Resource Union Street - Casual Discussion Thread

[LouisCyphre]

is that enough patch.

 

[HeliosAflame]

good patch!
Was enough and very exciting.

Bringing up one concern.
I think the cost of most things in the game looks too low and once the excitement of the new patch has died down it will be hard to find people to ref things.

the new ref rewards based on how hard things are to ref seems great and much more in line with how much I am willing to ref things, but so many things are now jc positive that it will be very hard to get jc out of the system, especially when events can inject in 18 at a time.

I think the amount players value being able to play content is being underestimated, and I would certainly be willing to pay more jc myself if it meant finding refs who were motivated to ref in a timely manner due to needing the jc themselves.

 

[LouisCyphre]

you're so right. claiming should cost JC

 

[HeliosAflame]

I can't tell if that is a serious response or not but possibly? Something else should, why not claiming so people make fewer but larger claims.
I think my preference would still be for facilities though, and maybe events as well. its really wild how much jc invents add into the system and people have a month to get jc for entry.

 

[Hyjack]

It is not serious. I would hate the processes of getting JC if it constrained my play that much. Right now JC is non-constraining, and a reflection of the contribution one makes towards running games. If you ref semi-regularly, you don't have to worry about JC. I don't think it is supposed to be the resource of concern. If I had to worry about having enough JC to claim my rewards, I'd start to hate JC and the processes needed to get JC, and feel "forced" to ref.

This patch made it punishing (JC Negative) when aiming for high value rewards, and rewarding (JC Positive) when aiming for low-value rewards, like grinding for EXP. I am "forced" to ref if I am aiming for legendaries or Z moves or other high-level facilities, because those runs cost a lot more JC than the average battle pays. It isn't even a "forced" to ref situation, and more like an incentive to ref in the form of rare pokemon and techniques.

Idk all the ins and outs or thoughts behind the JC system, but it would be bad to make people pay to claim.

 

[HeliosAflame]

It is not serious. I would hate the processes of getting JC if it constrained my play that much. Right now JC is non-constraining, and a reflection of the contribution one makes towards running games. If you ref semi-regularly, you don't have to worry about JC. I don't think it is supposed to be the resource of concern. If I had to worry about having enough JC to claim my rewards, I'd start to hate JC and the processes needed to get JC, and feel "forced" to ref.

This patch made it punishing (JC Negative) when aiming for high value rewards, and rewarding (JC Positive) when aiming for low-value rewards, like grinding for EXP. I am "forced" to ref if I am aiming for legendaries or Z moves or other high-level facilities, because those runs cost a lot more JC than the average battle pays. It isn't even a "forced" to ref situation, and more like an incentive to ref in the form of rare pokemon and techniques.

Idk all the ins and outs or thoughts behind the JC system, but it would be bad to make people pay to claim.

I think that set up would work well but it isn't currently how the rewards do work from what I can see.
even for the highest level battles for legendaries and z moves many of them are very mildly jc negative, and some (barry parmer) are actually jc positive.
That does sound good to me though. its easy to claim and easy to level, but if you want to get late game power you need to be pulling enough weight on reffing as well.

 

[Keriel]

State of the Pinnacle Report
This was mentioned on Discord and I thought it'd be useful to have, so here you go.
The following is a list of all unique rewards currently available (to my knowledge). Pokemon that are obtained NFE are listed as their FE forms.
I might try to keep this post updated, who knows.
Last update: 2024/01/01 (Cosmog event)

Advanced Techniques
Z-Moves: Realgam Tower Lv4 Sims (Cynthia, Nascour & Evice, Kukui, Adaman or Iridia) - Victory Reward
Dynamax: Raid Frontier - vs. the Fundamental Elemental Procession - Victory Reward

Non-Technique Control Legendaries
Articuno - Win a Realgam Tower battle with Bravado + Level 6+.
Azelf - Win 3 matches in League Circuit.
Celebi - Win 4 matches in League Circuit.
Fezandipiti - Defeat the "Loyal" Lousy Lackabouts in Raid Frontier.
Genesect - Defeat N in Realgam Tower leading Kyurem with Bravado 4+; Kyurem must survive.
Glastrier - Defeat the 3rd Wave of the December 2023 event.
Heatran - Win 3 matches in League Circuit.
Jirachi - Win 4 matches in League Circuit.
Kyurem - Defeat Colress in Realgam Tower.
Manaphy - Win 4 matches in League Circuit.
Mesprit - Win 3 matches in League Circuit.
Mew - Win 4 matches in League Circuit.
Moltres - Win a Realgam Tower battle with Bravado + Level 8+.
Munkidori - Defeat the "Loyal" Lousy Lackabouts in Raid Frontier.
Okidogi - Defeat the "Loyal" Lousy Lackabouts in Raid Frontier.
Spectrier - Defeat the 3rd Wave of the October 2023 event.
Tapu Bulu - Win a Raid Frontier battle with Bravado + Level 10+.
Tapu Fini - Win a Raid Frontier battle with Bravado + Level 8+.
Tapu Koko - Win a Raid Frontier battle with Bravado + Level 6+.
Regieleki - Win a Raid Frontier battle with Bravado + Level 6+.
Regigigas - Defeat Barry & Palmer in Realgam Tower (Doubles).
Uxie - Win 3 matches in League Circuit.
Victini - Win 4 matches in League Circuit.
Zapdos - Win a Realgam Tower battle with Bravado + Level 10+.

Technique Control Legendaries
Groudon - Defeat The Clashing Cataclysmic Colossi in Raid Frontier.
Kyogre - Defeat The Clashing Cataclysmic Colossi in Raid Frontier.
Kyurem-White/Black - Defeat Ghetsis in Realgam Tower. You must also obtain and or .
Melmetal - Win 3 matches in League Circuit (evolved from Meltan).
Reshiram - Defeat N in Realgam Tower.
Zekrom - Defeat N in Realgam Tower.

Non-Purchaseable Held Items
Sovereign Magnificance - Win the December 2023 Event.
Sovereign Malevolence - Win the December 2023 Event.

Trophy Pokemon
(This category contains non-purchaseable Pokemon that have little to no combat utility.)
Lv0 Dragonite - Defeat Lance in the November 2023 Event.
Lv1 Cosmog - Defeat Lillie in the January 2024 Event. (You cannot evolve a Pokemon that is already at level 1 or higher.)

Techniques for Specific Pokemon
Eevee - Z-Move and Dynamax access - Defeat Kimono Lady Zuki in Realgam Tower leading Eevee with Bravado 4+.
Ultra Beasts - Z-Move access - Defeat The Self-Perfecting Beast-Slaying Machine in Raid Frontier with 3 Ultra Beasts with Bravado 4+.

 

[LouisCyphre]

This coming circuit, I'd be pleased if people would think about how "worth" their Z-Moves feel, compared to other uses. Also, I'd like to hear after the fact how it felt to order into possible Z-Moves.

Balance adjustments,like "how much BAP a move gets from Z-Force" and "which crystals have which Z-Powers" are possible, so we have a lot of fine-tuning options available to us, to ensure Z-Moves feel like a good use of your Technique Control.

edit:

 

[SirinC&Kokomi]

Hi everyone....

Hide

I had some...setbacks during my absence and now I finally gathered myself up for some social activities...

Before return,at my disadvantage, could anyone do me a favor and offer a DAT document via email ...
[Sirin_N_Celebi@163.com]
Thanks a lot

 

[SirinC&Kokomi]

Doomed sorry the email address in the previous post was wrong
Fixed now

 

[Keriel]

Do the new Beginner Battles level all 3 pokemon sent to 1 or just the one you sent out? The reward is listed as "Promotion to Level 1" in the patch, so at the time I thought it'd be "all 3 pokemon get to 1 but you get no counters" but nothing about special rewards appears to be in the battle tower thread so maybe you only promote the pokemon you sent out (and also get 1 TC to promote one more)?

 

[HeliosAflame]

While we are redoing the new player experience, petition to give new players 5 tc after they finish their first battle (or whatever rewards would get them to 5tc).
That is enough to get all 3 of their mon to level 1 or get 2 of their mon to level 1, and replace 1 mon from their starter team if they figure out they don't like them now that they have a better understanding of how the game works.

update. I thought beginner battle was p3 not p1. That makes it less problematic, though it would still be nice to get to 4tc by the time you have played 2 beginner battles so you can do some team shuffling.

 

[P2X7]

IIRC you can advance any Pokemon that participates in a Level 0 battle to Level 1 for free, but I'd support a bigger TC prize regardless.

 

[Hyjack]

IIRC you can advance any Pokemon that participates in a Level 0 battle to Level 1 for free, but I'd support a bigger TC prize regardless.

New decree is you can only evolve (L0->L1) one pokemon per battle, caveat being they dont have to see combat

 

[LouisCyphre]

IIRC you can advance any Pokemon that participates in a Level 0 battle to Level 1 for free, but I'd support a bigger TC prize regardless.

You can find the mentioned change in this Tower post, now that I've finished repeatedly revising it.

The tl;dr is that we're prioritizing new players first (hence promoting possibly-inactive mons) and then dealing with later fallout as it may happen.

 

[P2X7]

Oh, cool; that seems like a good way to keep new people focused on the right things. Level-based reward scaling is a nice touch for progression, too.

 

[SirinC&Kokomi]

According to this battle, when some mons with mediocre attack stats attacks High-Def opponents, their damage calc results negative before type-effectiveness and stat boost calcs even using a super-effective move, which made the ultimate damage by a super-effective move lower than a not-very-effective move.
Although this happens rare, it still seems abnormal and I'd like to ask if there's a chance to fix it.

 

[TMan87]

It is not abnormal. It is simply a consequence of the damage formula. It also gives Night Shade & clones a reason to be used.

 

[Rextreff]

Where's the link to the Data Audit Spreadsheet I can't find it anywhere

 

[LouisCyphre]

You probably want this post:

https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/bbp-quick-link-reference.3724806/

It has links to the Data Audit, every Facility, and more besides.

 

[Mowtom]

Earn Bragging Rights Doing Labor for Me

Hi everyone! For those of you who aren't aware, I designed most but not all of the Realgam Tower challenges. GT wrote Zuki, Lou wrote Nascour and Evice, and Eve wrote Adaman/Iridia. Now, for the first time ever, I am explicitly seeking submissions! If you have a sim you want to see fully realized, this is your chance. I specifically want a 4v4 Doubles, 12 EXP, Level 2 or 3 challenge.

What I'm looking for you to do:

• Decide on the Pokemon, including their natures if level 3
• Create the backpack
• Write down all competitively relevant arena effects
• Give me enough of the flavor that I can fill in the rest without much effort

What I explicitly don't want you to do:

• Generate the profiles. I have my own formatting that I use for Realgam Tower profiles, so I would have to re-generate them anyway.
• Create the "challenge start template" hide tag at the bottom. If I make edits to what you've given me, I don't want to have to make them twice.

If you have something to send me, please do so by forum private message.

Most importantly, have fun! This isn't a test to see who can mimic my aesthetic sensibilities best! You have full permission to do whatever you'd like within the structure I have explicitly outlined, so go wild with your flavor and arena effects and such.

(Legal disclaimers: By submitting your work to me you give me permission to make any and all changes to it that I'd like. There is no timeframe under which I am promising to tell you if I am going to publish your challenge or not. Batteries not included.)

 

[LouisCyphre]

give mow your realgam design submissions NOW

Floating this possible Circuit tiebreaker for Feb onward, for feedback before I go to bed:

Current

Proposed

If one player has at least 36 more Battle Hours than their opponent, that player wins. This is the "Hour Gap" tiebreaker rule. Then, if that's a tie, the team whose Pokemon are missing the smallest percentage of their HP is declared the winner. This is the "Missing HP" rule. Example: If one Pokemon on a team is missing 50% of their HP, and the other Pokemon on that team is missing 80% of their HP, then that team is considered to be missing 130% HP. Then, if that's a tie, the player with the most remaining Battle Hours is the winner. This is the "Precise Hour" tiebreaker rule. Then, if that's a tie, the player that posted least recently wins. Woe betide us if we should ever make it to this tiebreaker.

Each player is scored as follows: For each of their Pokemon, they are scored a number of points equal to their HP percent rounded down. (A Pokemon with 100% remaining HP is worth 100 points. A Pokemon with 36 / 85 HP remaining is worth 42.3% ~ 42 points.) They are scored points equal to twice their remaining Battle Hours. Then, the tie is broken as follows: The player with the highest score wins. With the same score, the player with more Battle Hours wins. With the same score and Battle Hours, the player with the most Round Hours wins. All else the same, the player who posted most recently wins.

these are changes are intended to combat scenarios where it's optimal to refrain from posting at the end of the match timer, so evaluate them through that lens

there will surely still be SOME scenario where it's correct, but treating battle hours as "another HP bar" will make that decision more weightful. hopefully, encouraging gameplay over metagameplay.

the next circuit is only a couple of days away, so sound off whether you'd like to see this included or workshopped further

 

[HeliosAflame]

I like that it encourages people to not stall and still convinces people to try and be ahead on board.
the exact combining of them is a bit odd odd, specifically the fact that someone can be ahead on board when the game ends and still lose because they spent 4 battle hours more.

On the whole I think I like it and would be fine playing it for Feb, since it is generally speaking under peoples own control if that kind of niche situation comes up and it adds the correct incentives towards people actually playing the game.
People who are less consistently able to order once a day are the ones who lose out here and might have other opinions.

 

[Keriel]

I'm not sure that this is an improvement and I believe it wouldn't have solved the situation that actually came up, but overall don't mind it if others prefer it

the last tiebreaker switching from last to post to most recent post is however obviously correct.

 

[LouisCyphre]

who's excited for a hodge-podge of rejected pike mechanics