-
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!
Data ASB Feedback & Game Issues Thread - Mk IV
- Thread starter Its_A_Random
- Start date
Largest source of irritation and sludge mucking up the gym queue
I think the simplest solution is to allow the free badge of the gym's type to be granted once only, ever
Being a gym leader was never supposed to be part of completing the gym challenge, it was about contributing to the community for other's challenges
I think the simplest solution is to allow the free badge of the gym's type to be granted once only, ever
Being a gym leader was never supposed to be part of completing the gym challenge, it was about contributing to the community for other's challenges
Speaking to two things here:
(a) I don't mind the bonus suggestion, I will say that I'm only a proponent of the "upon winning" variation, but that's a bias of my competitive and non-consolatory nature.
(b) That gets a lot of opposition from me Texas. There's no reason why a member of the community shouldn't be rewarded for stepping up and running the gym (and in some cases being the punching bag). Moreover, I don't see the problem with leaders switching gyms if they deal with their challengers and such. One, you guys act like this is rampantly popular. The only users to have done it: Frosty (long enough ago to have done 10+ matches) and me (just recently). Two, at least there is not a negative change in the number of gyms active. Three, and most importantly, I don't appreciate the amount of complaining from the Gym Committee perspective of what is now simply just evaluating an application to decide. Maybe if we didn't change to the application system I could understand your gripes a bit more (like I did when we initially had this discussion in the discord some time ago). But now that there is actually no major load on the backs of the committee or any member aside from the person who desires to train a new team for a new gym, why is it such a big deal?
(a) I don't mind the bonus suggestion, I will say that I'm only a proponent of the "upon winning" variation, but that's a bias of my competitive and non-consolatory nature.
(b) That gets a lot of opposition from me Texas. There's no reason why a member of the community shouldn't be rewarded for stepping up and running the gym (and in some cases being the punching bag). Moreover, I don't see the problem with leaders switching gyms if they deal with their challengers and such. One, you guys act like this is rampantly popular. The only users to have done it: Frosty (long enough ago to have done 10+ matches) and me (just recently). Two, at least there is not a negative change in the number of gyms active. Three, and most importantly, I don't appreciate the amount of complaining from the Gym Committee perspective of what is now simply just evaluating an application to decide. Maybe if we didn't change to the application system I could understand your gripes a bit more (like I did when we initially had this discussion in the discord some time ago). But now that there is actually no major load on the backs of the committee or any member aside from the person who desires to train a new team for a new gym, why is it such a big deal?
Hahahahahahah
Sorry that is just too rich.
I dont mind the restriction on free badges via defending nor the incentive for defending (as long as that incentive is uc and not something absurd like free badges as badges are a proof of completing a challenge involving diversity, not resiliency). And I agree with much of the sentiment of not being incentive for a gl to have a long run.
But seriously? Not too long ago the same people were raging at me for putting restrictions on gym leaders trying out new gyms. Sorry I dont mind changes, but that is just too rich. And I even get the honor of being mentioned as the starter of a trend that doomed us all by the looks of it.
Also, make no mistake: the alternative for changing a gym is to leave the gym. All gls that have changed gyms did so due to being tired, not due to opportunity (deadfox already has bug badge and had fire badge when he tried out for fire, i already had ice badge when i jumped to the qualifiers and jjayy said he was tired more than once). If changing gyms werent a possibility, they would most likely merely leave the gym regardless (as deadfox in fact did ane i would if i lost the qualifier). And then you would have twice more vacant spots. So if you consider gym jumping as the source of all evil, I suggest you buy new glasses.
Sorry that is just too rich.
I dont mind the restriction on free badges via defending nor the incentive for defending (as long as that incentive is uc and not something absurd like free badges as badges are a proof of completing a challenge involving diversity, not resiliency). And I agree with much of the sentiment of not being incentive for a gl to have a long run.
But seriously? Not too long ago the same people were raging at me for putting restrictions on gym leaders trying out new gyms. Sorry I dont mind changes, but that is just too rich. And I even get the honor of being mentioned as the starter of a trend that doomed us all by the looks of it.
Also, make no mistake: the alternative for changing a gym is to leave the gym. All gls that have changed gyms did so due to being tired, not due to opportunity (deadfox already has bug badge and had fire badge when he tried out for fire, i already had ice badge when i jumped to the qualifiers and jjayy said he was tired more than once). If changing gyms werent a possibility, they would most likely merely leave the gym regardless (as deadfox in fact did ane i would if i lost the qualifier). And then you would have twice more vacant spots. So if you consider gym jumping as the source of all evil, I suggest you buy new glasses.
Hmm, still feeling touchy then? For someone who I think is one of the best battlers and contributors to the game, you sure seem to get riled up about this one thing. I wonder why...
Anyway, the reason I bring it up is because the system you implemented, while serviceable, doesn't hit at what I think should be one of the main goals of the Gym Committee:
It has nothing to do with people switching. I think people should be allowed to switch gyms (if you couldn't gather from my request back in November) for the exact reasons you mentioned, Frosty. In fact, I think it's a good thing in many situations: both you and Jayy really wanted to switch gyms and were given venues to do so. You have not "doomed us all," and I never implied that from my post. I just believe that if we're going to allow people to switch gyms (which we should), then there should be an even more tempting reason to stay in a gym. Because right now, in a vacuum, there is no reason to stay in a gym if you're hunting badges. And since most members of the community value longevity in gym leaders, we should give people a reason to stay. Note that I'm not saying we force them to stay. Just give them a reason.
I propose that gym leaders get xUC - 10 per completed gym battle, where x = amount of career-completed battles. Yes, I've always been a proponent of high UC levels, but I think that the price needs to be high to keep people tempted to stay in a gym. That would give Dogfish44 around 27UC for his next battle, 19UC to zarator, and 6UC to me. Wow, that is sort of telling that this is a problem -- I am the third most senior gym leader LOL. I know that's a lot of UC, particularly for Dogfish, but that's not a bad thing. He's provided the service of Electric-type gym for longer than most of us have been playing this game. The dude has the right to make some bank, especially since he could have applied for like five other gyms in that time and gotten those badges. The least bit of compensation he could get is some counters for it. The funny thing is, the UC he gets will likely be turned around at some point to further fueling his Electric-type gym when he gets a new Electric-type Pokemon, making it better. This goes doubly for zarator, who is well-known for having insane amounts of maxed Ghost-type Pokemon.
Does this system sound tempting to be a part of? Good, it should. Because that's the essence of what I'm proposing, not some construed argument that I consider "gym jumping to be a source of evil." It should be equally tempting to stay in a gym as it is to leave it. I think the system I've proposed above it a good metric: you can either stay and start raking in some pretty good UC, or you can leave and work on your next badge. It doesn't ultimately address Texas' post, but it does go a long way in equaling the playing field. If we really wanted to address it, we should honestly make users lose the badge of the gym they leave. But since that would frustrate a lot of people, I don't think it's feasible. My proposed UC boost is the cleanest way of tackling this issue, in my opinion.
Anyway, the reason I bring it up is because the system you implemented, while serviceable, doesn't hit at what I think should be one of the main goals of the Gym Committee:
I am proposing a reward for long-standing gym leaders because the system you implemented (and has always been in place, really) have never specifically rewarded longevity in gym leaders, yet it's something I feel we value highly in ASB. People revere Dogfish's Electric-type gym, and Ghost-type and zarator have practically become synonymous. We should be rewarding those contributors for staying in their gym for so long because they are providing a valuable service to us. One that takes a lot of work and effort, too.
It has nothing to do with people switching. I think people should be allowed to switch gyms (if you couldn't gather from my request back in November) for the exact reasons you mentioned, Frosty. In fact, I think it's a good thing in many situations: both you and Jayy really wanted to switch gyms and were given venues to do so. You have not "doomed us all," and I never implied that from my post. I just believe that if we're going to allow people to switch gyms (which we should), then there should be an even more tempting reason to stay in a gym. Because right now, in a vacuum, there is no reason to stay in a gym if you're hunting badges. And since most members of the community value longevity in gym leaders, we should give people a reason to stay. Note that I'm not saying we force them to stay. Just give them a reason.
I propose that gym leaders get xUC - 10 per completed gym battle, where x = amount of career-completed battles. Yes, I've always been a proponent of high UC levels, but I think that the price needs to be high to keep people tempted to stay in a gym. That would give Dogfish44 around 27UC for his next battle, 19UC to zarator, and 6UC to me. Wow, that is sort of telling that this is a problem -- I am the third most senior gym leader LOL. I know that's a lot of UC, particularly for Dogfish, but that's not a bad thing. He's provided the service of Electric-type gym for longer than most of us have been playing this game. The dude has the right to make some bank, especially since he could have applied for like five other gyms in that time and gotten those badges. The least bit of compensation he could get is some counters for it. The funny thing is, the UC he gets will likely be turned around at some point to further fueling his Electric-type gym when he gets a new Electric-type Pokemon, making it better. This goes doubly for zarator, who is well-known for having insane amounts of maxed Ghost-type Pokemon.
Does this system sound tempting to be a part of? Good, it should. Because that's the essence of what I'm proposing, not some construed argument that I consider "gym jumping to be a source of evil." It should be equally tempting to stay in a gym as it is to leave it. I think the system I've proposed above it a good metric: you can either stay and start raking in some pretty good UC, or you can leave and work on your next badge. It doesn't ultimately address Texas' post, but it does go a long way in equaling the playing field. If we really wanted to address it, we should honestly make users lose the badge of the gym they leave. But since that would frustrate a lot of people, I don't think it's feasible. My proposed UC boost is the cleanest way of tackling this issue, in my opinion.
I'm confused at to what happened with the rule about only keeping your badge after 10 completed matches?
did that rule go away or is there some interaction I'm not aware of that allows gym-hopping to allow collection of badges ?_?
did that rule go away or is there some interaction I'm not aware of that allows gym-hopping to allow collection of badges ?_?
That rule is still there; concerns are being raised that either:
1) It isn't enough to prevent gym hopping.
2) There isn't enough incentive to keep being leader afterwards.
So, for tl;dr-ers, do we want to better reward ASBers for longstanding commitment in the Gym Leadership scene, and thus further encourage other ASBers to emulate? I guess this is the question?
The second question would probably be "do we want to further discourage the opposite, as in Gym Leaders hopping types in order to further their personal agenda of badge collecting?" But then Frosty's line hits me there - if GLs can't hop, they can simply leave. So this doesn't seem like the better course of action, to me at least.
Back to the first question then - I think "why not". ASBers has always been small in population, so we need the incentive to retain people. Mentoring programs are part of the process to retain new people, New RPs and tours attempting to keep the game fresh is there for regulars and veterans, so a reward system that is incentive for long-term Gym Leadership ties in with the objective to retain. Mind you, "why not" does not equal "yes" - but that could be me being too cautious.
Please not just extra UC though, I'm really not fond of giving Dogfish and Zar two dozen UC on top of the hundred CC they get out of their max-movepool roster per match. Not too fond of furthering wealth gaps between new people and ancient blood. If I'm really pressed for an alternative I'd say something like extra leaderboard awards - eg. I can get a Hyper Potion every 5 matches as a GL since I only have 1 Badge, Jayy gets any one of the rewards from 5 Badges and below (except the UC of course).
The second question would probably be "do we want to further discourage the opposite, as in Gym Leaders hopping types in order to further their personal agenda of badge collecting?" But then Frosty's line hits me there - if GLs can't hop, they can simply leave. So this doesn't seem like the better course of action, to me at least.
Back to the first question then - I think "why not". ASBers has always been small in population, so we need the incentive to retain people. Mentoring programs are part of the process to retain new people, New RPs and tours attempting to keep the game fresh is there for regulars and veterans, so a reward system that is incentive for long-term Gym Leadership ties in with the objective to retain. Mind you, "why not" does not equal "yes" - but that could be me being too cautious.
this is just buff culture
we originally wanted to buff type crystals because they were worse than both type items and sig crystals
now.... what ._.
late but id be fine with giving leaders uc based on tenure
i dont careabout sig z crystals but it is kinda comical
edit: ur just buff culture :/
see i can also be unnecessarily hostile in this thread
i dont careabout sig z crystals but it is kinda comical
edit: ur just buff culture :/
see i can also be unnecessarily hostile in this thread
1) The only good sig-z-crystal is Snorlium-Z, which is pretty powerful imo but we could always just make Pulverizing Pancake weaker to be more consistent with the other z-crystals
2) Isn't necessary to buff them, as long as they aren't 2.5x more expensive than the far superior generic crystals
3) They were only worse than sig crystals on the mons that get sig crystals. So, 5 fully evolved Pokemon, an NFE, and an LC. Snorlax is the only one that really has a "good" sig crystal, but I'd still use Normalium-Z over it because if I use Breakneck Blitz Giga Impact, it's two less damage than Pulverizing Pancake, so in the long run normalium z is better
is normalium still better before whatever buffs we gave it?
Tracker time!
Hypnosis: Flavour Inquisition. That is all. Move to Voting.
Gym Leadership retainment policy: Gym Committee should start spearhead this discussion, I suppose? Individual Discussion thread warranted, or lump in the big Gym Comm thread.
Z-Crystals: I have zero experience with them, but nobody seems to agree/disagree with Exclaim enough to warrant further discussion. Shelved until further notice.
Healing Wish: Yeah healing 2 allies with one move (in Doubles and above) seems overpowered when compared to my memory of Heal Pulse. Although I wouldn't be averse to something along the lines of tripling EN cost for that double heal. Still, going into Voting straightaway.
Hypnosis: Flavour Inquisition. That is all. Move to Voting.
Gym Leadership retainment policy: Gym Committee should start spearhead this discussion, I suppose? Individual Discussion thread warranted, or lump in the big Gym Comm thread.
Z-Crystals: I have zero experience with them, but nobody seems to agree/disagree with Exclaim enough to warrant further discussion. Shelved until further notice.
Healing Wish: Yeah healing 2 allies with one move (in Doubles and above) seems overpowered when compared to my memory of Heal Pulse. Although I wouldn't be averse to something along the lines of tripling EN cost for that double heal. Still, going into Voting straightaway.
Regarding Gyms - Move that into the gym concerns thread, since that is their domain and decisions on that topic are their own, not the council's.
Yes to implementation, no to reasoning. It's less that there isn't any disagreement, but the fact that 3 mods have already signed off on it (DF44, Zarator, Zt). I'll get that implemented soon-ish
Also ugh Zt, not making voting threads after announcing to have things moved.
Anyways, I'm moving Hypnosis to implementation since it's a minimal flavor change unless someone has a problem with that.
Also ugh Zt, not making voting threads after announcing to have things moved.
Anyways, I'm moving Hypnosis to implementation since it's a minimal flavor change unless someone has a problem with that.
the inquisition itself speaks
lower the cc -> uc conversionrate to like 5 cc = 1 uc or 4 cc = 1 uc. 8 seems like too much given the adjustments we've made to payouts recently
i cant wait for it to actually be reffed that way