Double Battling

[rory]

With the release of ShoddyBattle 2 will come the ability for everyone to efficiently test and play double battles. This opens up a whole new arena of competitive battling to explore. Many are familiar with Nintendo's Video Game Challenge (VGC), but for those of you who aren't, it is a series of tournaments held around the world for Pokemon Platinum. As exciting as it may sound to have a metagame that is supported by Nintendo, it does have some major flaws. The most glaring flaw for those who are used to single battles is the lack of sleep, evasion and hax item clauses. This means that people can abuse moves like double team or dark void (on smeargle) to incapacitate half of your (four Pokemon) team. There are obviously ways to counter this using abilities, moves and items, but this, the four pokemon limit, and the restrictive banlist severely limits creative teambuilding

That being said it would be ludicrous for Smogon not to support the metagame provided by Nintendo, so I propose the following: Smogon should work to create its own "standard" doubles metagame while still supporting the VGC with articles and/or analyses. The most logical format for our new metagame would be doubles with six Pokemon on each team. This widens the possibilities of teams and combos, and allows more room on your team to counter certain threats. We would need to find a logical ban list that doesn't ban usable, but not overpowered Pokemon like Nintendo's does.

To do all the aforementioned tasks Tangerine has (in IRC) asked me if I would like to put together a team to prepare for the release of Shoddy Battle 2, so that when it comes out we will be quick to test things out, fine tune our metagame and begin creating articles and/or analyses for double battling. If you are interested in being a part of this team please state that in a reply to this thread (or a PM to me). You can tell of your experience double battling, or just give your opinion on the project as a whole.

 

[scampy]

I would like to be a part of this. : )

I have a lot of experience with double battles (I can't claim to have won any official tournaments, sucks to live in England for this), having played them since RSE, and am certainly interested in helping out here. We really need a solid double battle metagame not founded on absurd rules such as the banning of Rotom.

This is probably going to need an alternative approach to how we currently handle researching the singles metagame, if it's going to work. The way we write articles, and how we decide tiers, will be drastically different from what I can see.

 

[DJ Forte]

I would love to try this. I might have some technical difficulties at first. The double battle metagame really has no standards and I think it would be a good thing for smogon to start. If you have a little patience I could probably help test at first then later right articles, and make a name for me on smogon.

 

[rory]

After reading this thread, it's fairly obvious that once sb2 comes out we will be expanding do include doubles, and the only thing holding us back is the lack of a proper simulator.

EDIT: also thanks for taking the time to advertise your site

 

[DJ Forte]

So about how many people are you going need for this. As I said before I would love to do this.

 

[rory]

I'm not exactly sure at the moment, I'm just going to see how many people are interested first.

 

[Quantum]

I would like to be a part of this. :]

My experience with double battling goes back to the RSE era and I have been playing ever since. While I prefer standard doubles (6v6), the VGC format has grown on me and I play it frequently but I am far from satisfied with its rules and ban list.

I'm very interested in helping out with this. Doubles is a very diverse though largely unknown metagame-you could almost say it is the final frontier of competitive battling.

 

[makiri]

I personally love double battling more than singles for this generation, I do have lots of experience in the VGC rule set, and there are things to be improved upon. Creating this new metagame should be a fun and challenging experience for me.

 

[Caelum]

What are you doing in the mean-time prior to the release of shoddy battle 2 or a suitable double-battle simulation (SB2 won't be out for several months). I'm assuming from the OP that you were put in charge for whatever this sub-forum is designed to do and I'm confused what exactly is the purpose since it was agreed upon by myself, Misty, and Aeolus that proper analysis for the double battle metagame weren't suitable at this time due to the lack of a proper simulator in the Suggestions Box thread.

You can't establish proper analysis, a proper metagame, or a proper banlist without a suitable simulator (Netbattle doesn't even have single-game mechanics right, let alone double battle). In essence, what is this project intending to accomplish prior to a suitable simulator?

I'm fine with a thread for recruiting, but I'm asking what this entire forum is for?

 

[False [old]]

I am both interested in this project and eager to help if needed. Creating a metagame for 2v2 poses some interesting problems; for example, when writing an analysis for a pokemon, how do you present sets for it? We could talk about how great Feargle is, but without the right partner, he doesn't really do much.

There are a few ways we can solve this;

1) In the description of each set we can just mention in passing the kind of pokemon that work well with the given set; Pokemon that need to set up Trick Room work well with Feargle, for example.

2) We present each and every set as involving two pokemon; Smeargle and Dusknoir would be presented together as a Lead set, in this case. The set could be added to both Smeargle and Dusknoir's pages. The problem with this solution is that while it's important to make sure two pokemon work well together, they don't always get the chance to stick together.

Those are the two extremes, as far as I can tell.

 

[Mosquito]

I'd be able to help on this project (if I have time). I have a lot raw ideas and teams collected over the past 9 months of my preparation for VGS '09, and these ideas can be posted here and refined.

For the analysi problem, my suggestion is to have entire team archetypes as analysi. While this will benefit everyone in the fact that the best teams possible will be found, it will destroy the concept of team building. Unlike how people steal teams, having teams as analysi will mean that main that variant of a team will exist. It, however, allows forstrong teams to be made and modified to near perfection.

 

[cim]

No, it won't destroy the concept of team building. I don't see why making people figure out the same things everyone has to figure out for themselves will do anything when we could write it down and be helpful.

 

[Shelcario]

I'd be interested in doing this little project but, I don't have that much experience in doubles if that's ok?

 

[rory]

What are you doing in the mean-time prior to the release of shoddy battle 2 or a suitable double-battle simulation (SB2 won't be out for several months). I'm assuming from the OP that you were put in charge for whatever this sub-forum is designed to do and I'm confused what exactly is the purpose since it was agreed upon by myself, Misty, and Aeolus that proper analysis for the double battle metagame weren't suitable at this time due to the lack of a proper simulator in the Suggestions Box thread.

You can't establish proper analysis, a proper metagame, or a proper banlist without a suitable simulator (Netbattle doesn't even have single-game mechanics right, let alone double battle). In essence, what is this project intending to accomplish prior to a suitable simulator?

I'm fine with a thread for recruiting, but I'm asking what this entire forum is for?

Well for starters, while it won't be possible to finalize a metagame, we are definitely going to need somewhere to start for when sb2 comes out. It would be ideal for us to have a doubles ladder set up at least for testing right when sb2 comes out, which means we'll at least need a conservative banlist / ruleset, meaning barely anything will be banned. We also need to discuss stuff such as the format for articles / analyses as it will surely be drastically different than the singles analyses. Misty made this subforum so we can discuss such things. Without the lack of simulator we won't be able to make any big advancements or write articles or anything, but we still have to prepare.

 

[pkmn-taicho321]

I've got a tons of time and I can finally use shoddy battle at home, hopefully even more so when shoddy2 makes it's debut, so I'd love to help.

 

[VashTheStampede]

This is excellent. I can not claim to have much experience with Doubles, however it is, IMHO, so much more enjoyable then Singles ever was, especially the fast pace and the mind-games with moves like Explosion and Protect. I will help out with the project if asked, but I would understand if I was denied, due to my lack of experience.

 

[Caelum]

Don't even bother replying if you don't have double battles experience. Your enthusiasm is nice, but we want people who know what they are talking about.

Well for starters, while it won't be possible to finalize a metagame, we are definitely going to need somewhere to start for when sb2 comes out. It would be ideal for us to have a doubles ladder set up at least for testing right when sb2 comes out, which means we'll at least need a conservative banlist / ruleset, meaning barely anything will be banned. We also need to discuss stuff such as the format for articles / analyses as it will surely be drastically different than the singles analyses. Misty made this subforum so we can discuss such things. Without the lack of simulator we won't be able to make any big advancements or write articles or anything, but we still have to prepare.

I was under the impression Misty was opposed to this exploration given the fact he stated several times in the Suggestions Box thread that without a simulator we couldn't even go anywhere.

Anyway, the ladder thing is entirely in Doug's realm and you'll obviously just not ban anything besides the obvious ubers.

I don't see how the analysis would be written differently, all you would have to do is create a 2v2 page (possibly a tab near the Strategy tab) and just list sets like we normally do accompanied by common strategies and pairs for that particular Pokemon. Easily work like [SET] + [PARTNER SET] or just use set comments to talk about good partners. Also, a general strategy discussion for how to use that Pokemon in Doubles would be great.

I assumed there was a greater goal to this forum for the time being since it seemed silly having an entire forum that will have to sit around for months cluttering up C&Cs already cluttered sub-forums when this could be done in 2-3 threads which is why I asked; it was mostly so I would know what the purpose of this forum is for the time being.

edit: You don't have to reply to my last part about the sub-forum business. That's just whatever.

edit 2: I don't know why I'm being randomly hostile, just take what a said and tune it down 2 notches.

 

[rory]

I see your point on the cluttered C&Cs, but it's not like I'm in any position to do anything about it :P

Also, do you think it would make sense for us to include the fixing of moves etc, in the scope of this project? It doesn't really make sense for us to have two separate doubles projects going on at the same time.

What I meant by the format of articles and analyses was that for doubles you really need to have specific articles about different teams and strategies, and we'd need to decide on the format for such articles. It's not going to be terribly hard but we just have to get a consistent format that will probably include stuff like what Pokemon work well in the team, or what types of things counter it.

 

[Caelum]

I see your point on the cluttered C&Cs, but it's not like I'm in any position to do anything about it :P

Also, do you think it would make sense for us to include the fixing of moves etc, in the scope of this project? It doesn't really make sense for us to have two separate doubles projects going on at the same time.

What I meant by the format of articles and analyses was that for doubles you really need to have specific articles about different teams and strategies, and we'd need to decide on the format for such articles. It's not going to be terribly hard but we just have to get a consistent format that will probably include stuff like what Pokemon work well in the team, or what types of things counter it.

Read my edit notices for the first comments (and my 2nd edit just for general stuff).

On the move stuff, I just moved the 2 v 2 move thread I started. I did the A,B and some C moves (and I'm planning to do some more, but it's a lot for just me).

You can make separate threads about whatever other issues there are regarding tiering, rules etc whenever (mine as well put the forum to use while it's here). I'd prefer they were separate threads and not just all bunched together in this thread.

 

[rory]

Ok I'll get to work on that, thanks for your support.

 

[ungulateman]

I'd like to help the project. While it's clearly in the theorymon stage, I think I can contribute in a fashion.

 

[Havak]

I'll obviously be helping with this :)

While I support it in its entirety, I'm not sure if we can really acheive that much without proper testing. I mean, we'd probably be best to just roll with what we call standard rules (for single battles) in double battles. But at the same time, having no sleep clause etc in doubles could be argued upon. Although, for the most part, it's only making Dark Void Smeargle a bit less viable. We don't need to cater for just Smeargle, do we? Anyway, that's probably a discussion for another thread, like Caelum suggested.

In reply to the post you made on my upcoming revamp of an old double battle article, I'm not really sure what you meant..

Ok, Tangerine and I seem to have completely missed this thread when discussing what to do about Smogon's lack of doubles content. While I find it admirable that you are taking action in the right direction, I find the scope of your project extremely underwhelming. In this post I outline the basics of what I have planned for doubles in Smogon since Tangerine said I could find others interested in the project. Since you've already got a head start on this, I would like to see what you think about what I have planned out.

This article is completely different really...

All it's doing is discussing the common strategies in double battles, how to play with them, against them, what they are, what Pokémon can do them, and what Pokémon can do them best etc. At least, that's my plan when revamping anyway. A lot of the content in the article is still useful.

 

[Revolution.Z]

Ill help with this why not. A bit late perhaps but still im keen to get involved and I hopefully will be able to help out. I also have a good experience in the 2v2 environment

 

[crobatchop]

Should There is room for me, it would certainly be a pleasure for me to help testing this.

 

[RedSpyda]

I would like to help. i mainly play 2vs2 as playing standard 6on6 has gotten boring and its exciting to know everybody is on the same page about doubles