Switching and why it's a must for competitive battling

Shiny-HoOh

New Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
33
Points
6
So I've decided to make this thread to explain why switching is a must in competitive battling due to the ignorance of many players that don't understand the reasons that switching is a must.

So first off switching works fine, it only glitches if either player tries to switch when the opponent's pokemon is fainted (Which people shouldn't be doing anyways since that wasn't even in the actual games), which is easily avoidable.
(Switching used to be broken (I know it used to be, I was around from December 2009 until about June/July 2011, after that I kinda left/came back/left/came back and so on), which was the whole reason the unseen 'no switching' rule came about, however since it's fixed there's no reason to even keep this unseen and useless rule around.)

Switching vs. non-switching:
Switching battles take skill, knowledge, and prediction (As to what possible pokemon your opponent might switch to and what attack you should choose) while non-switching battles are purely luck based and the majority of the time comes it down to if your pokemon was able to survive an attack or what lead you chose (Basically a coin flip).

Prediction:
Predicting if and when your opponent is going to switch can easily determine a battle, for example if you have Starmie out and the opponent has Salamence out, your opponent switches Salamence you should be able to figure out a possible pokemon they'll switch in, currently this isn't really needed since very few actually switch or even know what pokemon to switch to, but eventually it will come in handy due to switches working.

Checks:
A check is when you get a free switch and send in a pokemon that can beat the opponent's pokemon.
Example: Your opponent has salamence out, it just killed once of your pokemon, so you send in Starmie, no matter what your Starmie will be able to kill the Salamence without fear of the Salamence surviving Ice Beam or outspeeding Starmie.

Counters:
A counter is when you can switch in a pokemon with little to no fear of what that pokemon can do and kill off that pokemon or force it out.
This is very important if you want to have a good team, especially against the top pokemon out there, for example a counter against Starmie could be Lanturn due to it resisting Hydro Pump and Ice Beam, neutral to Thnderbolt (In the future it'll be immune to Thunderbolt once Volt Absorb works), and is specially bulky enough to take a hit from Psyshock, so it could just switch in on any attack and kill the Starmie.
(Also a counter can be a check, while a check is not always a counter.)
 

Merse

Youngster
Joined
Apr 6, 2012
Messages
2,299
Points
36
Ah yes... The good old switching debate. This is about the 2465th time it comes up...
But I tell you what, without Shane there is no point even to talk about it (
 

Luminance

Youngster
Developer
Joined
Sep 24, 2013
Messages
643
Points
28
Merse said:
Ah yes... The good old switching debate. This is about the 2465th time it comes up...
But I tell you what, without Shane there is no point even to talk about it (
Why?
 

I.Am

New Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2013
Messages
288
Points
16
kaiser6tn said:
If there were hazards and phazing I'm pretty sure switching would be tolerated by players (I know I would for example), otherwise no as I think it would cause battles to drag unnecessarily (imo it's a bit pointless to accept switching while lacking ways of using strategies that can take advantage of that).
 

Luminance

Youngster
Developer
Joined
Sep 24, 2013
Messages
643
Points
28
kaiser6tn said:
Because most players don't believe hazards and phazing will be introduced now that Shane's gone.
Shane is not the only one who knows C++ in the world though.
 

KaiReborn

Youngster
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
1,037
Points
38
Website
theburningnotebook.tumblr.com
Fair enough of a point but the 'update rate' of current staff is much lower in comparison, hence why players show so little faith/hope/whatever you want to call it on changes happening
 

Luminance

Youngster
Developer
Joined
Sep 24, 2013
Messages
643
Points
28
kaiser6tn said:
Fair enough of a point but the 'update rate' of current staff is much lower in comparison, hence why players show so little faith/hope/whatever you want to call it on changes happening
I never mentioned current staff though, since there is no active developer in the team, I was referring to the possibility for them to recruit more developers in the future. What you are missing is not "Shane" as a person, you are missing dedicated developers.
 

KaiReborn

Youngster
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
1,037
Points
38
Website
theburningnotebook.tumblr.com
I'm just going by the discussions I've seen here for the past few weeks and a point of view that is shared by a large amount of players so I'm using it as an example of sorts to base the reasoning I presented here on
 

The-Predator

Youngster
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
1,552
Points
38
Luminance said:
kaiser6tn said:
Because most players don't believe hazards and phazing will be introduced now that Shane's gone.
Shane is not the only one who knows C++ in the world though.

We know that Lumi, but being realistic the fact that some new developer comes and get promoted means nothing to community now, we had Thugie that make some great updates but wasnt what we all were looking for, and not even mention Harcoreh, more then a year and a half and he ended up doing nothing, so thats why everyone show low hopes in that area
 

Merse

Youngster
Joined
Apr 6, 2012
Messages
2,299
Points
36
I pretty much doubt it that either the server or the game would be coded in C++.
And frankly, I share KPyppo's opinion. Nobody will learn how to code PWO and contribute a great deal to it. Not without the help o Shane or Xan. But I think it would be a bigger wonder if Xan would return. I still have a faint hope that the staff will realize that their own ego has less importance than the sake of the game.
Then again... we're talking about a staff led by Blue...
 

Luminance

Youngster
Developer
Joined
Sep 24, 2013
Messages
643
Points
28
I would say, never give up hope; PWO lived long without serious updates and now it got improved, of course I understand how you all raised your hopes when Shane came with all the impressive updates and wanted more, but PWO was never staff members and was never about huge updates.

We stayed for years in this game because of many reasons, none of them was related to staff nor huge updates. After all, staff are just people, come and go, and the only thing that stays is PWO, you can choose to enjoy it and hope for its advancement if you want.

People are different, and every DEV this game will have, will leave a mark here or there, updates will come and go.

What attaches us to PWO is never Staff, the game is technically not a real Pokemon game like you see in the market due to lack of many features, but we are still here, playing it, because it formed something more than just a usual game that we play every day. Even people who left it for a while no matter how long it was, they are coming back to it at some point. PWO is not just a game, so I hope you all give PWO a glimpse of , and it shall become what you wish it to be. :)
 

Shiny-HoOh

New Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
33
Points
6
I.Am said:
kaiser6tn said:
If there were hazards and phazing I'm pretty sure switching would be tolerated by players (I know I would for example), otherwise no as I think it would cause battles to drag unnecessarily (imo it's a bit pointless to accept switching while lacking ways of using strategies that can take advantage of that).
kaiser6tn said:
Because most players don't believe hazards and phazing will be introduced now that Shane's gone.
Hazards and phazing isn't a must when it comes to playing with switching and being competitive.

But I tell you what, without Shane there is no point even to talk about it (
That has nothing to do with this thread, it's about players and their refusal to learn how/when to switch and then them force feeding the 'no switching' rule down other players throats when that rule isn't even needed due to being able to actually switch without speed being a factor of whether or not you can attack when the opponent switches (The old switching bug.).
 

KaiReborn

Youngster
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
1,037
Points
38
Website
theburningnotebook.tumblr.com
Phazing may not be a must but hazards are, I have my own experience on competitive to back this statement up. Also it's not about refusal to learn how to switch but instead it's because the battle system is still too limited (even though it isn't as limited as it used to be)
 

nemo55

New Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2012
Messages
843
Points
16
All I can say is..battle in showdown to satisfy your battling needs! :D
 

Shiny-HoOh

New Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
33
Points
6
kaiser6tn said:
Phazing may not be a must but hazards are, I have my own experience on competitive to back this statement up. Also it's not about refusal to learn how to switch but instead it's because the battle system is still too limited (even though it isn't as limited as it used to be)
Hazards defenitely aren't a must (I've played with and without, hazards just make it easier to defeat the opponent, but defenitely not a must for battling).
Also the battle system isn't too limited for players to switch, I've yet to see anyone prove that.

nemo55 said:
All I can say is..battle in showdown to satisfy your battling needs! :D
I'm not really interested in battling on showdown or other battle simulators.
 

KaiReborn

Youngster
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
1,037
Points
38
Website
theburningnotebook.tumblr.com
Starting from the point hazards had enough of an impact to be the key reason behind a pokemon's tiering in some cases (there were little to no fire types in gen 5 OU just to name an example) further proves my point. Sure that in gens 2 and 3 hazards weren't exactly a must (spikes are far from being impressive imo) but gens 4 and 5 are a completely different story on that regard and let us not forget this game uses gen 5 battle mechanics as a reference as far as I'm aware. Also hazards and phazing are just the tip of the iceberg, there would be more moves that require fixing to be able to work with switching (pursuit being the main move I can remember). The point is, pwo needs to see moves that can make switching be a risk instead of being a choice with little to no drawbacks as it is currently (stall teams still aren't that viable because healing moves don't recover the amount is should which ends up giving all out offense users advantage), hence the need for moves that allow for different kinds of stratetgies before switching is accepted
 

Shiny-HoOh

New Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
33
Points
6
kaiser6tn said:
Starting from the point hazards had enough of an impact to be the key reason behind a pokemon's tiering in some cases (there were little to no fire types in gen 5 OU just to name an example) further proves my point. Sure that in gens 2 and 3 hazards weren't exactly a must (spikes are far from being impressive imo) but gens 4 and 5 are a completely different story on that regard and let us not forget this game uses gen 5 battle mechanics as a reference as far as I'm aware. Also hazards and phazing are just the tip of the iceberg, there would be more moves that require fixing to be able to work with switching (pursuit being the main move I can remember). The point is, pwo needs to see moves that can make switching be a risk instead of being a choice with little to no drawbacks as it is currently (stall teams still aren't that viable because healing moves don't recover the amount is should which ends up giving all out offense users advantage), hence the need for moves that allow for different kinds of stratetgies before switching is accepted

1: That only proves that we're able to use a wider array of pokemon in pwo (Percentage-wise, not total pokmeon-wise), also with bulky water types (slowbro being the main one) we have no problem countering these. (I'd also like to point out that many people that play competitive battling on simulators want Stealth Rock banned due to it limiting Flying and Fire types so much along with no pokemon being immune to it, etc.. (There have even been stealth rock-less ladders.))
2: Just because some risks aren't ingame doesn't mean there are absolutely no risks, you would still take a risk in your opponent prediction a switch to a counter and attacking with a move that's neutral or supereffective against that counter.
3: Currently there's absolutely no strategy involved when it comes to players playing without switching, it's purely luck based (Atleast with switching it takes prediction and certain counters so your team doesn't fall prey to switching into attacks your team can't handle) and isn't the whole point of a meta to use a strategy?
 

KaiReborn

Youngster
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
1,037
Points
38
Website
theburningnotebook.tumblr.com
Doesn't change the fact that even if switching was currently accepted battles would still be way too one dimensional, hence the need for more strategies that are present in competitive battling to become viable here as well and that includes switch related strategies because I don't count prediction as one.
 
Top