ASB Rules

[Chris 2.1]

Either are plausible and I could agree to either.

[Dark Dragonite]

Don't steal my idea!!!!!!

So, if it has limitations, it's ok, but if it were somehow intertwined with the arena, like say the arena was...

Pit of Dispair-

Both battlers begin in the middle of a huge crater, meaning rocks, and dirt galore, no trees, grass, but a medium river runs through it. The Arena is aptly named for the challengers who have lost themselves in this pit and perished. A random basic/baby pokemon's spirit will attach itself to each battler to help fight along side, but can be ushered away after 3 rounds by the cleansing light. Pokemon may ask for assistance at a cost of 6% health per round, for 1 move.

[Chris 2.1]

seems ok yea

[Elec Man EXE]

I've got a question about doubling damage in a battle...

I've seen an increasing number of battles using double damage popping up (and in fact, I'm reffing 2 of them). At first I thought no biggie. But then something occured to me. Double damage essentially halfs the time a battle takes, allowing people to complete battles very rapidly. Allowing them to get a large amount of points fast.

So... is that a completely legal way to do battles?

And if it is, should those types of battles be awarded full points?

Maybe I'm being a bit harsh, but...

[Ace64]

I have a question about combos. If I commanded a combo such as Thunder+Thunderbolt, how would you determine damage? Is it as simple as combining the damage for each separate attack, or would you add a certain effect (for example, vulnerability to paralysis)?

[Chris 2.1]

Elec Man: What do you mean? If you mean damage caps are off, then its perfectly ok. I mean damage caps just make sure a Pokemon cant take too much damage (for you hyper beaming, thundering fire blasting fans). If those caps are turned off, then you could essentially have an all-out frenzy and deal loads of damage with no limitations. However given the type of power you need, your Energy might reach zero before your opponents HP.

If, however, you mean someone literally doubles the damage (ie: 20% for thunder instead of 10) then thats unfair and any of these matches should be brought to my attention.


Ace: I think refs have to think: how can thunderbolt and thunder be combined? Not every attack combo is plausible. Combining the two might be too much electrical output for a Pokemon to handle, and the fatigue would certainly rise. If you feel that it is allowed, its up to your opinion as a ref to decide if there are specific hindrances or advantages from it. I can see paralysis occuring easier, but a slight reduction in power.

[Elec Man EXE]

I'm talking literal double damage... as in, every attack does double what it normally would.

Here are the 2 battles that have the double damage thing in effect...

This one with Spike vs Crystal Tears. I've only reffed 1 round, so I can probably just redo the damage calc for that round and get rid of the double damage thing... but as long as your looking there, it is OK to have no energy use, isn't it? That doesn't seem problematic, IMO.

And then this, between DarkestLight and Vermillion. I actually got a PM about double damage mid-match, and I agreed to it, so its partly my fault (should have asked as soon as I got it), but initially I didn't see issue with it. I think I've done 2 rounds of double damage for this one, so again I can probably redo the damage calc for those 2 rounds...

[MeLoVeGhOsTs]

I reffed such a battle aswell, between Mega Horny and Dan. Actually first two pokemon were normal and later two pokemon in double damage. It was a none damage cap match, so does that make any difference?

[Ultimate Charizard]

I personally think that the energy system needs a rethink/general consensus by everyone as to how it works.
As was said its to put off those that like to go for Thunder/fireblast/hyperbeam etc however how many times in the anime (and this is ANIME style battling) do you see them collapse from exhaustion. I know they occaisionally do but not being able to go for the Combo you want (and this is without the major moves) for fear of fainting.
I was in a battle recently with my Scyther where Safeguard/Swords Dance/Reversal made my Scyther faint using up 12%en. I never took a hit that round either so i went from 13hp to 0 without being attacked. Posting an attack defeated me.
My partners Gyarados used Safeguard/Twister/Water pulse and went from 34%en to 9%en.

I have been in battles where ive lost nearly 20%en a round. Are all our Pokemon simply unfit or what? Theyre always too knackered to battle.

[Elec Man EXE]

Different people ref energy differently... I can easily see Scyther fainting from those 3 attacks, 12 energy for them seems reasonable... I would ref that even higher. 5% for Safeguard, 4% for Swords Dance, and 6-7% for Reversal.

But the Gyarados thing seems high.... 5% for Safeguard, 5% for Twister, and 3-4% for Water Pulse (Same type moves use less energy). Those are my values anyway. And I also give back 3% energy per round to each pokemon, just to reduce the energy use in general, and since they get a bit of a lull between sets of orders.

And as for collapsing... thats why I came up with my "energy" method (with a few bits from Ace). Basically if a pokemon hits 0%, for a 3 attack period all attacks will be weaker and slower, but use no energy. Then after those 3 attacks, the pokemon will regain 30% energy, and continues. Ace described it as a "second wind". If the pokemon happens to hit 0% energy again, then its KO'd.

[Ace64]

I've scrapped the energy KO method in lieu of lowering my energy rates across the board...though I can understand what you're saying. For my reffings, I like to keep the energy rates roughly eqiuvalent with the amount of HP the other Pokemon has. If your Gyarados expends 50% EN using straight attacks, then his opponent should have about the HP. Of course, depending on counters, strategies, defense, etc., the numbers may be a bit different.

I just hate,hate, hate reffing rounds where both people use Relax. I'll rewrite Thunderbolt attacks three times in a row, describing as best as I can, but not Relax. It's a waste of a round.

[Ultimate Charizard]

Well thats what i mean. I dont want to waste a round doing something that isnt even a move.
I agree with some of your points Elec but you summed it up with your first line

Different people ref energy differently

It shouldnt be like that. There should be some general rule/consensus/understanding as to how the energy sytem works. Not just 'oh by the way refs, attacks use energy and pokemon can get tired, off you go!"

[Blademaster]

Well, accuracy and damage are approximated in the Attack List - maybe energy consumption should be, as well.

[Elec Man EXE]

^ I agree with Blade, it would be nice to have an approximate energy use in the attack list. ^

But who wants to take all the time to write up that? Its a lot of stuff.

[Ultimate Charizard]

well most of the attacks fall under certain damage categories (ie based on the amount of damage it does) maybe 5% of their damage calculation. So moves like Hyper Beam (base = 150) could use 8% energy, while Razor Leaf (base = 55) would take 3% en etc. Obviously those non damaging attacks and abilities would need a little more work.

Attacks like Hyperbeam are very rare though but i didnt want to set the limit too high as even at 10% an attack like Hydro pump uses 12% en. Now anyone that uses the Sunnyday/Solarbeam combo knows that with the energy drain that high were gonna end up with attacks becoming useless by costing more energy than they do damage. They would KO yourself faster.

We need to work out something though. Saying 'yeah it needs looking at but its alot of work and noone can be arsed' isnt really good enough is it.

[Ace64]

Ah no, fuck allll that.

Reffing is innately a subjective job. I'm not converting to one set formula of damage and energy calculation just because people think it'll make things fair. The reason some people are better refs than others are because their rulings are more fun to read. If damage and energy become static rates, then eventually, reffing will become things like this: "Pikachu uses Thundershock and deals 5% damage. Charmander counters with Ember dealing 5% damage." I may be exaggerating a bit, but only a bit. I'm sure everyone's read at least one reffing like that- I hate those.

If it really comes down to it- I hate energy KO's as much as the next- just refuse a reffing by refs who you know use high energy rates. Mean, but hey, it's your right. Or ask for them to lower their rates a tad.

[Ultimate Charizard]

I didnt mean change the entire energy/hp system. I simply meant use the base damage (from the game) as a formula for working out how much energy an attack uses.
As it currently stands its all completely on the ref. We have damge caps to limit too high damage and the like etc so why not bring in Energy caps as well?

[Blademaster]

I like that idea.

[Chris 2.1]

MLG: Double damage matches are way different from Damage Caps [Off] matches. Damage caps off means your attacks deal normal damage, but theres no limit to how much damage you deal (particularly effective for counter/reversal/mirror coat/etc). Similarly there may not be a limit to Toxic.

Matches where double damage is used are not allowed. Make sure you know this. Thats like saying "lets have a match, but first Pokemon to 50% is the loser". Its just a cheap way to get points. No damage caps are fine.

RE: Energy. Pokemon are fainting from exhaustion in the anime quite frequently. I think our system is pretty good, but UC I'm not sure if I agree that something should be done. I think if people lower the energy used per attack, then the problem is sorted. The thing is if we do something drastic, you can go all-out with energy burning moves and it means nothing.

One good example of energy levels is Morning Sun, Moonlight, Recover etc really, really burn Energy so if you want to restore HP, you're going to lose a lot of energy. Its to make sure matches arent over too easily.

I think some people dont think when they order moves like blizzard or fire blast. Theyre pretty damn exhausting. But at the same time some refs are reffing energy high.

In the next News Update I'll post a note for Refs because I want this to change. Energy caps are an interesting idea, but how would it work? Do you propose that if an energy cap is reached, the Pokemon doesnt perform said move?

[Dark Dragonite]

Energy caps are interesting, BUT, if pokemon doesn't perform said move, then why with damage caps, does a pokemon still attack the victim who will not lose any more health in said round?

[The Blue Avenger]

With damage caps, the attacking Pokemon doesn't know how much damage the opponent has sustained and will still attack, regardless of caps.

With energy caps, if I'm reading this correctly, the attacking Pokemon would realize that they've spent too much energy and would have to stop.

Myself, I'm not sure where I stand on this. It's interesting, to be sure, but since energy difers so much between refs, having your strategy ruined because your Pokemon took just a little too much energy that round... eck.

[Ace64]

I honestly don't see energy caps making much of a difference either way. Damage caps are hardly ever reached in any of my battles- why would energy caps be any different? Attacks like Spite may be a bit more effective, but what's the point? If you're going to fight someone, you might as well deal damage, not focus on draining energy- not between two healthy, 100% Pokes, anyway.

EDIT: Whoops.Said do instead of dont.

[Elec Man EXE]

I don't like the idea of energy caps, personally. I'd rather there be some sort of standard energy use (not 100% set in stone, but something like damage where an attack uses "low energy" or "moderate energy" and so on). It'd still have some variance depending on ref, but not as large as it is now. And of course, the ref could still modify it based on battle conditions.

The point of energy is to limit people from doing things like using repeated Hyper Beams or something. It doesn't make sense to cap energy, because if the trainer orders a pokemon to go all out like that, they shouldn't refuse just because they've used too much energy.

Damage caps are to control damage TO a pokemon, making it so a pokemon can't get completely destroyed in a single round, and the pokemon has no control over that.

My point is that energy is self-inflicted loss. If the trainer wants to use high energy attacks contantly, then they end up paying the price for it. But damage caps are more to regulate what a battler can't control, how much damage their OPPONENT can deal.

[Ultimate Charizard]

I used damage caps as an example because it has a comparable situation. Not as an answer. There is simply too much variance between the ref's and to me the energy system seems like it was slapped in place overnight like a band-aid to cover a problem.
People say that its in place to prevent people using moves like Hyperbeam over and over yet ive been in battles where ref's dont even take into account recharge on certain moves, the very thing the games designers brought in to counter the power of the attack. Ive faced Hyper Beamx3 in one round.

Perhaps its not an actual overall energy that we need. More of a way to limit it per round rather than per battle to stop people going in with rapid fire big moves.

I just think its rediculous to be in the situation where you order a defensive move like agility or something to avoid being KO'd and then your Pokemon faints from exhaustion.

[Metallixs Girl]

Why not just make all the massive charging attacks act just like the games? Solarbeam would take 2 actions unless Sunny Day or Growth was in effect. Overheat and Hyperbeam would happen the first action but force a relax the second turn and if they used it the last turn it would require relaxing at the beginning of the next round so you'd think twice about using it twice in a row... Just a rough idea...^_^

[Ace64]

Don't let one bad reffing ruin your whole perspective, UC- I saw the battle in question, and while it was a tad cheap- at least it's over. There are a few cheaper tactics that I don't like seeing- for example, Dig being used to avoid two attacks in a row. Why would your enemy, having missed its first attack, fire a second attack at thin air? Doesn't make sense to me.

[Chris 2.1]

Attacks.

We need to revamp the Attack List Beta. Generally its...well, very out of date, inaccurate etc, and I propose this autumn we overhaul the system and re-do attacks. Ru/Sa attacks were made for ASB when details were scarce; for the ambiguous attacks we could even list some of the variations on it, so refs understand (and battlers) there is a certain degree of diversity.

And I mean all attacks, including 1st gen ones. I think this would be very helpful. But what we would do, with any luck, is go through the difficult ones with the whole of ASB; to make sure you, as the ASBers acknowledge and embrace the differences.

[Blademaster]

Sounds like a pretty big project...

I'll lend a hand, if need be.

[Silencer]

I'm not sure if alot of us still watch pokémon. Ofcourse we stumbled onto this site when the show was in it's prime and most of us were at an acceptable age for viewing it. For some off us (including me) watching it will get strange looks from parents/family/friends, however their might be a hardcore center that can help though...

[Andrew]

I've seen enough to make informed decisions!

[Blademaster]

And I've seen enough to make educated guesses!

Seriously, that's what always annoyed me about the anime - too little variety in attacks.

[Elec Man EXE]

I don't see anything wrong with most of the attack list... what are some examples of attacks you think need to be revamped Chris?

Just out of curiosity, not to say that I'm trying to argue with you.

[Ace64]

Most recently, I've seen Stockpile and Swallow used- the ASB description doesn't match up with how many refs would ref it, I believe.

[Elec Man EXE]

Yah, I would agree. I would think Stockpile uses your own energy, not draining the opponent's energy.

The R/S attacks are pretty badly done in general, IMO. They don't even list base damage/accuracy, and the description is... well, lacking.

I was refering more to the old list.

[Knight of Time]

Okay, I wasn't sure if this would be the right place to ask the following questions, but here goes.

First, I know Ghost types have the ability to phase in and out of the real world in a battle, but can they ever phase into something solid as a means of hiding (e.g. a floor, wall, ceiling, or some large object, be it movable or immovable) from an opponent?

Second, can a Ghost type phase inside the body of an opponent as a possible way of dealing damage or uncomfortableness?

Thanks in advance.

[The Blue Avenger]

If they phase into a solid object, I would imagine that they wouldn't be able to unphase inside it without some discomfort: they would suddenly have a wall, pillar, etc. inside and surrounding them.

As for phasing into a foe... I would say no for the same reason. But I'd also like to hear other opinions about this, just because it's an interesting idea and not one I've spent a lot of time pondering.

[Chris 2.1]

Phasing into solid objects could work perhaps. I would also like feedback; I would imagine it taking immense energy to do so (maybe more than protect/detect to encourage it being overused). Remember the object that has been phased into would be susceptable to attack. Imagine phasing into a table and having the table catch fire. That would hurt.

As for posessing a foe, I get a sort of OOTP feeling; Voldemort posessed Harry and hurt himself; maybe the foe recieves 2/3% damage for each action they spend inside the foe.

[Elec Man EXE]

I've always thought phasing into objects to avoid attacks was perfectly plausible. I mean what sort of lame ghost can't go through / into walls? :p. It obviously has to have some energy cost, though I wouldn't put it as high as protect because its not guaranteed. Of course, damage to the object would end up badly (if say a pokemon shatters the wall the ghost is in), but it can be utilized as an evasive technique well enough. Turning solid inside an object, like having Foresight used on you, would certainly be a bad thing as well, and do some rather intense damage as well as making the ghost "stuck" for a time until it can free itself.

Possessing enemies... I can't see the point of that, personally. To possess, you essentially become part of the target, which would mean any damage done to the opponent would also be done to the possessor. But I suppose it may have limited use for certain arena's (like maybe make the opponent jump off a cliff, then exit their body before they fall too far). I don't much like the idea for possession, though. Seems like it would be either useless, or cheap.

[kitsun]

I have a question: is it legal to have a multi-team match(provided you could find someone to ref the chaos!)? The reason I ask is because I think it would be rather interesting to participate in/watch.

By multi-team I mean multiple contenders, competeing against one another. (A vs. B vs. C)

[Knight of Time]

I have a question: is it legal to have a multi-team match(provided you could find someone to ref the chaos!)? The reason I ask is because I think it would be rather interesting to participate in/watch.

By multi-team I mean multiple contenders, competeing against one another. (A vs. B vs. C)

Yes, it is legal to have a multi-team match (be it three or more people against each other, or four people in teams of two battling), but, the more Pokemon and/or battlers there are in the battle, the more difficult it is to ref such a battle.

Unfortunately though, some of those battles can die if one or more of the battlers is away for an extended period of time. I, for example, cancelled a tag team battle of mine because one of the battlers wasn't going to stay in ASB anymore; he used to mod this forum (RaZoR LeAf).

Still, hope that helps.