investigate the details of the formula and call the formula designers idiots. Other people will accuse the system of being glitched. Hilarity ensues.

Finale
  • The play ends with the arrival of the "White Knight".
  • The White Knight will reveal the "hidden variable" in the formula.
  • They will also publish the formula for a win in simplified form, so even the layman can understand it.
  • They will assemble pieces of information from the formula thread and other discussions, but will keep it very straightforward as they present each key variable in the formula. Something like this:
White Knight said:
The formula is broken into two sections, each section using certain variables. One variable (L), is used in both Section 1 and Section 2.

I have finally discovered the hidden variable in the formula, and it actually makes this whole thing make sense.

The two sections are added together to determine the winner.
Section 1 Variables
p = Number of Pokemon used in battle
L = Total health Lost during battle (as a percentage of team health)
a = Total number of Active pokemon at the end of battle
R = Player's Glicko2 Rating
? = The hidden variable (see below)

Section 2 Variables
f = Total number of Fainted pokemon at the end of battle
s = Stat total for the entire team
L = Total health Lost during battle (as a percentage of team health)
O = Overall number of turns where attacks were used

The secret behind solving this formula is the hidden variable which is represented as "I". After inserting "I" into the formula -- we can see the final formula for a Win at Smogon University:

((A + P) / R) * (I + L)) + ((F + O + O) / (L * S)) = Win!
The End.
(roll credits)

---------------------------

So that's the general script. What we need now is a cast. Since this isn't really a play, the roles are very vague. We're all "playing ourselves". But, I think it would help if we have an idea of the general roles we need fulfilled to pull this off. I envision the following roles listed below, but there may be more. Feel free to post ideas, if you think something is missing. Like everything else, I'm sure we'll make it up as we go along.

In general, there are two classes of characters in the play:
Heroes - People in favor of the formula, and working to get it implemented.
Villains - People opposed to the formula.​

Here are some of the roles that need to be played. With the exception of the White Knight, each role can (and should) have more than one actor. Some people will play multiple roles.

"Action Hero" - They help out and work to implement change in the community. They move the story along by causing things to happen. Action heroes probably need to be members of forum staff.

"Mad Scientist" - Technical types that are fascinated with the formula, implementation, and theory. Should have a certain detached aloofness as it pertains to the real impact on battlers and the metagame.

"Melodrama Hero" & "Melodrama Villain" - They add drama by getting emotional with their arguments, and/or personal with their attacks. We can't have too many of these, or it will look contrived.

"Theorymon Hero" & "Theorymon Villain" - Characters with little current battle experience that support/oppose the formula based on theory. They use hypothetical situations and not-always-current battle strategies to support their arguments.

"Battling Hero" & "Battling Villain" - People that battle actively and support/oppose the formula based on their assumptions of how the formula will impact their actual teams and battles. They refer to the latest-and-greatest battle strategies to support their arguments.

"Drive-By Hero" & "Drive-By Villain" - Periodically make very short, unsubstantiated posts to support/oppose the formula.

"Wise Old Veteran" - Lends sage advice and historical perspective

"Grumpy Old Veteran" - Opposes change. Wishes we could go back to the way things were. Crotchety assholes.

"Pedantic Ping-Pong Poster" - People who spam up discussion threads by quote-replying to their opponent repeatedly. At least two are required for a game of ping-pong. They endlessly argue over near-irrelevant nuances of words and arguments.

"Extras" - General discussion posters who amplify high points of the story by posting "on cue". Whenever something impactful is posted by the main actors, we may need to have some "filler" posted by the Extras, in support or opposition to the key post.

"White Knight" - The deus ex machina of our play.
--------------------------------

So, that's the plan. I'm totally open to suggestions, and I'm sure we'll change this up as we go.

I don't want to be a drill sergeant, since this is meant to be fun. For those of you interested in playing a part, post in this thread. The post immediately below this one will list the specific members of the cast, so we'll know who is who. Be aware that we need more heroes than villains, since the basic premise of this joke is that we are actually supporting this ridiculous idea.

Also, when asking for a role, try to make a realistic assessment of your general public profile. If you are traditionally "logical" on Smogon, you can't play a "Melodrama Villain". If you are a newcomer to Smogon, you can't play a "Wise Old Veteran". If you haven't been active in Policy Review or the Smogon battling community, then don't think you can suddenly spring up and be a key actor here. Be realistic. Feel free to suggest people that you think would be good for certain roles.

Lastly, please don't reveal this to anyone. Keeping a secret like this for an entire month will be quite difficult. But, if the secret gets out that it is a prank, then it will all be for naught. Hopefully, everyone reading this will keep this discussion STRICTLY internal.

As directors like to say, "Quiet on set!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top