Phaze Clause

Phaze moves are moves like Roar, Whirlwind, Dragon Tail, and Circle Throw.

I'm just curious to see what everyone else thinks about it. We have Accuracy and Evasion Clauses, so why not?

 

I like this. Under this clause could Dragon Tail for example still cause damage but just not have the resulting effect?

 

I think they still should. On Serperior, for example, Dragon Tail is a viable attacking move.

 

I don't really think this is the best idea. Roar and the like are pretty much there as a counter and check to sweeps and annoying teams that baton pass from mon to mon. If you enter a 4v4+ match with someone and this clause is on, and they have something sweeping that you don't have a direct counter to, Roaring away their boosts might be your only option. And Dragon Tail without its effect is essentially a less accurate, physical Dragonbreath, and when is the last time that was used in a serious battle? Accuracy and Evasion got clauses because they're not considered fair by most, and there's no strategy involved in using them. Phazing is legitimate for getting rid of problem mons and allowing yourself more time to get a counter for them.

I realize that it IS pretty annoying if someone is spamming, but they're decreased priority which allows you to Taunt or attack before they can get their move off, so phazing itself is already pretty easy to counter. A fast mon with an acc/eva move however, is not always.

 

A phaze in DPPt is worse than a KO, and nine times out of ten its not used to stop sweeps, just used when people don't know what else to do. If you want to use it, then don't agree to the clause.

And for the record, I think phazing is perfectly acceptable in Revo.

EDIT: We wonder why outsiders look down on the URPG, but then officials go and post pictures like that in a serious thread.

 

Why does everyone think the rest of BMG looks down on us ;-; Everyone I've talked to has been perfectly polite and seems to have no negative opinions towards us.

Anyways, I don't know enough about battling mechanics to really argue, but I remember battling Kai back when she had Water Dojo and she roar'd out my Clamperl in DPPT. Maybe this clause could only be used with DPPT or something.

 

There would be a few problems, but only a few.

Would Dragon Tail still have its low priority. If it did there would be few uses for it.

 

Sure! Heck, while we're at it, why not also put in a Paralysis Clause - it really irritates me, and I can't be bothered to counter it myself. Ooh, and I'm also pretty annoyed when people stop me using Sub and other non-attacking moves - can we implement a Taunt Clause? In fact, why not just have "Battle Clause - battles are disallowed because of their unfairness"?

lrn2counter.

Serious notes: Like Roulette said, phasing moves are self-penalising because of their low priority, and except for a few cases, it doesn't end up in the battle relying on hax/luck (unlike ACC and EVA moves).

 

Implying Accuracy and Evasion aren't more easily countered than phazing is. Not luck related? Is that serious? So its not luck if my Rotom-W gets dragged out against an Infernape? Its not bad luck if my permabasic gets dragged out?

Not only that, but you are so immature PichuBoy. God forbid someone tries to have an opinion, you people will just talk down to them. Great atmosphere for keeping members. Applaud yourself. But thats not just you, theres a ton of members like that.

 

I don't think anyone is getting mad at URPG if we post pics in our threads >_>

But MK is right. If we put a clause on every type of move that people don't like, pretty soon we'll have a clause for everything that isn't an attacking move. And you say "don't agree to it", but that isn't the case in a gym or E4 battle where leaders make the rules. If a leader has a team that focuses heavily on baton passing and statting up, people are going to have a difficult time beating them.

Pokemon like Espeon would become completely broken in this clause, since you could pass huge defs/speed/attack bonuses to it and couldn't even par or cripple it to slow it down. Dragon Tail is about the only counter to a boosted, sweeping espeon, and if you cut that out it would just run rampant. Also, it's been known to all that you keep a permabasic in your stats at your own risk. I've had it roared out before and it sucks, but I'm willing to risk the 1/65 chance. But anyway, I don't see how this is such a huge problem that it needs a clause. Normally clauses are reserved for broken aspects of the game, and I don't feel like phazing moves are. Dragon Tail/Circle throw aren't learned by a whole hell of a lot of mons, and Roar/Whirlwind are Tauntable and usually somewhat predictable.

 

Well yeah, leaders are supposed to have the advantage. Thats why there are Ice-type leaders who turn off the Freeze Clause.

By the way, phazing isn't the only way to stop a sweep. You could stop them statting up in the first place. If someone is able to stat up on you, then they outsmarted you. Phazing them out is a cheap and coward move, and it is broken.

 

I'm not sure how it's broken. They're guaranteed to go last, the damaging moves are nerfed by the small amount of mons that learn them, and the others can be taunted. Broken = not having a counter, and there are plenty of things that counter this problem. In no way does this warrant something as major as a clause being added. If you don't do enough to prevent being phazed out, then YOU aren't doing your job as a battler and didn't "outsmart" your opponent enough.

 

Not 100% true, it takes no skill or smarts whatsoever to get a sweep going using a Blaziken.

This doesn't really bother me, if it's implemented and people don't want to battle using it then they just don't turn it on.

 

Let me get this straight.

Clause worthy = broken
broken = no counter

So you're telling me that accuracy and evasion are harder to counter than phazing? Please do explain.

 

I wouldn't MIND having this clause for DPPT but other than that I have no strong feelings one way or the other. Let's all try to be courteous and tone it down. I don't think this is an issue that's importance needs to be inflated to the point where it's going to upset people.

 

I would agree with this if it wasn't for Gym Leaders being able to use it. Types with multiple passers would just wreak havoc with this clause on, which would make it more broken than it was before the clause was implemented.

Jolteon is one of the fastest mons in the game. It learns Sand Attack naturally. If you send it in against something slower, you can use Sand Attack first turn to get the acc down to 75% (on a 100% acc move, mind you). That kind of acc would be considered bad on most moves, and it's a 1/4 chance of missing. If you miss the first turn or even don't OHKO the Jolteon, that's even more opportunities to get your acc down. Then if you do manage to KO the Jolteon, the next mon that replaces it has an advantage because you still have Acc-2 or 3. You can switch out, but that in turn gives your opponent a chance to boost their stats.

 

As a Gym Leader, I would not want the Clause in effect, since that's how I personally stop stat ups a lot of the time. But yeah, I don't think it's that great of an idea in other gyms or battles either.

I would have to say no to having this clause. There are ways around phasing.

 

Maybe something that makes it so a basic is optional if it's chosen in DPPt? (and if that happens, then if the mon is refused it can't be brought into the battle later; you've already said you basically don't have it in the battle.) The only real problem I see is the DPPt issues with basics, and that would deal with that without utterly ruining the moves for strategic purposes.

 

You're talking to me about talking down to people having an opinion? The person that everyone hated for about 2 weeks FOR being vocal about their opinion? Do your research, please. I posted my immature side, then gave my serious points. What's the problem with that?

Accuracy and Evasion are less easily countered, because they have no drawback for the user. If you send out a fast mon, there is next to NOTHING the opponent can do to not guarantee an acc drop or eva boost, except for maybe Protect, but all that does is delay at best. Phasing has a low priority, so all it takes is for you to use some skill and predict they're going to phase, and Taunt them. Whereas, if you're hit by an Acc dropping move, or they raise their Eva, it's extremely hard to reverse it.

Anyway, I said that's why it's MOSTLY not based on bad luck. Even so, there's nothing stopping you switching back out again. Failing Taunt, possibly Torment to stop Dragon Tail spam? Teach them to your mons and Imprison? So many counters.

 

Yeah, if we ruled Basics out of being phazed out that would be fine. I think that's fair enough, since most basics have 0% chance of winning, while other Pokemon at least have a shot.

In my head I just saw you do that thing where you sashay with your fingers in the shape of a 'Z'. It was the best moment of my day.

Uh, but seriously, let's just everybody chill out. This isn't a thread about that, it's about this clause, so erm. Yeah.

Anyways, I'm all for Siless' idea.