Banning copy moves in Contests

To start, I don't really have much expertise in Contests so I might not have the best solution or a particularly good one. All I know is that copy moves are broken, wack and ruining my contesting experience, and something should be done about that. I've said this before when it ruined my master contest from a month or two ago, but nobody seemed to care or think it was an issue, so I'm making a thing of it now.

Basically, moves like Thief and Skill Swap are OP and too easy to use for their payoff, particularly when you go third or fourth. They're not an automatic wincon or anything, but you can score a too-easy +10 off, say, an elemental punch combo that would only lend +8 on the second turn. (And you'll notice anything above +4 before combos are mostly moves with significant downside like Explosion or Brave Bird or I guess Synthesis.)

My general line of thinking is that contests were from the start a poorly designed function of the RSE games that were highly unbalanced. We all have a little fun and make some good money, so I'm not coming at the section or anything for being anything other than what it is. But we can balance it better than the games did.

Like I've said, at least a few times, to the people who actually run this section, please fix it.

 

If you look at higher rank contests, it's a common practice to outplay copy all moves with startle all moves. They're possible to counter, and the top 5 Megas are harder to beat without proper counters in the battle section than copy moves in the contest section. That said, Nervous was an initial way of countering copy moves that isn't possible with Nervous Clause, and seeing how very few people tried using Nervous moves during our experiment with them, I don't see the proper copy counter coming back.

 

While I do agree that copy moves are lame, they are a viable strategy. It's the same as using self-destruct turn 5 or teaming in an FFA. While it is an annoying strategy, clauses limiting it can be made. Though, I do not believe using phrases such as "It's fucking lame and in my opinion anybody who's ever used a copy move is a lame fucko." will convince anyone to help out and should'nt be used in Trainer's Court.

Anyways, judges have been trying to improve the section by switching up the nervous clause and I don't see any reason to do the same for copy moves.

 

I agree that unchecked copying is OP. But the traditional thing to discourage their use or at least cripple their huge power is nervous: just rely on a dice roll to force someone out of an appeal whether it would completely neuter the copier or the pokes it was planning to copy. That's why there was a huge testing period for various nervous clauses because nervous in its current form is also a bit broken.

 

I do like the idea of trying out Copy modifiers, maybe something like a reverse Aeroblast where if your copy is too low, you get nothing. Outright banning it would make combos and the like too powerful.

 

as much of a fan of more RSE mods, I think, generally, people really hate playing with modified rules.


Also it is time to move on with ORAS.

 

Two more thoughts:

-I don't think we should be afraid to ban stuff in RSE. That mode came to us heavily imbalanced, with plenty of stuff beatable but still OP. You might define OP as stuff that is unbeatable only, which isn't something I'll battle you about, but in that case we're seeing this issue very differently and I'll defer to consensus. But I do think that banning a number of stuff in RSE =/= banning everything; in fact, you might get to be able to do some more wacky things when the smaller pool of disproportionately top-level moves becomes unavailable. The same logic goes into, say, Smogon banning something like 15 mons into BL to allow UU to flourish as a tier.

-apologizing for calling yall some lame fuckos, I took out that line. Definitely this whole thread comes from anecdotal evidence, which I think is fine for a starting point but I'd love to hear if you think copy moves are beatable (and non-OP, if you define the two separately). But I do get caught up in sounding funny or edgy, which I recognize is complete BS. working on it

 

I disagree. In the same way that we left GSC and RSE behind in battling. Contests is long overdue to have a "current meta" gamemode or at least switch to ORAS/SM. So, with that, I believe that before any major changes we need to update the contests section, urgently.

 

We could do that, but I think it becomes a totally separate issue and one that's going to require a lot of work from Morru and the others so it really isn't my place to say. Besides, as flawed as RSE is, we all kinda have a good time with it, though that's not to say I don't have an issue here

 

@Nitro;

Part of the reason why we've been running attempts to modify the Nervous Clause and review Active Stats (see here and here; I've linked to BMG but there's also the same threads on PWN) was, among other things, to look for ways by which we could answer the qualms that have been raised regarding copying.

Now I personally don't believe copying is OP enough to merit an outright ban (my reasons for which I will discuss here), but it's been raised enough times that I'm open to finding solutions where those opposed and for it can meet halfway, hence the recent efforts being done in the threads I've linked above.

I'll try to respond to everything in order.

Firstly, re: the Master Contest -- Correct me if I misremember, but I believe you were in the lead with Infernape before a massive copy chain happened. The Crowd Meter was at 4, with you moving first, and with all the others having access to a copy move, the copy chain really was obviously inevitable. And yet what happened was Infernape went for the CM anyway when lowering it was the better play; none of the others had a copy move that was Beauty so there was no risk of them getting the CM instead.

This highlights one of the main reasons why I think copying does not warrant a ban: It is only strong when people enable it to be so.

I think it comes down to the fact that most coordinators consider only their own appeals rather than considering all four each turn, which frankly speaking is key to winning contests. There are times when doing your own thing regardless of the rest of the appeals wins you the ribbon - shoutout to the Froslasses out there with their Normal Beauties - but if coordinators want to place high/win consistently, they'll have to learn to consider the other players' appeals.

If you know copies are coming, play around it rather than into it. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone when it comes to having success in foiling copy chains, so it's doable. Especially when, at their core, copy moves are literally dependent on what you do...

And there's also the question of what happens if they do get banned. You mention getting to do more 'wacky things when the smaller pool of disproportionately top-level moves becomes unavailable', which may be true for battling, but I honestly don't see the same happening for contests. By their very nature contests have far less things to do than battles. If copy moves were banned, consider this: Assuming everyone played optimally, contests will very likely just be combos with finishing (+8/X) moves in Round 5. What do we do then? Why is winning via copying 'cheap' or 'lame' but winning through combos isn't?

 

I think there are definitely ways to beat copy moves, for sure. And I've been thinking more deeply into it (which, to be fair, I didn't really do in the master contest). But it still seems like they are unbalanced, and require what I see as an overly contorted strategy to deal with.

Tell me if I'm missed something here, since you definitely know better, but sending a move with a low appeal like Dragon Dance or a startle move is the best strategy to counter copy moves. Startle is great and one of the more exciting elements of Contests in my opinion, but obviously it isn't available or even all that effective if you're moving first or second. Worst than that, there's still the possibility that somebody else just blows it for you -- which can happen many different ways in Contests, but seems to have an outsized likelihood of leading to an appeal in the +5 to +10 range with little set-up and relatively little risk. I think it says a lot that even the best legal combos require a turn of lead-in to what is at most a +8 appeal, and other standalone high-appeal moves top out at +6 on top of extenuating circumstances like user position or increased startle risk. Even finishing moves "only" get you to +8, and there's just one round per contest where they can really be used in.

I don't think copy moves are impossible to beat, and I've seen that even more since I raised this issue for the first time. But I still think -- subjectively, sure, but after careful thought -- that they're still just disproportionate to the rest of the game. (For the sake of having a reference point, I think even Nervous leads to better competition than copy moves, although yes the one was designed to counter the other and yes Nervous is better off as its own separate discussion.)

With combo moves, the great variety of startle moves (again, the most exciting element of Contest play to me, and the one I think people will/should lean into if copy is neutered) and possibly a reintroduction of Nervous with modified odds, I think you'd have a perfectly fine thing going on. But idk. It also matters to me how many others see that this is as much of a problem as I do.

 

Personally I feel like copy moves are OP at beginner/intermediate levels of play but people who predict other player's moves and play at a much higher level than I do can consistently beat the copying strategies. I think that contests are a lot more complex than most people realise and the fact that copy moves are so prevalent now will only drive higher levels of play.

At master rank, +4/+4 combos, nervousness spam, obvious appeal combo plays and copy moves still have their place, but should be situational rather than a win factor - which is what the people who manage to win consistently at the higher levels use to their advantage. I love that more diverse strategies and combinations are seeing use in the last few months and I feel like these conversations really help to show how much the contest metagame is evolving. As it stands now though, I think that they aren't OP but definitely still are very valuable moves to have!

 

Of course you can mess up a Copy, the same way you can mess up a Nervous. Nothing is flawless, but the thing about Copying moves is that they often give a high score for very low risk. And when I say high score I'm talking about Copy-Half moves that earn easy +8s without the risk of getting startled or further copied. The only moves that do that are Random moves, which often lead to more failures than success, and End moves which can only be used on Round 5.

What are you gonna do? Jam everyone in front of you so the copy'er will get a lower score? It will still get a higher score, since Jams have a low appeal, and the copy'er only needs 2 hearts from each one in order to rack a +4 in the end (already acounting for the base +1). And if it does mess up, it can still make a comeback by doing the same thing some Rounds later. It happened a few times before. So you sacrifice yourself for the slim chance of ruinning it for one of the coordinators, like the last contest I was in where I startled everyone multiple times and copy still won. If you're gonna counter a Copy-Half move, you can't do it alone. For Copy-Target moves, you can purposedly use a low appeal move to screw up the copy'er after you, but you'll fall behind by doing that, since the others will catch up. I also don't know of any category of moves besides copies that can be used twice in a row and still work.

The most effective counter for copies is Nervous, and the simple fact that those moves are around is enough to make people think twice before copying, even if no one uses them. Even if you manage to avoid nervous, you need the others to also avoid it, otherwise you get nothing.
But Nervous was considered broken and was banned because of that, even though it didn't lead to as many wins as copies do. Problem with Nervous is that there's no counter for it, since they act before you can even move. You can just use Condition Round 1 and hope for those 50%, which is still a high chance. It's also heavily RNG based, which people never like.
There enters Active Stats, which offer direct counters to Nervous. 3 of them, to be precise: Cool, Cute and Tough. It also should make Jams more powerful since that's the con of 4 of the 5 Stats, which in turn should counter copying, but no one seems to be willing to use Jams so far, which I'll see if it changes with a Smart or Tough contests, since those are kind of the "home" for Jams. But I guess we'll also need to put some direct Copy-counter on Stats aswell, and I already have the idea for it.

 

Logs + observations from today, might edit more from the last few days later.

Spoiler

Charizard combo'd a startle move, was type effective (Cool) on Gnocchi the Alolan Raichu, and Mr. Mime used a condition move
Gengar's copy move still scored +5 to tie Charizard who put in the additional work of combo set-up -- and it would've been the highest appeal if Charizard didn't land a type effective startle or Mr. Mime chose anything other than condition

[2:03 PM] Juliorain: Gnocchi appealed with Swift! +2
[2:03 PM] Juliorain: It appealed first! +4
[2:03 PM] Juliorain: ITs coolness was unsettling…
[2:03 PM] Juliorain: CM = 0
[2:04 PM] Juliorain: Bruno the Mr. Mime appealed with Nasty Plot! +1
[2:04 PM] Juliorain: Its condition rose above normal!
[2:04 PM] Juliorain: What a patootie! +1
[2:04 PM] Juliorain: CM = 1
[2:04 PM] Juliorain: Yonge the Charizard appealed with Dragon Claw! +2
[2:05 PM] Juliorain: It startled the others!
[2:05 PM] Juliorain: Alolachu - 4
[2:05 PM] Juliorain: Mime -2
[2:05 PM] Juliorain: It comboed well! +2
[2:05 PM] Juliorain: Charizard shined! +1
[2:05 PM] Juliorain: Its coolness was unsettling...
[2:05 PM] Juliorain: CM = 0
[2:06 PM] Juliorain: Edgy Clefable the Gengar appealed with Skill Swap! +1
[2:06 PM] Juliorain: Copy copy! +3
[2:06 PM] Juliorain: It shined! +1

Spoiler

With a +9 lead over Eevee heading into the final round, I used a low-appeal move to defend against copy. Obviously others had the advantage of access to finishing moves, but Eevee was able to score even higher than that off copy and only the repeat appeal stopped it from tying first.
[7:52 PM] Juliorain: damisa-sarki the slowking appealed with Protect +1
It became oblivious to the others!
Its kyuuuteness was great! +1
CM =1
Clefabl appealed with Healing Wish! +8
It can no longer participate!
It was cute tho... +1
CM = 2
[7:52 PM] Juliorain: Cleffa appealed with COpycat! +1
[7:52 PM] Juliorain: Copy copy +9
[7:53 PM] Juliorain: CM = 1
[7:53 PM] Juliorain: Eevee appealed with Covet! +1
[7:53 PM] Juliorain: COpy copy! +10
[7:53 PM] Juliorain: Repeat appeal -2

Spoiler

Charizard won by 3, only because Gengar landed a doubled direct Jam while using a repeat appeal. See DeKrueger quote below.

[2:31 PM] Juliorain: Yonge the Charizard appealed with Dragon Rush! +2
[2:31 PM] Juliorain: first! +4
[2:31 PM] Juliorain: Shined brightly! +2
[2:31 PM] Juliorain: coolness was booed...
[2:31 PM] Juliorain: CM = 2
[2:31 PM] Juliorain: Gnocchi appealed with Wild Charge! +6
[2:31 PM] Juliorain: It became more aware of the others!
[2:31 PM] Juliorain: coolness was booed...
[2:32 PM] Juliorain: CM = 1
[2:32 PM] Juliorain: Edgy Clefable the Gengar appealed with Lick! +1
[2:32 PM] Juliorain: It startled the others!
[2:32 PM] Juliorain: Raichu -8
[2:33 PM] Juliorain: Star! +1
Crowd was disappointed with the repeat appeal -2
[2:33 PM] Juliorain: Bruno appealed with Role Play! +1
[2:33 PM] Juliorain: Copy copy! +3
[2:33 PM] Juliorain: Stars! +2
[2:34 PM] Juliorain: IT was cute!
[2:34 PM] Juliorain: CM = 2

Your point of Contests of not being a race to the finish line is a really good one that kinda defines good versus elite contesters, but I still think that many of the things that Contests try to reward or disparage (Jam, repeats, moves like Double-Edge or Destiny Bond, yes even combos) are thrown off by how good copy moves are. You could see it as a counter to certain things, but I see it as undermining the entire system.

It feels like there are far too many scenarios where making the effort to counter somebody's copy is eventually also a forfeit. I also like Haillys' point that Jam becomes much better when you don't have to worry about keeping up with copy.

see spoiler 3
[2:44 PM] DeKrueger: I think copying was played around just fine without [Nervous Clause] though
[2:46 PM] DeKrueger: You just gotta tear yourself down and take someone with you :^)

 

By "having success in foiling copy chains" I meant doing just that and also winning the contest, so the approach summed up by DeKrueger's quote is a whole different animal.

If you are startling those in front of you in an attempt to lower the copy scores without keeping in mind your own total and those of the copiers, then that's what you're getting wrong. In some Rounds you just have to accept that they will either outscore or tie with you, so it's on you to outdo them in the next. There is methodical startling, and then there's just startling to spite the copiers (which, as demonstrated, is more often ineffective than not). I also question which kind of startling moves people use; in the several contests I've judged, coordinators seem to miss that the best startling moves to use in this situation are those that halve appeals (e.g. Super Fang and its ilk).

As for the go-to method of combating copying, there's more to it than sending moves with low appeals or startling. I personally take a preemptive approach to it, and try to make sure I'm never in a situation where I'd be allowing them to score off big from my appeals. Copy moves are at their best when used at Position 4, which is why moves that set the user to this Position are valuable. So why not use the same moves to oust them from advantageous positions?

I'm still unconvinced that copy moves are OP, but if there's one thing I can say about them it's that they're warping. You have to be careful of your appeals when they're present, but I don't see this as grounds for a ban, and instead view planning counterplays as something to be encouraged.

I almost feel like bringing up the matter of why you don't use copying moves of your own, and if the excuse is not all Pokémon get them, well, not every Pokémon is viable, even in contests, so there's that.

In any case:
I don't think we're in any position to impose drastic changes to contest dynamics just yet. We're still internalizing what we've learned from the Nervous Trials, and the testing on Active Stats has only recently begun.

On this note, I do feel there's something to be gained if we were to start testing modifications on Copy moves directly, so that's something to watch out for.

 

Nitro, while I admire your efforts towards finding examples that defend your point, I don't think your examples really do so and instead highlight other problems that I'd like to address. I don't have the time right now to address all of your points so I'll just address your first, and perhaps get to your others after work tonight.

I'm going to explain this example with lots of numbers so that you can hopefully see how the copy-all was beaten in this instance, so bear with me. The Charizard's Dragon Claw combo is the perfect example of some of the points Morru was trying to raise in regards to pre-emptive planning and it was a really good play. Single handedly, it thwarted the copy-all move coming from the last place - it brought down everyone else's score while still scoring high itself with the well set up combo. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this example was meant to highlight how strong and safe the combo it is, and how "highly" it scored even when it was worked against, but this isn't what has happened.

The safety comes from being in last place, a position which can almost guarantee that you can get away with whatever you want without repercussions. The copy scored 5 hearts, with one of those coming from a Condition Star which would've existed no matter which move was used. The copy-all scoring 4 points only matches the standard (+4) moves that most Pokemon have access to, so the argument that it was still "strong" doesn't really go. Using a matching attribute standard (+4) move would have scored higher than the copy-all did, with +1 from crowd and then +1 from the star. Using any position 4 move (+6) would have scored higher than the copy, with it scoring +7 from the star or even +8 if it matched the attribute.

This is the perfect example of the copy-all being outplayed, because in the safety of the position 4, Gengar could have scored a completely untouchable +8 by using Facade, or even a +7 using a Dark Pulse. But instead of using these safe, high scoring moves, it took the huge risk of the copy-all to try and score higher than +8, and it failed. Gengar took the risk to try and score higher than a completely safe +7/+8, and the Charizard's startle shut it down along with the other's appeals, singlehandedly. The argument of "Even though the copy-all was 'beaten', it still scored tied first for the round" doesn't go when Gengar could have very easily scored higher by using a very safe position 4 move, and the same results would've happened but with Gengar clearly in the lead for that turn. Position 4 is a very lucrative position where you're very safe, and I want to stress that. You get this powerful position for either scoring the lowest last turn or deliberately putting yourself there with a Go Last move like Trick Room. Using a copy move actually throws away that safety, and once again puts your own score into the hands of the other players. It's a risk, sometimes it can pay off, in this case. It was not worth using at all. I hope this helps you understand a little better.

 

That's a great point, re: position 4 being the lucrative position. I think access to +6 position 4 moves like Facade or safety with risk moves like Flare Blitz, without the possibility of Jam in any case, is plenty lucrative enough, but yeah. I see what you're saying and it throws much of what I'm thinking upside down.

What upset me then was that even in the case that copy was played pretty dang close to perfectly, it still finished with a strong appeal relative to that specific round, while also representing the low range of appeal possibilities in that case. It's the risk/reward of it that frustrates me. If copy was played against even a little less effectively by any one of the participants, it could've easily scored higher. A steady +6 from Facade is one thing, but when copy can get you +4 while being played well against, and +6 or much, much more than that with just a little more luck... it almost becomes too hard to play against without a complete field of very good participants all watching out for it.

It's like, the best you can do is tie it, and even if that's one way to pull out a win, it still has ramifications across the standings. Lucrative is one thing, but I feel like copy often pushes the bounds on that.

Purely personal decision because I don't like it -- like, say, using Mega Venusaur instead of Mega Lucario (or whatever you consider the runaway Mega as). If you can't beat copy without using copy, I'd say that's grounds for OP. But I'm aware that it is possible, so that theoretical point doesn't completely apply.

Anyway, I'll drop the case here since the last few rebuttals have been really really really clarifying and I've spoken my bit anyway. I still would prefer some kind of nerf, like halving all copy appeals (again) so they become low risk and low reward as opposed to low/high, but I think it's becoming clear that I'm in the minority. Nervous will have a beneficial effect against copy overall, so unless somebody else wants to back me up with a compelling and yet to be made point, I guess just keep me in mind is all I'm saying for now.

 

Perhaps maybe modifying nervousness rates to 20% for position 2, 40% for position 3 and 60% for position 4 would shift the favour of position 4 and copy moves in one, but if the nervousness clause is already settled then maybe there are other areas to look at it!

 

I'm still in favor of returning Nervousness, both as an answer to copying move (double risk because you get screwed if the person/people ahead of you are nervous) and to make position four not untouchable. I am not against a modified Nervous Clause, but that would involve a lot more discussion about the data gathered from the trials (and possibly some hypotheticals about things not tested).

I really do not want to keep banning "the best thing". I'm afraid it will lead to a slippery slope of "Oops, now Combos are OP, better ban them" and so on. Honestly, I feel like the only clauses that should exist are OP Combo Clause (potentially tuned down a bit, but absolutely with Curse + Spite/Grudge and Curse/Mean Look/Endure + Destiny Bond, as it was almost impossible to win without a DBond combo before that) and GB Clause (while I'm not a fan of it, it is an exact battle clause that carries over perfectly and makes equal sense in both). Stat options are also fine to keep. But this is my personal opinion and may not reflect the view of the Chief Judges.

 

Why are we still on RSE?

Does ORAS adresse the issue if copying moves?