-
The moderators of this forum are the Pokémon Showdown! Administrators.
-
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!
SS Random Battle Suspect Process - Dynamax
- Thread starter The Immortal
- Start date
- Status
Link to replay please. For all we know, your opponent is an idiot to have allowed Darm to use 3x Max Knuckle instead of using Max Guard to stall out and prevent one of the boosts.
Also, in gen7, you can literally win in 1 turn if your lead is Slurpuff and they can't answer the Belly Drum. In gen8, it's not as scary because Slurpuff can't 1hko a dynamax. Sticky Web in gen7 is also far more effective, as there are less spinners/defoggers, and boots doesn't exist. Every gen7 random veteran has won and lost many games all because of turn 1 or 2 Sticky Web.
Last edited:
I'd also like to see this replay. Dynamax makes gdarm into a base-95 speed ice type with a good attack. Not the example I'd think of for dynamax being broken.
lol why are we still discussing whether or not dyna is broken? The debate is over whether or not a mechanic that significantly lowers the number of times the player who executed a better strategy will win the match should be kept in the metagame because it is "fun" and "generation defining." The fact that literally every other tier on showdown has banned it clearly establishes that it is not a competitive mechanic; we do not need to rehash that side of the debate.
If you'd like to see why dynamax is uncompetitive, please consult the following thread:
https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/np-ss-ou-suspect-process-round-1-boom-boom-pow.3657265/
Well, I'm not sure if I'm going to make Reqs because I keep taking a loss streak every time I approach 80 GXE, so I figured I'll just leave my two cents: Dynamax is simply not an appropriate mechanic for any singles format and should be banned. It utterly invalidates common game mechanics and renders moves such as Encore, Disable, and weight-based moves into liabilities. It creates 50/50's that can cause the game to swing wildly and unpredictably. There's the obvious example of breaking choice lock, but there's also the incredible risk of going for a move like Low Kick and wasting your turn (and likely losing a critical pokemon) because they dynamax.
Dynamax is even worse in random battle than it is in most singles formats. It has a very negative interaction with the lack of team preview, since it's more or less guesswork as to which dynamax user is your best bet. Dynamaxing too early with insufficient scouting risks being countered, but waiting too long to dynamax can let your opponent get their own dynamax in play and start snowballing - which often forces you to use your own dynamax in a very suboptimal way just to survive. While dynamax can save you from bad matchups, it creates far more of them than it solves. If my team is held together by a fast revenge-killer like Weavile that can punish my enemy for every KO, then I live in constant fear that they might dynamax rather than sacking or switching out.
The thing I love about random battle is the huge amount of variation you get. It comes at the cost of having lopsided matchups due to randomness in teams, but no other metagame sees anywhere near so many Pokemon or weird and wonderful team compositions. Dynamax upends this by putting all the focus on itself and greatly shortening the length of the match by quickly whittling through both teams. The centralization just isn't fun and detracts from the wide variety of strategies that random battles offered in previous generations. The most fun and interesting battles I have are ones where both players keep dynamax in reserve until the game is already over, or those where both sides essentially negate the opponent's dynamax by harmlessly stalling it out. These conventional matches are way more fun and enjoyable and give more time for the non-dynamax pokemon to shine, and give me hope that with a dynamax ban the format will be much improved.
If dynamax does end up staying (and I sincerely hope it doesn't) then there is one simple change that could significantly help the situation: make it so that the random battle sets do not have dynamax candies. This is not a rules change but a sets change, since it is perfectly legal in-game to have pokemon without any dynamax candy level. This would make it much easier to revenge an opposing dynamax user while they are dynamaxed. Right now stalling out dynamax is the optimal approach and it rarely makes sense to attack into it.
Dynamax is even worse in random battle than it is in most singles formats. It has a very negative interaction with the lack of team preview, since it's more or less guesswork as to which dynamax user is your best bet. Dynamaxing too early with insufficient scouting risks being countered, but waiting too long to dynamax can let your opponent get their own dynamax in play and start snowballing - which often forces you to use your own dynamax in a very suboptimal way just to survive. While dynamax can save you from bad matchups, it creates far more of them than it solves. If my team is held together by a fast revenge-killer like Weavile that can punish my enemy for every KO, then I live in constant fear that they might dynamax rather than sacking or switching out.
The thing I love about random battle is the huge amount of variation you get. It comes at the cost of having lopsided matchups due to randomness in teams, but no other metagame sees anywhere near so many Pokemon or weird and wonderful team compositions. Dynamax upends this by putting all the focus on itself and greatly shortening the length of the match by quickly whittling through both teams. The centralization just isn't fun and detracts from the wide variety of strategies that random battles offered in previous generations. The most fun and interesting battles I have are ones where both players keep dynamax in reserve until the game is already over, or those where both sides essentially negate the opponent's dynamax by harmlessly stalling it out. These conventional matches are way more fun and enjoyable and give more time for the non-dynamax pokemon to shine, and give me hope that with a dynamax ban the format will be much improved.
If dynamax does end up staying (and I sincerely hope it doesn't) then there is one simple change that could significantly help the situation: make it so that the random battle sets do not have dynamax candies. This is not a rules change but a sets change, since it is perfectly legal in-game to have pokemon without any dynamax candy level. This would make it much easier to revenge an opposing dynamax user while they are dynamaxed. Right now stalling out dynamax is the optimal approach and it rarely makes sense to attack into it.
Every other tier is constructed and has team preview, which means you can build a team to best abuse dynamax, and specifically target the Pokémon that will counter your dynamax. What constructed does is irrelevant -- currently there's a lv72 Glalie with Moody in random, which is underwhelming most of the time due to its pisspoor initial stats.
The only thing random takes from constructed is tier leveling, and sleep clause. Everything else about it is unique.
I'm new here. Where do I vote once I've played minimum 60 games with 80+ GXE?
------------------------------
If here, then I vote ban - my profile on Showdown is RBDS Notty.
------------------------------
If here, then I vote ban - my profile on Showdown is RBDS Notty.
post a screenshot of your /rank while on your suspect alt in the Voter ID thread https://www.smogon.com/forums/threa...er-identification-thread-read-the-op.3662008/
and then you will be tagged on your Smogon notifications to vote in a couple days in a different thread. Check Smogon regularly!
Thank you, friend.
I didn't get around to playing enough to get reqs but Random Battle is my favourite Showdown 'metagame(s)' (I ran an unofficial Randbats tournament, won by Diophantine (who doesn't necessarily endorse this message!), which I know merely proves, I hope, my passion for the format, rather than any expertise) and wanted to chip in and ask if, even if Dynamax is banned, would it be possible for Randbats to divert from the Smogon metas further? I don't know the rationale for the current levelling system, I'm not sure I've read one somewhere, and it's not terrible for what it is (basing levelling on Smogon usage, in lieu of any other way of doing the levelling, is far better than no levelling at all!), but I can't help but think it would be better if Randbats levelling changed each month like Smogon usage tiers do - based on the winrate of each Pokemon in Randbats. I.e. each Pokemon could start at their current Randbats level, but fall in level if their winrate is (to some level of significance) higher than 50% and rise in level if their winrate is lower than 50% (to some level of significance). The variables involved may need tweaking but eventually this should, I think, resolve in a much more balanced metagame, where each Pokemon is equally viable, which I think is what the current levelling system seems to be aiming for but doesn't achieve, because it's too arbitrary. I understand that I'm not a coder so I can't implement my dynamic Randbats suggestion easily in a pull request on GitHub, but I hope I'm allowed to use this opportunity to make an appeal for a more dynamic levelling system, even if Dynamax is banned. Given what The Immortal said in the OP:
I'd also note that we have Battle Factory (hopefully Gen 8 Battle Factory will be coded and released soon!) as our randomized Smogon metas format, with all Lv100 Pokemon, strictly based on Smogon tiers and movesets etc, we don't need to emulate Battle Factory by not choosing to diverge further from it on levelling.
My suspicion is that Randbats definitely has the volume of play needed to make dynamic (based on monthly (or more or less frequent) winrate stats) levelling possible. I'm aware I've discussed this topic before, to no avail.
I'd also note that we have Battle Factory (hopefully Gen 8 Battle Factory will be coded and released soon!) as our randomized Smogon metas format, with all Lv100 Pokemon, strictly based on Smogon tiers and movesets etc, we don't need to emulate Battle Factory by not choosing to diverge further from it on levelling.
Last edited:
Gen 8 battle factory is in progress. An alternate, winrate-based leveling system is and has been on the table for a while now, although it will have a higher priority in the case of a no-ban vote due to not needing to edit all of the sets for all of the mons. It is probably likely to occur either way the vote goes, however. Just a matter of time and coding resources.
I think this replay is the best example of both sides of this argument.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen8randombattle-1099011395
On pro-dynamax side: the balance between these two teams is so lopsided that it's funny. Multiple legendaries versus PU threats and... Pex. A banded dracovish versus a team with exclusively slower pokemon. It should be an auto-loss. Dynamax allowed me to flip that loss into a win by saving it for the one thing my team couldn't possibly stand up to under normal circumstances.
On ban-dynamax side: they used their dynamax poorly, and I used my dynamax well. That was literally the only deciding factor in the game. Team comp, scouting, move selection (to that point) weren't super important. When each player used their dynamax was the whole game. That's reflected in many games - the ability to win in randbats is often dictated by getting a good dynamax abuser and using it to win. It makes setup sweepers unnaturally resilient to misplays - if whatever is in front of you can't deal more than 65%, you essentially have a free setup turn no matter what (barring crits), even if you're outsped.
So I guess the question is: is having the potential to turn a bad matchup around by conserving dynamax worth making most games revolve around its well-timed use?
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen8randombattle-1099011395
On pro-dynamax side: the balance between these two teams is so lopsided that it's funny. Multiple legendaries versus PU threats and... Pex. A banded dracovish versus a team with exclusively slower pokemon. It should be an auto-loss. Dynamax allowed me to flip that loss into a win by saving it for the one thing my team couldn't possibly stand up to under normal circumstances.
On ban-dynamax side: they used their dynamax poorly, and I used my dynamax well. That was literally the only deciding factor in the game. Team comp, scouting, move selection (to that point) weren't super important. When each player used their dynamax was the whole game. That's reflected in many games - the ability to win in randbats is often dictated by getting a good dynamax abuser and using it to win. It makes setup sweepers unnaturally resilient to misplays - if whatever is in front of you can't deal more than 65%, you essentially have a free setup turn no matter what (barring crits), even if you're outsped.
So I guess the question is: is having the potential to turn a bad matchup around by conserving dynamax worth making most games revolve around its well-timed use?
The main reason these teams are lopsided is because he rolled some good Dynamax abusers and from the looks of it you didn't roll any at all. Based on when he quit I'm willing to bet most of his team just couldn't touch Pex.
When I look at this replay it shows more of the issues dynamax creates than the positives it brings to the table. You very nearly lost to a turn 2 dynamax in which your opponent did not secure any boosts on turn one. I'm not sure how Cursola lived the max mindstorm, seems like it probably should have died. If it did, you very well may have lost to that awful Dynamax right off the bat.
84 Atk Solgaleo Max Mindstorm vs. 84 HP / 84 Def Cursola in Psychic Terrain: 265-313 (109 - 128.8%) -- guaranteed OHKO
I also wouldn't say your Dynamax was good either; you had a ton of ways to deal with Dracovish without using yours (it was choice locked), and the only thing really preventing you from outright losing to Latias was Dmax on Arctozolt. But your opponent messed up by not calm minding more on your Wailord, so it works.
All in all, yes, teamgen is still an issue in random battles, and even in a world without Dmax the odds would be stacked against you in this game. But in a world with Dmax you almost lost turn 1 before your opponent even had the chance to throw with his Latias. I won't generalize too much beyond this replay since just about every point that can be made has been discussed already in the thread at great length, but anyway... This is my two cents.
Maybe I'm missing something, but exactly how could I have dealt with Vish without using dmax? It literally OHKO'd/2HKO'd every member of my team with fisheous rend. Choice lock doesn't matter much when that's the only move Vish wants to click. The only path I had to beating it (without using dynamax) was hopefully stalling it out by giving up Wailord at the very least, but probably also something else. Otherwise every time it hits the field, I guaranteed lost a mon. Using dynamax let me get rid of it without outright sacrificing something.
85 Atk Choice Band Strong Jaw Dracovish Fishious Rend (170 BP) vs. 85 HP / 85 Def Toxapex: 110-129 (52.1 - 61.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
As for the calc, the calculator appears to be applying a 50% boost instead of the correct 33% boost. Damage without psychic terrain is:
85 Atk Solgaleo Max Mindstorm vs. 85 HP / 85 Def Cursola: 178-210 (73.2 - 86.4%) -- guaranteed 2HKO.
Multiply the damage range by 1.5 and you get your calc. I happened to have played the scenario before, so I knew cursola could live.
As for Latias, yes that could also have beaten me, but only if they wanted to further push their luck by boosting while taking ice beams. Out of curiosity, I checked these calcs too. Latias needs +3 to put Arctozolt into range of Draco (50% roll exactly), which is another two turns. +4 to guarantee it, which is 3-4 turns (depends on the damage rolls). 5-6 total ice beams, or 40-50% chance of being frozen with 27-32% of being crit, or roughly a 60% chance for Wailord to win that if Latias tries.
I also want to add that I'm pretty firmly in the camp of "ban dynamax" - I don't really enjoy having my games dictated by a single turn's decision.
Last edited:
I don't think that replay proves anything except that better decisions still win games. Your opponent used Dynamax poorly (and then for some reason tried to set up a Lati against a Dynamax Wailord). You used Dynamax to get past what you saw as the biggest threat to your team. If anything, this is an advertisement for why Dynamax should stay.
I answer your question with a question: Do you prefer that you would have just lost that game and moved onto the next one?
This is the pro-dmax argument I pointed out, yes. I can see the validity to it, which is why I thought the replay was pertinent.
Obviously I'd like to win all the games I can win, but I also don't think much of what I did there (outside of dmax) was as game-determining as my opponent wasting their dmax while I got value from it. That's a huge amount of influence from a single turn choice, which is why I'm not in favor of keeping it in the tier.
You can spam recover with Pex and sack nothing assuming he stays in, or you can go Wailord and sack it instead. You dropped 42% on Dracovish the turn it came in and it was due to tank 12% next turn. It might be a calc but it's probably dead. And even if it's not dead it's low enough to where it's not a problem for you anymore since Pex is still healthy. No way Dmax is your best play here.
That would explain some things. The calc would then instead be the following:
84 Atk Life Orb Solgaleo Max Mindstorm vs. 84 HP / 84 Def Cursola: 231-273 (95 - 112.3%) -- 68.8% chance to OHKO
Your odds of losing upfront to a shitty turn 2 Dynamax with no prior setup were kind of high, which is my main point.
I mean... He took the alternative .9*crit% chance of winning so... My point still stands. He threw any decent chance he had of winning by not calm minding more.
Well, ~20-23% chance to be crit one or more times (1/24 chance to crit as of gen 7), but sure, close enough on the other stuff.
Wailord also does not innately win with just a freeze or a crit. If you freeze him when he's healthy then you're forced to switch into Arctozolt and he'll have to stay frozen for 2 turns minimum in order to lose (however long it takes you to land icicle crash with him going first). If you crit him when he's healthy then he may still be able to win depending on his spdef at that point.
So we should base our decisions on the hopes that the worse player not only plays their own DMax poorly, but plays against your DMax poorly.
So then, the other hundreds of replays where DMax doubles as a "win button" should suffice for the pro-ban side?
I don't understand how people can possibly think that this is a good stance to take. If we voted against banning things because some people play broken things poorly, there would never be a need for suspect tests...
Last edited:
Dynamax will remain legal. What next? Well as I mentioned, we will be working on a system to balance Pokemon levels and no longer rely on the Dynamax-less tiers.
- Status