Jump to content
  • 30
DarylDixon

Ban Quick claw

Question

so, it's possible to get rid off that item from MM? it's kinda boring letting players winning only with rng items, it's kinda idiotic keep items such as quick claw and kking's rock unbanned and let horrible players winning only with those rng items, over using their skills.

Share this post


Link to post

Recommended Posts

  • 0

King's rock is already debatable in my opinion because it induces a lot of luck reliance but quick claw doesn't "add" an effect, it legit removes a certain aspect completely hence I totally agree!

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

dGDzUyX.jpg

 

I can't imagine how frustrating it must be to be in most of your shoes, but it will never surprise me that some people won't admit that they dropped the ball with this by letting these items back in the first place.  It's also not surprising that the moment you introduce any element of luck into this game, that there will be a few who are willing to exploit it to its fullest (for example how Wobba-Rain was spammed).

 

There is hardly any utility in bringing back these items, and if there were any, its utility is heavily outweighed by the negative aspects it brings.  The only utility it can serve is by possibly making some sets more viable, but at the expense of completely negating another player's already well-built team.  I've seen games where a Cloyster is able to beat a +2 Physical Defense boosted Reuniclus just by flinching its way through with Kings Rock.  

 

Just because these items weren't banned in Smogon, doesn't mean that they should've been unbanned here in MMO.  One possible reason as to why it wasn't banned in Smogon is because these luck-based items are rarely used.  The reason for their lack of usage is because there is a stigma associated with running cheap strategies like this, and it's one of the best ways for someone to overlook your skill level and thereby not get picked for a team tournament.  Players there are on a higher skill-level and most have respect for the game to not settle down for such strats.  The reason its usage is picking up here in MMO is because rather than educating newer players on how to get better by properly playing the game in order to reduce the skill-gap between themselves and a higher skilled player,  the ability to use these luck-based items is a quick-fix in reducing that gap because you can skip the "playing better
 part to the "victory" part.  Players here also don't suffer any form or backlash or repercussion for running such strategies other than losing a few points on the ladder.  These very same players are probably ones who ladder casually and have nothing to lose while the hard-working players lose valuable time spent in grinding / teambuilding / playing to get better.

 

Re-introducing these items simply added more external factors into a game that we cannot control and we already had enough of that as is.

Edited by NikhilR

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
40 minutes ago, Risadex said:

Don't get it wrong, ai mean, I totally agree with the point of removing as much RNG factors as we can.

 

But, is this a real scenario? I mean, as pointed above in smogon they didn't used to spam it, and besides cloyster with kings rock, which i think is the only "reliable" one.  There are even a reason to a competitive player use quick claw at all?  A 20% priority chance in trade of a good item? I don't know which mons can reliably use this without be a meme tbh.

 

IMO, the same way there are serious competitive players in the ladder, we must give space to meme comp players and people with just play for fun or even people starting comp, which doesn't have such good items in the early stage to the game. 

 

So a good alternative could be ban this items back, but only for tournament (and high level of competitive unnoficials ofc)

 

TL;DR: Keep it in ladder, unless it get high % usage. Ban those items for tournments.

Why don't we also allow items like brightpowder to be unbanned and ohko moves to be unbanned?  The accuracy of attacks against a Brightpowder holder is 0.9x.  In other words, if you use a 100% accuracy move against a Brightpowder holder, you will hit 90% of the time.  Will people trade a 10% or slightly higher chance to dodge an attack over a good item like Eviolite, Life Orb, Leftovers, Choice Item, Scope Lens?  Ohko moves have like a 30% accuracy and given that competitive MMO players love accuracy so much more over power (like choosing to run flamethrower over fire blast, aura sphere over focus blast), why not let players who ladder have access to both?  Will people choose to trade a 30% chance of potentially ohko-ing an opponent (I said potentially because moves like fissure does not hit flying or levitate pokemon, or ohko pokemon with sturdy ability or pokemon holding focus sash), or will players prefer a 100% chance of potentially 2-3 hko-ing their opp?

 

The concept of fun is very subjective because losing to luck is usually never ever fun.  Some people have fun when they win with luck, and others may feel bad.  Have you ever encountered a player who has had fun while getting lucked?  The game as it is makes players "comp-ready" with how they have made the storyline NPCs harder, and items like choice band or choice scarf are like 100k or lower, and so it's not like players will not have access to those items by the time they are ready to ladder.  They simply choose to run these items with the purpose of winning with luck, and that is a very unhealthy mindset to encourage.

Edited by NikhilR

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
On 9/15/2020 at 11:23 AM, DarylDixon said:

so, it's possible to get rid off that item from MM? it's kinda boring letting players winning only with rng items, it's kinda idiotic keep items such as quick claw and kking's rock unbanned and let horrible players winning only with those rng items, over using their skills.

I strongly disagree with your suggestion.

 

1. Quick claw does not always allow the player to go first in PokeMMO. I don't know if this is just a PoleMMO thing or a newer generations modification, but it does not always let a Pokemon move first in-game.

2. Your comment about King's Rock I disagree with. If PokeMMO is anything like actual Pokemon, then King's Rock is needed to obtain certain Pokemon such as a Slowking for example for a trade-evolution. I don't know if PokeMMO has changed that feature in-game, I don't see why they would have, do I can only assume it's essential.

3. Even if quicklaw did always allow an opponents Pokemon to move first, it would hold no real bearing on a real Pokemon player. You need to keep in mind that other held items you can use for yourself will have a bearing on your battle against someone using quickclaw, also keep in mind certain movesets that you can use to highten your advantage over opponents use of items, and moves.

 

Simply put, I think you should bulk-up your play a little bit to be more competitive against those who are using quickclaw. 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
3 hours ago, The5thHorseman said:

I strongly disagree with your suggestion.

 

1. Quick claw does not always allow the player to go first in PokeMMO. I don't know if this is just a PoleMMO thing or a newer generations modification, but it does not always let a Pokemon move first in-game.

2. Your comment about King's Rock I disagree with. If PokeMMO is anything like actual Pokemon, then King's Rock is needed to obtain certain Pokemon such as a Slowking for example for a trade-evolution. I don't know if PokeMMO has changed that feature in-game, I don't see why they would have, do I can only assume it's essential.

3. Even if quicklaw did always allow an opponents Pokemon to move first, it would hold no real bearing on a real Pokemon player. You need to keep in mind that other held items you can use for yourself will have a bearing on your battle against someone using quickclaw, also keep in mind certain movesets that you can use to highten your advantage over opponents use of items, and moves.

 

Simply put, I think you should bulk-up your play a little bit to be more competitive against those who are using quickclaw. 

I strongly disagree with your reply to Daryl's suggestion.

 

1) Daryl did not mention that quick claw allows the user to go first.  He even mentioned Quick Claw as an "rng" item, which stands for random number generator, in other words it isn't static.  The randomness associated with Quick Claw prevents one from properly strategizing during the game play.

2) Daryl did not mention that King's Rock should be eliminated from the game.  If you read carefully, he mentioned that whoever in charge was idiotic for unbanning these items, key word being there "unbanning" which means they were once banned from PvP but not for other purposes.

3) If you don't have any competitive credentials then you should try to stay in your lane and maybe give advice to players on how to play rock-paper-scissors, snakes and ladders or anything else in that area.

 

Simply put, I think you should stop posting in threads that are comp-related and also read the OP's suggestion three or four times before replying so that I don't have to make these kinds of posts.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Always nice to see people who have no experience in playing pvp comment about it. 

 

5 hours ago, The5thHorseman said:

2. Your comment about King's Rock I disagree with. If PokeMMO is anything like actual Pokemon, then King's Rock is needed to obtain certain Pokemon such as a Slowking for example for a trade-evolution. I don't know if PokeMMO has changed that feature in-game, I don't see why they would have, do I can only assume it's essential.

We are talking about it's use in Pvp and not Pve. 

 

5 hours ago, The5thHorseman said:

3. Even if quicklaw did always allow an opponents Pokemon to move first, it would hold no real bearing on a real Pokemon player. You need to keep in mind that other held items you can use for yourself will have a bearing on your battle against someone using quickclaw, also keep in mind certain movesets that you can use to highten your advantage over opponents use of items, and moves.

Real pokemon player? What is that? Are we all play-acting here? 

 

As Nikhil mentioned earlier, the reason why we need them banned is because of its overbearing rng effect. This is a competitive scene where skill reigns above all. Imagine being rank 1 on the ladder and losing to a random because of rng. That's stupid. I can understand having these items if we had gen6-8 mechanics and mons but right now there is no way for us to counter such plays. 

 

From all your previous suggestions I can see that you think PokeMMO is like the original games. It is not. This is not a Pokemon game. It is a Pokemon MMO. Emphasis on MMO. So, the MMO takes precedent over the Pokemon part.  

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
2 hours ago, NikhilR said:

I strongly disagree with your reply to Daryl's suggestion.

 

1) Daryl did not mention that quick claw allows the user to go first.  He even mentioned Quick Claw as an "rng" item, which stands for random number generator, in other words it isn't static.  The randomness associated with Quick Claw prevents one from properly strategizing during the game play.

2) Daryl did not mention that King's Rock should be eliminated from the game.  If you read carefully, he mentioned that whoever in charge was idiotic for unbanning these items, key word being there "unbanning" which means they were once banned from PvP but not for other purposes.

3) If you don't have any competitive credentials then you should try to stay in your lane and maybe give advice to players on how to play rock-paper-scissors, snakes and ladders or anything else in that area.

 

Simply put, I think you should stop posting in threads that are comp-related and also read the OP's suggestion three or four times before replying so that I don't have to make these kinds of posts.

Simply put there's no reasoning behind removing quick claw, unless it always allowed the user to move first.

 

When someone says "ban quickclaw" and there's no logic behind it, ones going to assume it's due to its traditional function, which is why I explained that. He's griping about quickclaw for no reason whether the item always allows the mover to go first or only sometimes does. You can't just go complaining to the devs for changes because you don't like something, you have to have an actual reason. And here there is no reason for them to be banned. That's the bottom line and the point I was conveying.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
31 minutes ago, EricRasp said:

Always nice to see people who have no experience in playing pvp comment about it. 

 

We are talking about it's use in Pvp and not Pve. 

 

Real pokemon player? What is that? Are we all play-acting here? 

 

As Nikhil mentioned earlier, the reason why we need them banned is because of its overbearing rng effect. This is a competitive scene where skill reigns above all. Imagine being rank 1 on the ladder and losing to a random because of rng. That's stupid. I can understand having these items if we had gen6-8 mechanics and mons but right now there is no way for us to counter such plays. 

 

From all your previous suggestions I can see that you think PokeMMO is like the original games. It is not. This is not a Pokemon game. It is a Pokemon MMO. Emphasis on MMO. So, the MMO takes precedent over the Pokemon part.  

Then perhaps don't use the item, instead of griping about it to the devs without a logical foundation for the change? The user has the ability to fix that concern without bothering the devs and forcing everyone else the inability to use it if they so choose.

Edited by The5thHorseman

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
1 minute ago, The5thHorseman said:

Then perhaps don't use the item, instead of griping about it to the devs without a logical foundation for the change? The user has the ability to fix that concern without bothering the devs and forcing everyone else the in ability to use it if they do choose.

What do you mean don't use the item? We are asking for a ban because OTHER people are using the item having brain-dead wins. And there is a logical foundation you just can't see it because you don't know jack about competitive play. 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
5 minutes ago, EricRasp said:

What do you mean don't use the item? We are asking for a ban because OTHER people are using the item having brain-dead wins. And there is a logical foundation you just can't see it because you don't know jack about competitive play. 

Then read my first message if your bothered by others using it. You need to beef up your gameplay. Like I said, there are items you can use with your own Pokemon that can give you a better advantage against quickclaw users, and there are also certain moves you can teach your Pokemon to remove items. There's no reason to ban quickclaw when you should be beefing up your competitive play.

Edited by The5thHorseman

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
3 minutes ago, The5thHorseman said:

Then read my first message if your bothered by others using it. You need to beef up your gameplay. Like I said, there are items you can use with your own Pokemon that can give you a better advantage against quickclaw users, and there are also certain moves you can teach your Pokemon to remove items. There's no reason to ban quickclaw when you should be beefing up your competitive play.

It doesn't matter if you beef your gameplay when someone can flinch you ten times in a row and you lose the match because of it. It doesn't matter when you are dominating the game but because the opponent moved earlier time and time again because of an item that leaves things up to luck and you lost because of it. 

 

That's the point everyone is trying to make here. It doesn't matter how much you "beef" up your gameplay because some idiot will move faster than you most of the time, and flinch you to death. Skill doesn't matter when you have items like Quick claw and Kings rock. Competitive is skill based play. Not luck based. 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
12 minutes ago, EricRasp said:

It doesn't matter if you beef your gameplay when someone can flinch you ten times in a row and you lose the match because of it. It doesn't matter when you are dominating the game but because the opponent moved earlier time and time again because of an item that leaves things up to luck and you lost because of it. 

 

That's the point everyone is trying to make here. It doesn't matter how much you "beef" up your gameplay because some idiot will move faster than you most of the time, and flinch you to death. Skill doesn't matter when you have items like Quick claw and Kings rock. Competitive is skill based play. Not luck based.

Yeah it's annoying, but your not going to get flinched everytime, and when it comes to quickclaw being randomized, it's actually an advantage for the one facing the opponent using quickclaw, because it's not always making the Pokemon go first.

 

If the logic behind banning quickclaw is because it's randomized, then why don't we ban bright powder, why don't we ban flinching moves, why don't we ban all moves that may possibly leave a status inflictions.

 

Randomization is a part of Pokemon, and it makes no logical sense to use randomization as a basis for an argument to ban quickclaw. Where chance and randomization is prevalent, skill and strategy can be used to level the playing field. 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
25 minutes ago, The5thHorseman said:

Yeah it's annoying, but your not going to get flinched everytime, and when it comes to quickclaw being randomized, it's actually an advantage for the one facing the opponent using quickclaw, because it's not always making the Pokemon go first.

 

If the logic behind banning quickclaw is because it's randomized, then why don't we ban bright powder, why don't we ban flinching moves, why don't we ban all moves that may possibly leave a status inflictions.

 

Randomization is a part of Pokemon, and it makes no logical sense to use randomization as a basis for an argument to ban quickclaw. Where chance and randomization is prevalent, skill and strategy can be used to level the playing field. 

You might wanna check the PVP rules because Bright Powder IS BANNED.

Please stop making these uninformed and illogical posts all over the forums.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
9 minutes ago, HumongousNoodle said:

You might wanna check the PVP rules because Bright Powder IS BANNED.

Please stop making these uninformed and illogical posts all over the forums.

Okay, so you addressed bright powder, and it's true I haven't read the PvP rules, but this reply here doesn't undermine the logic I posed debunking the thesis posed by OP in my reply to ericrasp.

 

So I now ask you this: how does your reply here provide a foundation to debunk mine, considering I also made mention of flinching moves and moves that possibly leave an infliction? I suppose you're not going to address that huh? The same reason your not going to address that, is the same reason why quickclaw shouldn't be banned.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
1 hour ago, The5thHorseman said:

Simply put there's no reasoning behind removing quick claw, unless it always allowed the user to move first.

Yes, there is a reason for removing quick claw even if it does not allow the holder to move first - it does nothing but promote luck over skill.  The entire premise behind creating a competitive environment was to foster the skillful strategies that Gamefreak offered us while at the same time not being held down by the luck-based elements that Gamefreak created as well.  You sound like someone who has zero competitive experience, so let me inform you that we have clauses in PvP here.  You can find a list of clauses in this thread:


Some of these clauses would literally turn pokemon battles into a coinflip or just incredibly stupid battles, like if we didn't have sleep clause, evasion clause etc.  In order to make the game more "fair" we have these clauses.

 

1 hour ago, The5thHorseman said:

When someone says "ban quickclaw" and there's no logic behind it, ones going to assume it's due to its traditional function, which is why I explained that. He's griping about quickclaw for no reason whether the item always allows the mover to go first or only sometimes does. You can't just go complaining to the devs for changes because you don't like something, you have to have an actual reason. And here there is no reason for them to be banned. That's the bottom line and the point I was conveying.

 You are not wrong regarding the part I bolded, but what you're missing is that Quick Claw's traditional function is in and of itself problematic.  Quick Claw was once one of the items that was banned under the "Hax Items" clause that was listed in the thread because of its inherently luck-based feature, but it was then brought back, which is why this thread was created.  

 

1 hour ago, The5thHorseman said:

Then perhaps don't use the item, instead of griping about it to the devs without a logical foundation for the change? The user has the ability to fix that concern without bothering the devs and forcing everyone else the inability to use it if they so choose.

Maybe you should realize that you're the one in the dark.  There is a logical foundation for this change and I've explained it in the first post of my thread as well.  The entire purpose of the suggestion box is to "bother" devs with potentially meaningful changes and it's a win-win situation because the changes we suggest would make us want to play the game more and that aligns with the devs' goals of wanting to maintain its existing playerbase.  You're not the devs' spokesperson so I have no idea why you want to label someone's suggestion as "wasting the devs' time."  None of us have the ability to stop someone else from using the item, hence why we're complaining about it.

 

1 hour ago, The5thHorseman said:

Then read my first message if your bothered by others using it. You need to beef up your gameplay. Like I said, there are items you can use with your own Pokemon that can give you a better advantage against quickclaw users, and there are also certain moves you can teach your Pokemon to remove items. There's no reason to ban quickclaw when you should be beefing up your competitive play.

Why don't you show us the way then?  In fact, why don't you choose a date and time of your convenience to challenge me to a game and if you beat me, I will listen to you.  If there are much smarter + experienced competitive players that haven't figured out a way to counter quick-claw users, then you can see why I'd have difficulty in just taking your statement at face value.  It's simply a dressed-up version of "Get good".  So I'm giving you this opportunity of showing me how I can be a better player at a date and time of your choosing (you can PM me this if you wish).  If you win, I'm all ears as to your strategy on how to beat quick-claw users.  I can also provide you with a detailed battle-like scenario of why the item is problematic, but it'd be much better if I tried explaining this to you in practice.

 

43 minutes ago, The5thHorseman said:

Yeah it's annoying, but your not going to get flinched everytime, and when it comes to quickclaw being randomized, it's actually an advantage for the one facing the opponent using quickclaw, because it's not always making the Pokemon go first.

 

If the logic behind banning quickclaw is because it's randomized, then why don't we ban bright powder, why don't we ban flinching moves, why don't we ban all moves that may possibly leave a status inflictions.

 

Randomization is a part of Pokemon, and it makes no logical sense to use randomization as a basis for an argument to ban quickclaw. Where chance and randomization is prevalent, skill and strategy can be used to level the playing field. 

The reason we don't ban around every single thing that is luck-based is because 1) it would change the entire meaning of actually playing Pokemon because there are some luck-based elements we shouldn't remove and 2) not every randomisation takes away from player autonomy.

 

I'm just going to focus on the last point because that is what is most important.

 

If a pokemon is using Scald with 30% chance to burn, you can switch in your Natural Cure user to absorb the burn, a Magic Guard pokemon to absorb the burn, you can equip your pokemon with items like Lum Berry to heal the burn, or run moves such as Heal Bell or Aromatherapy to heal the burn.  In other words, there is some control over these luck-based elements such that even if they do arise, there is a way to counter it or deal with it.

 

The same goes with flinching.  Rock Slide has a 30% chance to flinch, but the only way you will be flinching something is if you are slower than the rock-slide user.  So we can avoid being flinched as long as our pokemon is faster than the rock-slide user, or run rock-resists such that even if flinches do occur, then it isn't game-changing.  To repeat again, even though Rock Slide has the chance to flinch, I still have reasonable control over my choices in order to be prepared against it.

 

This does not happen with Quick Claw users.  Sometimes it is impossible to live an attack from a strong boosted pokemon, and so the only way to beat it is by outspeeding and killing it first.  If your only, but reliable, way of defeating a +2 Rhyperior is by using a Surf Starmie, and it uses Quick Claw and attacks first, you then proceed to lose the game.  You have no absolutely no control over this because you cannot pick and choose when Quick Claw will trigger, and you have no reasonable way to prepare for it.  Simply put, my entire strategy was nullified by something that I have zero control over.  This is why Quick Claw is problematic.

Edited by NikhilR

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
29 minutes ago, NikhilR said:

Yes, there is a reason for removing quick claw even if it does not allow the holder to move first - it does nothing but promote luck over skill.  The entire premise behind creating a competitive environment was to foster the skillful strategies that Gamefreak offered us while at the same time not being held down by the luck-based elements that Gamefreak created as well.  You sound like someone who has zero competitive experience, so let me inform you that we have clauses in PvP here.  You can find a list of clauses in this thread:


Some of these clauses would literally turn pokemon battles into a coinflip or just incredibly stupid battles, like if we didn't have sleep clause, evasion clause etc.  In order to make the game more "fair" we have these clauses.

 

 You are not wrong regarding the part I bolded, but what you're missing is that Quick Claw's traditional function is in and of itself problematic.  Quick Claw was once one of the items that was banned under the "Hax Items" clause that was listed in the thread because of its inherently luck-based feature, but it was then brought back, which is why this thread was created.  

 

Maybe you should realize that you're the one in the dark.  There is a logical foundation for this change and I've explained it in the first post of my thread as well.  The entire purpose of the suggestion box is to "bother" devs with potentially meaningful changes and it's a win-win situation because the changes we suggest would make us want to play the game more and that aligns with the devs' goals of wanting to maintain its existing playerbase.  You're not the devs' spokesperson so I have no idea why you want to label someone's suggestion as "wasting the devs' time."  None of us have the ability to stop someone else from using the item, hence why we're complaining about it.

 

Why don't you show us the way then?  In fact, why don't you choose a date and time of your convenience to challenge me to a game and if you beat me, I will listen to you.  If there are much smarter + experienced competitive players that haven't figured out a way to counter quick-claw users, then you can see why I'd have difficulty in just taking your statement at face value.  It's simply a dressed-up version of "Get good".  So I'm giving you this opportunity of showing me how I can be a better player at a date and time of your choosing (you can PM me this if you wish).  If you win, I'm all ears as to your strategy on how to beat quick-claw users.  I can also provide you with a detailed battle-like scenario of why the item is problematic, but it'd be much better if I tried explaining this to you in practice.

 

The reason we don't ban around every single thing that is luck-based is because 1) it would change the entire meaning of actually playing Pokemon because there are some luck-based elements we shouldn't remove and 2) not every randomisation takes away from player autonomy.

 

I'm just going to focus on the last point because that is what is most important.

 

If a pokemon is using Scald with 30% chance to burn, you can switch in your Natural Cure user to absorb the burn, a Magic Guard pokemon to absorb the burn, you can equip your pokemon with items like Lum Berry to heal the burn, or run moves such as Heal Bell or Aromatherapy to heal the burn.  In other words, there is some control over these luck-based elements such that even if they do arise, there is a way to counter it or deal with it.

 

The same goes with flinching.  Rock Slide has a 30% chance to flinch, but the only way you will be flinching something is if you are slower than the rock-slide user.  So we can avoid being flinched as long as our pokemon is faster than the rock-slide user, or run rock-resists such that even if flinches do occur, then it isn't game-changing.  To repeat again, even though Rock Slide has the chance to flinch, I still have reasonable control over my choices in order to be prepared against it.

 

This does not happen with Quick Claw users.  Sometimes it is impossible to live an attack from a strong boosted pokemon, and so the only way to beat it is by outspeeding and killing it first.  If your only, but reliable, way of defeating a +2 Rhyperior is by using a Surf Starmie, and it uses Quick Claw and attacks first, you then proceed to lose the game.  You have no absolutely no control over this because you cannot pick and choose when Quick Claw will trigger, and you have no reasonable way to prepare for it.  Simply put, my entire strategy was nullified by something that I have zero control over.  This is why Quick Claw is problematic.

Well, your entire reply was inrooted in the scenario that quickclaw would allow the opponent to go first. Since it does not always take effect, it leaves you the chance to nullify your opponent, and/or it's item with certain moves. So the match is not left to chance at all.

 

Now, let's say hypothetically that the devs made quickclaw make the holder go first Everytime, then that would solve not only your complaint here, but everyone else's, because of the ideaology that was used for the argument to ban quickclaw, because then quickclaw could be countered with quickclaw, forcing users of two quickclaws to rely on their speed stat.

 

I see your point, but I don't agree with it. It takes away from Pokemon. And yes, there are ways to nullify status inflicting moves, but I would say there arent any more ways to do that than there are to nullify "quickclaw spammers", in fact I'd say mathematically there are less, due to the variety of status inflicting moves. So you have a better chance mathematically on taking care of quick claw spammers, than you do status inflicting moves due to variety. So your reply in that aspect really doesn't debunk my heart ideaology in regards to "if you want quickclaw banned, then so should all moves that possibly leave a status infliction.

 

So I stand by my disagreement due to this.

Edited by The5thHorseman

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
1 minute ago, The5thHorseman said:

Well, your entire reply was inrooted in the scenario that quickclaw would allow the opponent to go first. Since it does not always take effect, it leaves you the chance to nullify your opponent, and/or it's item with certain moves. So the match is not left to chance at all.

Your statement is contradictory.  If you say it does not always take effect, then that means there are certain instances where it would take effect, which basically means the match is left to chance.  Since neither I nor my opp is in control of the outcome, the game is always left to chance.

 

2 minutes ago, The5thHorseman said:

Now, let's say hypothetically that the devs made quickclaw make the holder go first Everytime, then that would solve not only your complaint here, but everyone else's, because of the ideaology that was used for the argument to ban quickclaw, because then quickclaw could be countered with quickclaw, forcing users of two quickclaws to rely on their speed stat.

Yes, and that would be stupid.

 

3 minutes ago, The5thHorseman said:

I see your point, but I don't agree with it. It takes away from Pokemon. And yes, there are ways to nullify status inflicting moves, but I would say there arent any more ways to do that than there are to nullify "quickclaw spammers", in fact I'd say mathematically there are less, due to the variety of status inflicting moves. So you have a better chance mathematically on taking care of quick claw spammers, than you do status inflicting moves due to variety. So your reply in that aspect really doesn't debunk my heart ideaology in regards to "if you want quickclaw banned, then so should all moves that possibly leave a status infliction.

Please show me the math you used to debunk my idealogy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
6 minutes ago, NikhilR said:

Your statement is contradictory.  If you say it does not always take effect, then that means there are certain instances where it would take effect, which basically means the match is left to chance.  Since neither I nor my opp is in control of the outcome, the game is always left to chance.

 

Yes, and that would be stupid.

 

Please show me the math you used to debunk my idealogy.

 

The point I'm making is the entirety of a match is not left to chance when you have at least one chance to nullify the item or the Pokemon in some way.

 

When it comes to moves that possibly leave status infliction, you have paralysis (electric), freezing (ice), burn (fire), poisoning (poison), etc, etc.. The probability of dealing with the amount of variety of status inflicting moves is less than nullifying your opponent or it's held item in battle, because there is more of a potentiality of having the right Pokemon type or the right held held item for a specific status infliction. That's why the probability ratio to deal with status inflicting moves is less than dealing with quick claw spammers.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
3 minutes ago, The5thHorseman said:

The point I'm making is the entirety of a match is not left to chance when you have at least one chance to nullify the item or the Pokemon in some way.

Show me the different ways you'd go about nullifying the opponent's Quick Claw without potentially costing you the game or putting you at a significant disadvantage otherwise.

 

3 minutes ago, The5thHorseman said:

When it comes to moves that possibly leave status infliction, you have paralysis (electric), freezing (ice), burn (fire), poisoning (poison), etc, etc.. The probability of dealing with the amount of variety of status inflicting moves is less than nullifying your opponent or it's held item in battle, because there is more of a potentiality of having the right Pokemon type or the right held held item for a specific status infliction. That's why the probability ratio to deal with status inflicting moves is less than dealing with quick claw spammers.

No it's not.  I'm listing out the different ways you can deal with status that wouldn't be so costly.

 

Burn + Poisoning + Paralysis + Freeze - Dealt by Lum Berry / Heal Bell / Aromatherapy / NC user

Burn + Poisoning + Paralysis - Dealt by Rest

Burn + Poisoning - Dealt by Magic Guard

Freeze - Dealt with by Scald

Burn - Dealt with by fire types

Poison - Dealt with by Steel and grass types

 

Now do the same with Quick Claw.

Edited by NikhilR

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
2 hours ago, The5thHorseman said:

Simply put there's no reasoning behind removing quick claw, unless it always allowed the user to move first.

When someone says "ban quickclaw" and there's no logic behind it, ones going to assume it's due to its traditional function, which is why I explained that. He's griping about quickclaw for no reason whether the item always allows the mover to go first or only sometimes does. You can't just go complaining to the devs for changes because you don't like something, you have to have an actual reason. And here there is no reason for them to be banned. That's the bottom line and the point I was conveying.

 

This is such a terrible argument I really had to re-read your comments multiple times to make sure you weren't joking. Alright, first of all there is a ban criteria for "uncompetitiveness" so by that alone you're wrong. But even just speaking intuitively - does this make any sense? You weren't be able to ban clearly overpowered Pokemon if they relied on a move that isn't 100%? You weren't able to ban OHKO moves because despite completely harmful to a competitive game, they might not always work?

 

I don't think this thread should have even continued after Nik's first comment but there's always just that one person who finds the need to comment with "ur mad cuz bad" despite people having actually good arguments to improve the game.

 

Edited by OrangeManiac

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
1 hour ago, gbwead said:

Is quick claw really used that much?

many on lowrank people holding it on slow pokemos such as escavalier and rhyperior, there's no a good reason to keep it unbanned  since those type of people gonna go pray only on rng

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Because I like to be assertive,  I won't go arguing against people this time, and will stick to the facts.

Regarding Quick claw, its effect is: The user has 20% chance to move first in the same priority bracket.

First of all, its effect adds nothing to the competitive metagame. I simply adds a needless rng layer that more often than not can't be avoided by the opponent.

Disregarding how common quick claw is right now (I already saw some, but cannot pinpoint specific usage yet), let's take a look at that number: 20%

Quick claw users should be bulky slow pokes, that are able to take some hits if needed. This 20% within 2 turns in a row becomes 36% of triggering at least once, and 48,8% of triggering within 3 turns.

These numbers are quite high when comparing with other rng items, which I won't discuss here, and in insight, they can be somewhat usable in some bulky slow af mons, which imo might get them increased usage over time. 

Quick claw isnt broken in the op sense of the word, but adds a super relevant (%wise) rng factor as pointed above that adds literally nothing, as stated, to the competitive environment. Therefore, should be banned. 

Thank you all for your time.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

people kill each other for the fast claw, if it is forbidden, how to compensate for a very slow pokemon?
Note that the fast claw does not guarantee 100% touch.
I think penalizing players because there are haters is not the best way to balance.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.