PandaJJ
-
Posts
564 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by PandaJJ
-
-
Dragonite's niche over salamence is that it can't be flinched, has access to superpower and extreme speed, and is bulkier. I have seen some people use light screen too, but that is not recommended. While the lack of intimidate, speed and rock slide is unfortunate, dragonite makes for a decent choice bander thanks to in particular extreme speed. Ice moves are however very common, so dragonite is indeed difficult to use.
Tyranitar is one of the few good answers to gengar in doubles. While gengar is often paired with metagross, tyranitar still manages to pull it's weight with proper support. I will admit tyranitar teams are hard to use, but can be powerful when played correctly. Tyranitar is also the only pokemon in the game with the ability to remove rain without using a move, which makes it a decent rain check. Dragon dance variants are common, since a dragon danced tyranitar is like an aerodactyl on steriods, but I think mixed sets have some potential as well. As for sand teams, I think that is a thing that hasn't been properly explored yet, but I fear they are not very reliable due to the presence of rain teams.
If you are planning on making your first doubles team, neither dragonite nor tyranitar are your go-to pokemon. Salamence does a lot of the same as dragonite, and aerodactyl has a lot of similarities with tyranitar. I would consider trying those first.
- Rendiz and ErrorGlumac
-
2
-
IGN: DarkLumio
-
-
gg, I won.
Shout-out to Kanzo for most motivating manager. Also LF 8-0 this week :3
- Sableye32, Leorodo, MisterHide and 7 others
-
10
-
IGN: PandaJJ
-
-
in 3 hours i could get around 900k, is that enough to build a comp? :rolleyes:
Please teach me how to magically transform money into comps without wasting time on catching pokemon, egg hatching, leveling and EV-training. If you don't get it, the time it takes from a creative idea forms to a testable comp can be produced is the actual problem here.
And to people who still think tournament prizes will help this, it won't. You can turn time into money, but not the other way around.
-
I will repeat this untill oblivion - buffing the prizes of officials will do more harm than good and completely misses the core of the problem. Making a small percentage of competitive players able to experiment and test out new things so the meta becomes more interesting is flawed, because it forever prevents new players from getting into competitive play. No matter what we do (even if everybody started from scratch,) the distribution of official wins would be exponential (extremely scewed) so a very few players would have the majority of wins. This is related to skill, and this won't ever change. A buff in prizes essentially makes better players better and bad players worse, and freezes the current copetitive communty (while this is already the case, buffing prizes can only make it worse.)
It's nice of you to bring up this issue though - currently, tiers are boring because experimenting is practically impossible. I only have so much time, and I barely have enough time to keep up with a single tier (keeping up a strong expression, since i have numerous of ideas that I would proably never be able to test.) It is not hard to see why the developers have made it this way, though - in theory, once you acquire "every possible comp," there is nothing for you to do but wait for tournaments. However, I would like to direct this to the developers; "Every possible comp" is impossible to even store on a single-digit amount of accounts, not to mention no human being will ever be close to living long enough to make them. While it might seems that breeding comps is an activity that might possibly be "completed" somehow, even if this were true, there are ways to work around this. First of all, competitive play would never be completed, that would be the analogous to one being "complete" as a chess player after having played too many games. Secondly, additional gameplay content such as dungeons, party quests etc. will fill the game with content to do in-between.
On a final note to Xela: Gimmicks is another thing that keeps breeding alive. Gimmicks often features pokemon which are fundamentally different from those used in standard tiers, and forces you to breed more. The reason why people hate gimmicks now is because it's not possible to even compete in all standard tiers, much less also compete in gimmicks. The only way to encourage people to play gimmicks is to make breeding faster (aka fix the economy.) This would of course also encourage people to experiment with things in other metagames.
- londark, aftershocker, Gunthug and 13 others
-
16
-
LF venn diagram, words are confusing
- aftershocker, Hassy, DoubleJ and 3 others
-
6
-
I use crunch for the suprise OHKO on gengar
Crunch should be standard on aerodactyl, but it shouldn't really be used unless you are in an endgame VS gengar, where locking into crunch doesn't immediately lose.
On a side note though it seems like icy wind is becoming a more prevalent move in the meta and if this continues Aero may have to be moved back down to A+
Although, icy wind actually makes sure that aerodactyl remains faster than salamence and gyarados, so it is actually able to do what it's supposed to. Aerodactyl never had any good switch-ins even before the dominance of icy wind, anyways.
I feel like both gyarados and aerodactyl are difficult to place, but they are certainly either S or A+.
-
Restarted the poll with public votes, since somebody *cough* JIce *cough* was suspected for cheating. Try not to make lots of fake accounts this time.
[spoiler]maybe that wasn't the actual reason, but whatever[/spoiler]
-
put another poll up panda
as requested
rendiz i have to say.. you are really good comp player.. but your introduction deserves a kick for 2 hours! :)
I just quoted Red from GSC for the time being. Unless he comes up with anything, I will keep replacing it with bad quotes by Rendiz in the future.
[spoiler]
You have been warned.[/spoiler]
- ErrorGlumac and Leorodo
-
2
-
1st year anniversary! As proven by the community, as we stand, we are potato.
But hey, despite that we still managed to collect 16 individiual official wins and win the team tournament! We have grown from only 5 players to become a medium-sized team of ~15 players, and we were even recognized by Eggplant as one of the top 8 teams in the game (whatever that's supposed to mean.) We are soon opening our gym to provide a (hopefully) tough challenge to players, and we are always hunting for more official wins. Let's make YOLO #1
EDIT: Btw, I made some changes to the opening, including adding a few extra posts. This means that everybody who wrote "page king" no longer are. Who's the loser now?
-
Ok let me clarify my point more. If too many matches get determined by someone running out of time that is partly due to the meta and their playstyle. If the timer gets upped in doubles then taking more than 20 seconds will still make you lose based on time eventually because you end up with a net loss each turn. That is how the timer should work. So that part is not really an issue. I never stated agreement or disagreement with the suggestion I pointed out that an issue was being made out of the design of the timer in the first place. Is there improvement to be made? Yes. Is it an issue that if you take too long that you eventually lose on time? No.
You said there was an issue with the metagame, while in fact the timer is simply not designed for the metagame. That makes the timer the issue. If you actually read what I wrote, you would know that I'm fully aware of the purpose of the timer. By changing the increment from 10 to 20, it does exactly the same as it does now. If you thought I wanted it to be impossible to lose on time, I would have suggested to remove the timer. Alas, I did not. Both of your comments are completely obsolete, since my original post already contains all that information.
(also, playstyle has nothing to do with this since this affects the majority of players, irrespective of playstyles)
- Kiliminati, Hassy, ErrorGlumac and 3 others
-
6
-
The point of the timer giving back 10 seconds is so that if you do take longer you lose time overall. It is a modified chess timer in which you clock it once you make your move. If you take too much time then you lose. If matches more and more matches are being determined by the timer running out then that points more to an issue in the meta game than an issue with the timer.
The timer was designed and calibrated by using singles. I already explained why that doesn't apply to doubles. Please stop posting in my suggestion threads.
-
No doubles, rip
- Rendiz, DoctorPBC and SamuraiHunter
-
3
-
Ya I haven't been given doubles usage in a long while. Fortunately the meta hasn't shifted hardly at all.
This is hardly true. Starme 22%? Kangaskhan 19%? Tyranitar 9%? If you go into a doubles tournament and expect to see more starmie and kanga than ttar, you will be surprised. I'm not sure exactly where ttar is at the moment, but I would be very interested in knowing. Not directing the lack of statistics at you of course, but I'm sure the current statistics are rather outdated.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
After having talked to several other doubles players, we have come to the conclusion that the current timer is bad for playing doubles.
The current timer was designed so that you have enough time to play long games, but you are still forced to actually make the game progress. If you spend more than 10 seconds per move, you will eventually lose on time. This is great for singles, because these games tend to be long, yet each turn will usually take less than 10 seconds. In doubles, this is not even close to true. There is not simply twice as many options each turn, the number of options is squared, making each turn a lot longer. Furthermore, doubles games are much shorter than singles games, so the amount of extra time you are able to gain by the 10 second increments is significantly less. As a result, losing on time in doubles is a lot more common than in singles, and a lot of games enter a stage where both players are throwing out their moves due to lack of time. This is undesirable in a competitive game.
My suggestion is to change the time increment from 10 to 20 seconds. This will significantly reduce the number of matches decided by time, as well as having very little negative impact. Seeing as doubles game rarely ever passes 20 turns, this is about 3 minutes extra time added. In a tournament, this amounts to a maximum of 15 extra minutes. Considering that doubles tournaments generally finish within 2 hours, this seems like a minor issue. Of course, the exact change is up for discussion, but extra time is clearly needed.
- ErrorGlumac, Guerinf, 001 and 34 others
-
37
-
-
-
IGN: PandaJJ
-
-
VGC 2016: CaptainKek vs. BlueBreath
In 5-10mins (will post link)
- xXBlu3BreathXx and Arimanius
-
2
-
Omg, just realized this is Thursday instead of Monday this time. Ily eggu
PSL Betting Thread
in Competition Archive
Posted
50k - VGC 2016: CaptainKek vs. Telf - Taker: PandaJJ
I paid this (although the bet was actually 100k)