1. Welcome to the Orange Islands! Please remember to read the rules. Come chat with us on Discord and enjoy your stay!
  2. The moderators of this forum are DHR-107, Codraroll, and NoCheese.
  3. Welcome to Smogon Forums! Please take a minute to read the rules.
  4. Click here to ensure that you never miss a new SmogonU video upload!

In-game tier list policy discussion thread

Discussion in 'Orange Islands' started by Codraroll, Oct 1, 2017.

  1. Colonel M

    Colonel M Like a Pope
    is a member of the Site Staffis a Forum Moderatoris a Live Chat Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,941
    I think you miss the entire earmark of the average tier list that is designed by people (especially by myself) considering that the maximum I ever see a party is ever at 4, and most of the time I would argue 2-3 is a lot more efficient. You also will notice I point out things such as Experience gains fairly often in some of my arguments (though not as of late, only because I've been tied by other means). One of those times I mentioned how Cranidos's Erratic EXP gain can be really detrimental to it sometimes (though it can be a benefit) whereas I also will argue that there are times where Gyarados's Slow Experience Gain can really hold it back and, sometimes, keep it from getting up to the critical levels it needs to get. But, at the same time, if it soloes at a certain point in the game (which some can) there's also where EXP gain has a slightly lowered playing field over a Pokemon so long as the stats and move distribution back up the Pokemon. Typing too, to a lesser extent.

    The solo play is an interesting theory, but the problem is that it requires a specific setup and usually only has a couple Pokemon that really benefit from it. Even then, it doesn't necessarily rank them accurately as a whole by solo play as some of these Pokemon listed also do more than fine on their own in solo play (Totodile in GSC for example, which is already in S). Solo play has skewered results as can be shown in games like Fire Emblem where it's usually more efficient to have at least a second or third Pokemon. Knowing one of the original pioneers of this list, he certainly did not assume all 6 Pokemon being used and probably would argue that 4 was a bit too much in RBY as an example. Even though he isn't around IOS and I have discussed at great lengths about solo play with things such as Tailow in HGSS and how Poplio is also a highly used solo candidate (at the time) for SM. But at best it could argue Tailow higher with Poplio... well... already Top Tier. It's something that could be used to help strengthen a Pokemon higher for example.

    If a tier list is ever assuming more than 4 Pokemon, the chances are it's probably incorporate HM Slaves, something that has had a significantly lower ranking throughout the years since there is arguably a lot of room for HMs (it just compresses in situations where you have a party of 2-3 and you catch a legendary) and some of your party is arguably having some of the benefits like Surf or Fly used anyway (Fly may be weaker than Drill Peck, but Fly has a wider distribution than Drill Peck). A person in a tier list may showcase off a party of 6, but that does not mean a tier list should ever follow in an example that a person uses all 6 slots for Pokemon for battle.
  2. sumwun

    sumwun

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2015
    Messages:
    429
    I agree with this part. Why can we assume that players can trade, but can only trade to evolve stuff? I'm pretty sure there are very few players for which this assumption is exactly true, so tiering anything based on this assumption is pointless. It would be a lot easier for us if we simply assume that every player has access to one and only one cartridge.
  3. Merritt

    Merritt

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,099
    We do somewhat cater to this by having a notation for both the traded evolution rank and the no trade evolution rank. In addition, it's also much easier to find a person who's willing to give you 5 minutes to do a tradeback to evolve your Kadabra than it is to find somebody who's willing to give you a somewhat rare item like an early Moon Stone for example.

    The limitations as I understand them on trading is that it's all resources that rely on the original game that is being played, with no assumptions on what the other cartridge may or may not have beyond the ability itself to trade - something that's generally obtainable within the 10-20 minute mark.
    Codraroll and Kurona like this.
  4. Kurona

    Kurona

    Joined:
    May 12, 2014
    Messages:
    4,852
    Would this extend to Karrablast and Shelmet, then? Most games have them in the same area; but in BW, would it be assumed you can't evolve Karrablast until you get to Iccirus City where you can catch a Shelmet?
  5. Silver_Lucario42

    Silver_Lucario42

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Messages:
    885
    another reason why we don't factor in trading stuff for purposes other than evolution is because that opens up the can of worms that is trading in different mons. and trust me when i say that those worms are better off canned.

    you have a good point here. i really hate this because i'm so used to allowing shelmet/karrablast to evolve immediately, but at the same time i don't see why they deserve this over mons that evolve with stones.

    on the purpose of tier lists: i think that it's reasonable to use them for planning out your party based on the amount of challenge you want. it also gives you a good description of what you should expect out of a mon, and how to use it most efficiently (get x tm, use move reminder for y move, buy z item, etc) to help in nuzlockes and stuff.
    Kurona likes this.
  6. Merritt

    Merritt

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,099
    I wouldn't be opposed to that idea honestly, it seems fair to me, but at the same time I could see why people would object to it.
    Kurona likes this.
  7. sumwun

    sumwun

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2015
    Messages:
    429
    How does any trading, even if it's for evolution, not open that can of worms?
  8. Colonel M

    Colonel M Like a Pope
    is a member of the Site Staffis a Forum Moderatoris a Live Chat Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,941
    In fairness trading does open the can of worms, hence why questions come from sumwun and Coeur7 exists. That isn't to say that these questions are invalid or anything, and they definitely were discussed at great lengths throughout some time.

    The simple answer is, while the player does have the option to trade for virtually anything that they want within the game's limitations, it also does bring up another can of worms on why we don't rank someone like traded Mewtwo Top Tier or even High (High considering that it is rather disobedient) or why you couldn't trade an egg earlygame and, thus, have a Pokemon that is specialized for in-game pummeling. The truth of the matter is by allowing trading the limitations are eased on; however, a line in the sand is drawn that the use of trading with others is used strictly for evolutions that are physically possible at the time.

    Furthermore, consider at one point some of these games, DPP in particular, could use the GTS to evolve a Pokemon without having to physically use another cartridge; however, the method is no longer possible in that the GTS is currently shut down. It would be a weird move to retroactively prevent traded Pokemon from existing in some of these games where it was actually possible without another cartridge.

    If you must know, the main argument back at the time to help create the (Trade) and (No Trade) was actually due to the physical limitations at the time when you had to be right next to someone to trade. While this still is true for some generations such as Generation 3, other generations have much easier access to online play nowadays to do these trades. In the tier list threads there should, at minimum, have a rule that allows a player to trade a Pokemon purely for evolution that is within physical means at the time of trade (i.e. no Metal Coat bullshit before it's available) and to use trading only for that specific instance.

    Honestly (Trade) and (No Trade) with a solid rule in place already solves the loopholes that are potentially caused by allowing tradebacks. I don't see the reason to suddenly change such a policy.
    This, on the other hand, opens a rather different can of worms in my opinion. Shelmet and Karrablast being obtainable in two different areas of the game in Black and White and there are definitely instances where the Shelmet Player at the time could naturally be ahead of the Karrablast player. Honestly, I would argue the ruling to favor Karrablast in that the traded evolution can happen as soon as its obtained, but I'm curious to hear what others have to say on this as well.
    Silver_Lucario42 and sumwun like this.
  9. pika pal

    pika pal
    is a Community Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2010
    Messages:
    2,227
    the main thing is that the trading rules as they are right now only depend on the act of trading, plus a trading resource from the game doing the run. this means I could have a cartridge on standby and use it for tradebacks every time I play, no need to farm out new items or go catch something for the other cart to use. The (Trade) ranked mons only require a trading partner be available, not that they have anything besides the ability to trade, often available within 15-20 minutes of play at a stretch.

    For Karrablast and Shellmet, I think they're fair to rank as "trade/no trade" entries, just perhaps treat their evolution point as when a cart could obtain both at once, and thus provide both necessities for the evolution.
    willempju, Cobalt Empoleon and Kurona like this.
  10. Lucchini

    Lucchini

    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    Messages:
    560
    With regard to evolution, in which games of the series do players still have the option of trading with somebody to evolve, say, Kadabra? If it's hardly possible in 2k17, perhaps trade evolution shouldn't be considered in these games? Referring to the older gens here.
  11. mertyville

    mertyville

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,217
    I don't know if people see it as I do, but regarding Pokemon that evolve through trading while holding an item makes me wonder if the items required should be ranked too based on that you have to get them. Otherwise you could argue that your trade partner has the chance to any time provide you the resources you need to beat the game (which still is true if we rank items individually).

    On another note, Pokewalker tiered for HGSS vs. Pokeradar untiered for B2W2 also seem contradictory since both use external resources but don't require a second DS. I know some people might thing the answer is obvious, but can we have a discussion on that topic later regardless?
    Random Passerby likes this.
  12. Kurona

    Kurona

    Joined:
    May 12, 2014
    Messages:
    4,852
    Right away to me there's a very clear distinction there -- Dream Radar is a completely different game, while the Poké Walker comes with the game. It's still technically an external resource, but in a much more diminished way compared to Dream Radar.
    Random Passerby likes this.
  13. sumwun

    sumwun

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2015
    Messages:
    429
    The current policy already assumes that players can't use items from another game, so for example, getting a Scizor requires the player to provide his own Scyther and his own metal coat.

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)