"Hax"

[Agent Syrup]

I was just wondering what elements of RBY make it so much more chance based then other generations. And if I were to make a mod (or a card game) based off of Generation 1, what elements could I change to make it less... hax.

[Agent Syrup]

And please do not mention wrap.

[Isa]

The main difference is that critical hits are based of speed in RBY, whereas they're the same for all Pokémon in future generations. The CH rate for future generations is 6,25% - compare this to Tauros who has a CH rate of slightly over 20%.

Moreover, paralysis is very common in RBY, and it's not in future generations. Here's something for you though - in most other generations (GSC is the exception), battles are swift and speedy, and almost everything is fragile. Your offensive Pokémon can't have good offensive stats simultaneously in those generations, so a single turn of paralysis can decide the game. While this is also true in RBY, I'd say that most turns of paralysis are...inconvenient, but by no means game-changing. Alakazam vs. Chansey is an example. You don't WANT to get fully paralyzed as Chansey in that matchup, but if you do...it's tolerable.

Moving on, freezes are permanent. I think this is pretty dumb, but it's part of the game, so...basically, if you get a lucky freeze (and Ice Beam/Blizzard is more common here than in future generations too, I think, as Ice becomes a HORRIBLE defensive type whereas it's one of the better in RBY), you're much more screwed than in future generations where you can thaw out with luck.

I'd say that's it?

[Zilch]

Don't forget the 255 rule, where every 100% accuracy attack has a 1/256 chance of missing, barring Swift. That's due to a programming oversight, mind you. It's not an intentional feature.

[Crystal_]

Every turn is a X% chance to happen something, be it a crit, a 30% para, a 25% FP, a 10% freeze, a Hyper Beam/Blizzard miss or whatever.

[t3h Icy]

Critical Hits are the biggest part of it, and it's because they aren't frequent enough where they're expected, but they're common enough to always need to worry about. Criticals can still have the same effect in later generations, but since they're much less common, they don't need to be worried about as much.

I think what it comes down to is that for each turn, there is a very high variation in what can happen, each with fairly good chances (Freezes, double CHs, two CHs in a row, FPs, etc).

Also because a lead in RBY can still crumble fast.

255s are kind of hax I suppose, but they're rare enough they can be ignored, and in most matches a lot of moves are not used where a miss matters significantly (such as Alakazam vs Chansey). Also, only 100% accuracy moves 255ing are detectable, because if a move that can ordinarily miss 255s, it's just assumed it missed like normal.

255 Explosions are hilarious though.

[lilith]

rby feels particularly like hax to me because there's a lot of situations that are supposed to be "safe" (reflect up against paralyzed tauros, lol) when there's really quite a high chance of failing. later generations don't feel like they even have as many situations that are supposed to be safe (less walls, less setup/status, etc) so there's no opportunity for me to feel haxed in the first place. i'm also extremely bad at everything in later generations so i could be making this up.

getting protect 3 turns in a row is funny too though...

hax are totally a large part of why i find rby so exciting, though... having to weigh various high risks makes it really suspenseful to me. i love the way that optimal play seems to vary depending on whether you're ahead or behind in a match because of all the hax that could happen at any time... while we're conditioned to ignore certain options as too risky, then they suddenly become important in a match coz they are the only way out of a situation. i feel like it makes the game somewhat more skill-intensive and more complex than just memorizing a bunch of matchups and what to do in them. especially in a meta so lacking in diversity as OU/ubers, without all the hax i'm afraid every RBY match would play the same.

people who judge rby to be boring really should at least play until they've said something like "i should use ice beam because the chance of them 255ing twice in a row is less than the chance of them 255ing and then getting frozen!"

also, the rest/recover mod256 bug is total hax...

[redemption]

"Hax" doesn't truly exist in RBY. RBY is a game of calculated risks. Example: Reflect Zam Vs Tauros. In this situation Zam has the advantage over Tauros. However this advantage could easily be destroyed by a Critical Hit for example which some would consider hax. However playing Zam vs Tauros is playing a chance based situation in which anything could happen.

[jorgen]

It's mostly the crits. People see "critical hit" and assume "OMG lucky" when really it's no luckier than a Thunder Para in GSC or a full paralysis in many cases.

Thing is luck is definitely more impactful in later generations because of what lilith said about no safe spots - seems like every game comes down to a do-or-die prediction at some point if it isn't outright dominated by one player. You usually only have 1 turn to do things, so losing it to a crit or an fp is a MUCH bigger deal. Thus, when these dudes look at RBY and see that crits are even more frequent, the instinct is to rage over it and assume the meta is all luck-based when really crits aren't nearly as impactful here (and when they are, i.e., when they are Tauros crits, people know to play around those).

[t3h Icy]

Dec 11, 2012 11:52:03 GMT -8 redemption said:

"Hax" doesn't truly exist in RBY. RBY is a game of calculated risks. Example: Reflect Zam Vs Tauros. In this situation Zam has the advantage over Tauros. However this advantage could easily be destroyed by a Critical Hit for example which some would consider hax. However playing Zam vs Tauros is playing a chance based situation in which anything could happen.

Very true, RBY's risks-rewards can have zany outcomes sometimes.

I've always liked RBY more for its simplicity, but the factor of luck is interesting. It makes it funner for weaker players since they always have a chance to pull off upsets, and it's always amusing how crazy things can get sometimes. It is a bit rough for tournaments and serious games though since a streak of bad luck can cost a stronger player the match. That's why I've always tried to have best of 3 and best of 5 sets, since as the number of games goes to infinity, the win-lose ratio eventually balances itself out. Of course we can't do infinite games, but the chance of awful bad luck enough to cost players a match goes to ~0 pretty quickly.

That still hasn't stopped some amazing things from happening though. This match got me 2nd in a round robin tourney, lol. StS beating Vil was also amazing. And I've been on the rough end of the stick too, I'm sure everyone has.

[jorgen]

I liked the Hyper Beam crits in the round robin of the first anniversary tour against WW

[t3h Icy]

Haha, yeah.

This is another amazing one (starts at turn 23).

[Isa]

Hax comebacks are fun. Icy was impressed, Zilch was not amused. www.rby2k10.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=bl&thread=983&page=1#7349

www.rby2k10.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=bl&action=display&thread=874 This is not fun though. I got outplayed and outRNG'd.

[Dexter]

I wonder what the odds are of playing two exactly identical games given the same moves made in each.

[t3h Icy]

It depends on if you're counting exact everything, or just perceived. For example, against a Chansey with 1% HP, a Critical Hit and not is functionally the same thing.

And about ~0. Depends on how long the match is. Mewtwo using Psychic against 6 Weedles, is the same 97.7% of the time ignoring whether an attack is Critical or not.

[Agent Syrup]

Thank you all for your input. This gave me clarity.

[Dre]

To whoever said RBY isn't hax, I disagree because you can lose from situations where you had the advantage. That to me is hax.

[Isa]

Seems like every other Pokémon game to me

I mean, I get your point, and I think RBY is probably the most hax-filled generation. Your statement needs clarifying though if you want to keep it from being silly and redundant. =p

[redemption]

Dec 12, 2012 3:32:07 GMT -8 Dre said:

To whoever said RBY isn't hax, I disagree because you can lose from situations where you had the advantage. That to me is hax.

A game that allows upsets is better than a game that doesn't. Also, I can(Without Crits/freeze/Parahax) create a win from a disadvantaged position(And I'm certain I'm not the only one). Thus this argument is quite frankly nearly invalid.

[Dexter]

Dec 12, 2012 3:32:07 GMT -8 Dre said:

To whoever said RBY isn't hax, I disagree because you can lose from situations where you had the advantage. That to me is hax.

That to me is every game ever invented.

[longfellow]

I mean obviously if your opponent outplays you from a bad position they deserve to win, but I think what Dre meant is that in first gen Pokémon you can have done all the right things, capitalized on your opponent's mistakes, built up a better position, and continue to be one step ahead of your opponent, but if they get that CH para Body Slam with FP you can still lose. You may choose to accept this element of luck or not, but you have to at least address the fact that it's different from other games and even from other Pokémon generations.