I'm being ridiculous, but it should be possible with cart mechanics, if a second sleep/freeze happens, to end the match, heal your Pokémon, go out to the tall grass to deplete your HP/PP/status to the exact conditions as they would be if sleep/freeze clause had been activated, reenter the link arena, and start the battle anew from that point.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Remove Sleep and Freeze Clause, and ban Reflect
- Thread starter Dre89
- Start date
- Status
FOMG I agree, that's a very fair point, so I guess I was getting a bit ahead of myself. Still, I guess there's no reason we can't talk about it.
On that note, what are the potential solutions for cart-accurate sleep clause? At present I can think of two options- greying out sleep moves as I suggested, and a prompt-DQ system as outlined in the OP (iirc these were the two solutions brought up in the PR thread). Prompt-DQ is easily the truest to the cart, since it doesn't impose any restrictions but is a use-at-own-risk kind of thing. The main issue I have with it is that it's kinda a bullshit way to win. The second option is to grey out sleep moves when the clause is active. Though this is replicable on cart, it does impose restrictions that would otherwise not be present. Furthermore, if you were to modify it to be less restrictive it becomes rather complex. However, I still prefer this option because it's more consistent with how games are currently run- the only way to win is to actually beat the opponent rather than cheese the opponent by abusing the rules.
Are there any other solutions?
===========
Regarding the whole ending battle and trying to replicate the conditions prior to clause activation, I think that's a rather unreasonable solution. It's absurdly time-consuming and difficult to replicate, and I don't think it's a viable option in the context of playing a series of matches. Furthermore, some factors are literally impossible to replicate- if you've been burning sleep turns trying to wake something, there is no way of replicating that on cart, since even if a wild pokemon sleeps you, you have no way of knowing how many turns you have remaining.
A counterpoint to the unreasonable argument that got brought up on PP is that finding pokemon with perfect DVs is similarly unreasonable. First I'd like to point out that it's something that occurs in a different context- teambuilding is not the same as playing tournament matches. Second, afaik there's an assumption (or maybe it's explicit) that both players are not using pokemon that can only be obtained by abusing glitches- however I don't think this rules out using glitches as a shortcut to obtaining legal pokemon. Idk, could be wrong here. Anyway, just felt like bringing that up since I thought it was relevant
On that note, what are the potential solutions for cart-accurate sleep clause? At present I can think of two options- greying out sleep moves as I suggested, and a prompt-DQ system as outlined in the OP (iirc these were the two solutions brought up in the PR thread). Prompt-DQ is easily the truest to the cart, since it doesn't impose any restrictions but is a use-at-own-risk kind of thing. The main issue I have with it is that it's kinda a bullshit way to win. The second option is to grey out sleep moves when the clause is active. Though this is replicable on cart, it does impose restrictions that would otherwise not be present. Furthermore, if you were to modify it to be less restrictive it becomes rather complex. However, I still prefer this option because it's more consistent with how games are currently run- the only way to win is to actually beat the opponent rather than cheese the opponent by abusing the rules.
Are there any other solutions?
===========
Regarding the whole ending battle and trying to replicate the conditions prior to clause activation, I think that's a rather unreasonable solution. It's absurdly time-consuming and difficult to replicate, and I don't think it's a viable option in the context of playing a series of matches. Furthermore, some factors are literally impossible to replicate- if you've been burning sleep turns trying to wake something, there is no way of replicating that on cart, since even if a wild pokemon sleeps you, you have no way of knowing how many turns you have remaining.
A counterpoint to the unreasonable argument that got brought up on PP is that finding pokemon with perfect DVs is similarly unreasonable. First I'd like to point out that it's something that occurs in a different context- teambuilding is not the same as playing tournament matches. Second, afaik there's an assumption (or maybe it's explicit) that both players are not using pokemon that can only be obtained by abusing glitches- however I don't think this rules out using glitches as a shortcut to obtaining legal pokemon. Idk, could be wrong here. Anyway, just felt like bringing that up since I thought it was relevant
Haven't you noticed that the author of this thread has already abandoned it? That means that you no longer have anyone to argue with.
By the way, I find sad that the author wanted to get rid of Freeze Clause and forced Sleep Clause and yet he refused my invitations to have a Gen 1 OU match with those conditions, looks like he didn't want those changes to be implemented after all :/
By the way, I find sad that the author wanted to get rid of Freeze Clause and forced Sleep Clause and yet he refused my invitations to have a Gen 1 OU match with those conditions, looks like he didn't want those changes to be implemented after all :/
How does that work if a pokemon only knows one sleep move? Or is locked into Encore? Or in a pp-stall situation and it only has a sleep move left? I assume in these situations we would need to make exceptions - stop greying them out and use the dq system/allowing to break sleep clause if the opponent forced it with Encore.
Seems like a rather bad solution for new players. Now instead of just wasting a turn because they didn't know about a rule, they now would lose the entire battle. Also misclicks would be more annoying. We also would have the same issue as above (pp-stall and Encore).
If you burned some sleep turns in the battle, just let your pokemon be slept by a wild pokemon and burn the same turn number against it. Of course we can't know how long the sleep would have lasted initially, but we can recreate the situation with the same uncertainty and possible outcomes.
I think the best way to enforce sleep clause on cart would be to just let the other player wake up his mon while switching around, should you have broken it. If they wake up against a different pokemon just continue switching until you both have the right ones in again. In a real battle on cartridge you could let a referee do that so no new information is revealed to either player if the clause was broken early.
In short, after some thinking the sleep clause how we have it on showdown seems indeed possible to enforce on cart.
For freezes I think you could just use the suggestion of Longfellow and try to recreate the same gamestate. Freeze clause doesn't activate that often and playing on cart would also take much longer overall. I don't know how many people would actually be willing to play a bo3 with the animations, loading time and so on.
Quick post just to say that some people may have misunderstood what I said about freeze clause.
I said that the Freeze mod should be conserved because we can pretend that on cart it would be a rematch if a second pokemon gets freeze, so PS! just kills any case of this in the egg.
It changes the game by a little 'cause on cart you could try to get freeze'd one more time, but every Freeze Clause hater that I read said that " A 2 freezes on the same side match is too rare to be taken into consideration ".
Edit : I don't care about the sleep ruling, Sleep Mod or not what you want is still a sleep clause anyway.
I said that the Freeze mod should be conserved because we can pretend that on cart it would be a rematch if a second pokemon gets freeze, so PS! just kills any case of this in the egg.
It changes the game by a little 'cause on cart you could try to get freeze'd one more time, but every Freeze Clause hater that I read said that " A 2 freezes on the same side match is too rare to be taken into consideration ".
Edit : I don't care about the sleep ruling, Sleep Mod or not what you want is still a sleep clause anyway.
Blightbringer
Banned deucer.
Blastoise? Isn't Vaporeon a superior option due to higher Special, Hit Points, and access to Acid Armor? Don't tell me you just have an attachment because it was your first starter Pokémon...
@Blightbringer I like fun teams, that's why I used Blastoise.
@FOMG We're talking about Gen 1, so Encore does not exist. Also, if a player is dumb enough to bring a pokemon that only has Sleep inducing moves he deserves to lose via indirect Sleep Clause for his stupidity. By the way, an opponent also deserves to lose if his pokemon's PPs reach zero and his only remaining move is, let's say: Sleep Powder and he has no choice but to put a Second Pokémon to Sleep, that may sound cruel, but that's how the game is when you use real Pokemon games, by the way, it is VERY unlikely that a pokémon will end up with just sleep moves, e.g. Exeggutor will die before wasting all its Psychics, Mega Drains and Double Edges.
FOMG all the counterpoints you bring up in terms of greying moves are answerable with a simple question- does the player have a choice about using sleep moves? If so, then they should make that choice rather than putting something else to sleep, be it using a different attack or switching. If they really have no choice, which is extremely rare, then they should be able to use sleep moves- in such a scenario it's fair to say that the player using sleep moves has lost and so the opponent shouldn't care too much about repeatedly being put to sleep. I actually discussed this option on PP, I think the most troublesome issue is how a simple restriction limits otherwise fair play, while things get really complex if you try to minimise cases where those restrictions occur
As mentioned above, I think the cases of Encore and PP stall are easily resolvable. As for the prompt-DQ system, the idea behind the prompt would be to mitigate the impact of misclicks (you'd need to misclick twice in a row) as well as explain the rule to people unfamiliar with it. At that point if people still don't get it then tbh I think that's on them, there's only so much you should account for human stupidity, but I think it's reasonable to disagree on that, so I'm not really going to argue. Either way, I do agree that it's a bullshit way to lose and if people are somehow still activating it then that'll probably be really discouraging. Although I still think it's better than a mod, it's not my preferred option
Yeah I guess I focused on the wrong things for the whole sleep replicating thing, it wasn't until the day after I posted that that it occurred to me that the actual number of sleep turns remaining doesn't matter since that info is invisible anyway. As for your suggestion regarding switching pokemon until they wake, that only works in gen 1 as entry hazards kill that idea in later generations, as well as Leftovers.
I still think replicating team states is an absurd length to go to though. Saying that playing on cart would also take a while I think is a bit of a cop-out, and it's also not really comparable to the chore of replicating a team state at the time of a clause activation- I honestly don't see how the latter doesn't take several hours, or more likely a day or two (I think I'm being extremely generous with several hours tbh), an actual cart battle is not really comparable imo. The whole thing is jumping through insane hoops to rationalise something that should've never been there in the first place
- Status