Gen V Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

[Linkachu]

The Gen V Doubles Rules will spread to our Triples rules as well. Originally we were basing them off the VGC11 ruleset, but many alterations have been made to suit our needs. Here's what we've got:

- No Pokemon of the same species in one team.
- All hold items must be unique.
- The move Sky Drop is banned from use due to a game-breaking glitch.
- The Fair Play Clause is in effect: if a player uses Explosion, Self Destruct, Perish Song or Destiny Bond to cause a draw, the user of the respective move loses.

The Ban list
150 Mewtwo
249 Lugia
250 Ho-oh
382 Kyogre
383 Groudon
384 Rayquaza
386 Deoxys
483 Dialga
484 Palkia
487 Giratina
490 Manaphy
491 Darkrai
493 Arceus
Reshiram
Zekrom
Kerudio
Meloetta
Genosect

Edit March 7th: Due to the majority vote, the ban list has been altered and made much more lax. Discussion is still open on this, but for now this is what the majority of people want - so we'll run with it.

Also, nobody has commented about the lack of the Fair Game clause, but I think I read somewhere that it's a default in Gen V. For clarity however, I'm putting it back in.

 

[KoL]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

Something I did neglect to mention regarding the Dream World abilities is that you CAN use the two Dream World abilities that appear in-game, namely Daruma Mode Darmanitan and Telepathy Musharna. All others can't be used in VGC11 (I think this is only due to VGC11 taking place in just 3 months.)

 

[Linkachu]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

(I think this is only due to VGC11 taking place in just 3 months.)

That would make sense. I personally have nothing against the Dream World abilities, and even though we can't utilize them now (nor will be able to for awhile) I can't imagine banning them altogether. It'd be wasted potential, and considering that the majority of us are looking forward to trying 'em out it'd be very counterproductive for our wants/needs.

 

[KoL]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

If people want it gone, I'm all for it - I'd honestly agree to remove the ban since it doesn't really apply for our needs in this case.

 

[Linkachu]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

I think it's safe to say that removing the ban won't upset anyone, so I'm going to go ahead and do so. People can still discuss it, but I have a feeling we already the majority of answers...

Now, looking at this banned Pokemon list, I'm noticing how much more restrictive it is than our current Singles ban list. Do we want to stick to the VGC11 bans of Victini/Kyurem? I guess Shaymin, Jirachi, Phione, Mew, and Celebi should also be considered since their Singles bans were lifted as well. I personally can't really make a good argument for whether to keep them banned or not to ban them, so again I'm pretty impartial on that one.

 

[Doctor Oak]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

I'd be happy to go with a pretty empty ban list ala the singles and just see what needs changed from there after seeing the results of it in practice.

 

[KoL]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

Ah, one rule I forgot is the Sky Drop Clause. Due to a rather evil glitch combined with Gravity that can put a Pokemon out of play for the entire match, the move Sky Drop is banned from both doubles and triples.

Oh, and there's no vote for this, because if you see it you'll know straightaway why it's warranted.

 

[Doctor Oak]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

Hopefully it will only be an issue for B/W, though.

 

[KoL]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

I doubt it'll carry over into any games succeeding B/W, although Acid Rain managed to find its way into HG/SS after being found in Platinum, so we can't be certain.

Not that I can see Sky Drop being all that amazing without the glitch in doubles/triples anyway, but hey.

 

[Linkachu]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

I'd be happy to go with a pretty empty ban list ala the singles and just see what needs changed from there after seeing the results of it in practice.

Since nobody else has replied yet...

I agree with this. Anyone else disagree? If not, I'm going to tweak the doubles ban list so that it more closely matches our Singles ban list.

 

[Sir Red]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

I'm for the slack ban list personally, as we don't know what will break the game in Gen V and should give things fair testing first.

As for the Gen V only thing...I'm torn. I see the merit in the official VGC11 rules having it Gen V only as it emphasis the fresh start feeling of the series and essentially provides a more level playing field for new and old players alike. But I feel things would just be odd if we did the Gen V only rule on Charms. I mean, with nearly 500 Pokemon to choose from we all already use a number of the same Pokemon in our small battling community. :x If things were restricted to Gen V only there would be the same dozen or two Pokemon that were on every team. That would take away the fun of having hundreds of Pokemon if so few were being used (especially in a Tourney/league, as things would monotonous as hell and I could see some people getting turned off to battling if they're more casual and have to constantly battle the same Pokemon and have their team murdered by them.)

Not to mention that if things were restricted to Gen V only pretty much everyone would have to either run Trick Room or be prepared to battle in it/counter it. I know that a fair number of members would not be too keen to have to constantly have to suffer through Trick Room's affects nearly every time they battle.

As it is quite obvious, looking at things from the point of view of a more casual battler (which is what I feel a good number of our players are) restricting things to Gen V is rather off-putting.

 

[Doctor Oak]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

I agree that the VGC11 setup isn't the best for a default rule set.

I really, really want to be running stuff under the VGC11 rules - but that doesn't mean we should take it as our base line.

 

[Linkachu]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

I really, really want to be running stuff under the VGC11 rules - but that doesn't mean we should take it as our base line.

Red can clarify, but what I took from him is that he doesn't even want that much. :X

After thinking about it I can see where he's coming from. Having maybe a single big tournament (ie. the next Winter Tournament) under the VGC 11 rules would be fun to promote the new Pokemon, but having multiple will get old fast. There's only so much you can do with 150 some Pokemon, especially when a good portion of those aren't even viable competitively.

But for the record, the Gen V only clause was never meant to be a base line rule. It's just part of the copypasted VGC11 rules. As I said in my first post, we need to be deciding which older generation Pokemon we want banned for our official doubles rule set.

I'm going to strike out any Pokemon from that ban list that we're considering unbanning, but discussion is still open on these guys. If you haven't replied yet and plan to be battling doubles here, let us know what you think.

 

[Stark]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

I'm down for the lax ban-list, as Alex had said previously in the thread.

Don't forget we're also having a mini-tournament with our Gen V ingame teams, so we'll have an opportunity to try out the Gen V only idea there

 

[Balakai]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

I must say I am quite easy going on this, I think a lax ban list is fine and just allowing us to figure out what needs to be banned is the best way forward.

 

[Linkachu]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

Looks like we might not really have a choice with the lax banlist if we're using Gen V's WFC flat rules, but that's 4 votes for the lax ban list - and if it came down to it, I'd lean that way, too. Since nobody is opposed, I'm going to make the changes to the list, and we'll go from there.

Also, I've taken liberties and added the Fair Game clause. It's barely ever necessary, but best to have it clearly stated for clarity's sake.

Edit: The Soul Dew is typically always banned, eh?

 

[Doctor Oak]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

You might wanna actually explain in the rules what exactly the fair game clause entails.

Incidentally, have we confirmed that the Sky Drop issue is still present in the localised games? It wouldn't be unlikely for them to have fixed it.

 

[Linkachu]

Re: VGC11-based Doubles Rule Set - Please Review/Discuss

You might wanna actually explain in the rules what exactly the fair game clause entails.

This is a rough list so, yes, that was always the plan for the finalised version.

We've used it since Gen IV, so I'd hope for discussions sake everyone already knows what it is.

If they don't, shame on them. :X