Rule for PVP

[Gamerseignvs]

@Belzebel @yakuzacamel @GamerseignVs @Madtrainer @darkblader12 @DaraChan @Pedrawr @Sleazer @Nechrit @eltyyy @Chalzon @navneeth @NamelessHero27 @PerfectMistake @Meen2 @johncampita211 @teerav @JorgeMape @Ta7esh @vikky90 @GeoMine @Euripides @Jazlan94 @KenjiSetou6969 @CobraMK @TeamRocketBoss @CAPTAINCOD1 @Fjabio [uSER=1408519]@Blacck[/uSER] [uSER=2291879]@Duerenkran[/uSER] | Tagged every user who commented or liked any of the previous posts

---

I am Qeight, the Moderator Team Leader and in charge of most changes that would have an effect on the way my team enforces rules. We do consider most proposals, look at the positives and negatives of a possible change and make decisions accordingly. The same happened here hence I took some time to reply.

 

No, this is how normal proposals work. We consider everything and make a decision based on that.

 

Yes, the same way any suggestion from you would be taken seriously. It would annoy you as well if you were instantly disregarded when you make a proposal, so I kindly ask you to stop with that sarcastic tone. This isn't the first time, if you have nothing productive to contribute to a discussion please do not comment at all.

---

Onto the proposal, I believe there is a big misconception on what the proposal actually is. It's not banning PP stalling, it's banning intentionally PP stalling. Let me set the scene for a clearer understanding. It's a 1 v 1, Player A only has Scizor left.

• Payer A's Scizor with Choice Band used Bullet Punch
  - 252+ Atk Choice Band Technician Scizor Bullet Punch vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Mew on a critical hit: 175-207 (43.3 - 51.2%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Leftovers recovery
  
• Player B's Mew used Barrier.
  
• Payer A's Scizor with Choice Band used Bullet Punch
  - 252+ Atk Choice Band Technician Scizor Bullet Punch vs. +2 252 HP / 252+ Def Mew: 58-70 (14.3 - 17.3%) -- possible 9HKO after Leftovers recovery
  
• Player B's Mew used Soft-boiled
  
• Payer A's Scizor with Choice Band used Bullet Punch
  - 252+ Atk Choice Band Technician Scizor Bullet Punch vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Mew on a critical hit: 175-207 (43.3 - 51.2%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Leftovers recovery
  
• Player B's Mew used Barrier.
  
• Payer A's Scizor with Choice Band used Bullet Punch
  252+ Atk Choice Band Technician Scizor Bullet Punch vs. +4 252 HP / 252+ Def Mew: 40-48 (9.9 - 11.8%) -- possibly the worst move ever
  
• etc..
  

At this rate the Mew can not be killed, even with critical hits. There is no way for Scizor to win this match-up however let's pretend the Scizor is at 10% HP. The Mew can simply use an attacking move to end the battle but instead chooses to use Barrier and Soft-boiled over and over and over again. The sole intention here is to waste time, this is currently allowed within the rules hence why we considered the proposal but this proved itself very difficult to actually write down.

The issues we faced were: We would be assuming intentions by enforcing such rule as we can not know for certain the user had an attacking move in their move set (at least not at a 100% rate due to server limitations) and if he had we would require video evidence of the ENTIRE match to look through if the user has enough PP or used them all. This proved itself very difficult, time consuming and simply not practical as a rule. Therefore the conclusion is that the rule stays untouched and remains the way it is written down.

 

---

 

I sadly have to inform you that majority of time-stalling reports are null and disregarded because users' do not know what time stalling is or have no video evidence to back up their claims. That is the reality of things. In my time as staff I enforced this rule three times in total.

 

 

 

The above example explains exactly what you are misunderstanding. There is no way for you to win the match and then the PP stalling happens.

It's not a matter of if they are winning, they have the win 100% (if no disconnects occur).

 

The same thing I told to eltyyy, if you have nothing productive to contribute to the conversation please do not comment.

 

This was ultimately one of the deciding factors against a rule change as this happened to me more than once on my player account.

 

Another deciding factor on why the change would be a bad idea.

 

 

 

 

Yes a Forfeit button would solve the issue but that's not the grand subject here. If you want to make more suggestions about it feel free to do so but as Teerav pointed out this has already been done enough. If the Devs want to do it they can, it is solely up to them.

 

If Moderators get the correct and working tools to moderate these things then I wouldn't see an issue with a Forfeit button.

---

Alright this is it from me, if you have more concerns feel free to comment again. :)

 

Kind regards,

Q8

yes there is when u win that pp stalling match when your opponent starts struggling or both of you struggling i could careless about stall, all i am saying is that not a rule that makes sense

[Gamerseignvs]

If we are talking about pp/ stalling why cant we ban conkeldurr