How Counter CRASHES Gen 1! | RBY Bytes

[@robertlupa8273]

10:03 _"The debate on mods in Pokemon will rage on until the end of time."_ Well, duh. Once you use Rage in Gen 1, you can't stop.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

PFFFT

[@champion1859]

@@PlaguevonKarma I agree got me weezing

[@shadowtitanx3962]

So damn true. Rage is the most useless move up there with Psywave. Idk why are they TMs in Gen 1 is beyond me.

[@rifasclub]

@@shadowtitanx3962 To sell Mega Punch and Mega Kick as tutored moves.

[@Mage_Nichlas_]

Ah yes, my favorite part of competitive Pokémon, when my Dragonite with no status turns into an Asleep ABSJIVKVSKIZJIVAC?!?!¿ with 8 HP bars and my game stops working.

[@chickenfurnace]

Wild appeared effect is quite funny

[@troykv96]

I think the comparison with Melee's mod is extremely appropiate, after all, the desync was completely unintentional, and ALWAYS ends up in an unplayable state, it's something that if it was possible to fix, it could have done. I can understand the desire for purity of some players, modding too much a game can turning into a completely different experience, but you're essentially asking to completely ban a move in order to preserve the "purity" of the game experience (I'm wouldn't be surprised if more desyncs are found in the future) instead of just making the desync situations not make the game explode.

[@imaginaryboy2000]

Counter is a move that plenty of pokemon can learn, and a lot of them would like to have it. If a ban on the move were just a Chansey thing, fine, but think about the poor Gengars of the world that wouldn't be allowed switch shenanigans. Would you really want to look them in the eyes and tell them they can't use their favorite move?

[@theangrycolossal]

Fixing up the game's code to prevent desyncs seems like it makes plenty of sense. Even from a purist perspective, you're not changing how the actual mechanics of the game works or doing anything to the inherent balance. You're just taking a thing that breaks and wasn't intended to break, and fixing it up to work more as originally intended.

[@bebe8090]

Yes especially since it took over 20 years to find the issue in the first place. Having a patched counter which mostly works the same seems closer to how the game has traditionally been played than banning it would be. Thank you friend.

[@cleebe823]

I hope these people are consistent purists and refuse to patch or update anything - ie they should be running their OS without without service packs / updates, along with anti virus and libraries. The pure way 😂👌

[@redkun5]

Except no. If you start doing that, you need to fix EVERYTHING and god knows that RBY is a broken mess.

[@Bongyes]

There is a funny side to fixing bugs in RBY. People like some bugs in RBY. Hyper beam is best example. The mechanic of not having to recharge if you KO an enemy is a bug. However many like that feature and i can see why. Personally a vote should be made for prolonged period of time and after it is finished they should strictly stick to the results.

[@egon3705]

@@redkun5the difference is that if you click focus energy or whiff a tbolt the game will continue on as normal desyncs cause absurd glitches and usually crash the game

[@zeenoh5811]

I think the patch was fine. like, imagine if hyper beam had a desync chance. you can't really remove hyper beam lol I think counter adds a lot to the game and removing it would be a massive shame, so I'm cool with it

[@elilopez6260]

The purist argument makes sense with any other generation than gen 1, a gen so fundamentally broken that half of the moves/mechanics don't work as intended. But I also understand that there is only so much effort you can put in a decades old tier that's already has a *heavily* established playerbase

[@Neceroe]

Yeah fully agree, there's a big difference between unintended features and actually game breaking bugs despite both technically falling under the category of glitches/bugs

[@slowburgundyy574]

I guess you could make the argument that gen 1s dogshit broken mechanics are (at this point) bonafide parts of the game from a competitive standpoint. I have no interest in getting into gen 1 competitive and for the most part agree with patching out game ruining mechanics, but I can understand loving gen 1s flaws as much as its features

[@serPomiz]

my opinion is that, while playing on a same format of the original, but on a different successive hardware, all of the clause that fix gamebreaks are allowed if the game breacks under it's own wheight, it's not something sustainable by the game itself, and so it can abused, which is against the baseline of having a ruleset in the first place while the sleep and freeze clause may or may not be agreed upon, as it's rule not present in the basegame, the step needed to have a game going without ending in a 'tie due to mechanical interruption' should always be taken in the name of the spirit of competition or in short, does the game INTENTIONALLY allow it? and in this case, no it doesn't, it desinc

[@AkaAkoVT]

So, weird thing this reminded me of. I think I encountered a desync bug in Scarlet/Violet recently, while trying the Mewtwo raids. Granted not as severe, but going by the fact that I was in voice, we realized stuff wasn't happening at the same time... or at all, sometimes.

[@luckasneo2089]

The subtitle feature is so nice. As nice as your video.

[@gamerk316]

The way I view things as both an outsider and software engineer by trade: You *already* have two entirely separate RBY metas, given that Stadium fixed a number of bugs within the game. With that in mind, having a third meta (Showdown) isn't the worst option out there. That being said, if to want Showdown to match cartridge RBY, then any changes should be limited strictly to moves that have the potential to outright break the game (Counter/Psywave), with other fixes (Hyper Beam, Ice being Super Effective on Fire, 1/256, and so on) left alone. That being said, it would be nice to have a RBY meta where *everything* that was a bug was fixed, and allowed tradeback moves (non-glitched HM05, obviously) as it's own meta, which I suspect would look wildly different from what we have today.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

The issue with the bugs thing is that a lot of the things that look like bugs are intentional. For example, 1/256 was changed to reroll in Stadium, in a way that was very much intended. It's very hard to gauge even when looking at code, some of it is very edge-casey. Stadium already seems to be the "bug fixed" RBY, and most competitive RBYers hate it.

[@alexisdipoalo9443]

Weirdly this isn't to unusual from my knowledge, I know in newer games certain moves don't work correctly namely relic song and secert power due to sleep clause

[@starwarriorterra8373]

While I somewhat understand the purist perspective here, I have a hard time seeing how it applies specifically in the case of Counter and Psywave, which desync PvP battles. I feel it should be obvious that there is no way that Game Freak wanted that to happen when the moves were used; these are game-breaking glitches in the purest sense. With freeze and sleep clause, even those have more reason to be upset over as a purist, since even if they were incredibly unbalanced, these status effects work as intended. However, it's worth noting that there are plenty of oversights that would never be questioned, as well. Hyper Beam's lack of recharge on fainting a Pokemon is probably the easiest example of a mechanic you would never mod in any RBY battle simulator (Correction: Hyper Beam's lack of recharge on faint was intended, but even if it weren't, I doubt people would be trying to patch it). The primary difference is that while Hyper Beam has an oversight within the move's code, that code is consistent and does not break the rest of the core game. Desyncs are always going to break a game, full stop. That in mind, the only two options really are to either ban the offending moves, which can throw the meta completely off-balance, or patch them so that they don't desync, and keep the meta relatively stable. Psywave is forgettable, but as you said, Counter has meta-defining uses; with that in mind, a patch seems to be the right move.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

You'd be surprised, but the Hyper Beam thing was intentional! It actually stayed into the first Stadium game released exclusively in Japan. It wasn't until the first international game where they would selectively nerf it.

[@starwarriorterra8373]

@@PlaguevonKarma Ah, my fault for not being aware! Though, I think the hypothetical is still worth the explanation I gave, so I'll keep that with an added note for correction. Honestly, I should have considered the possibility it was intentional, considering they also decided it to be a good idea to make Blizzard a 30 percent freeze move in the original Red and Green. It is truly amazing that Generation 1 holds itself together with anything at all; at the very least there's no doubt it's an extremely unique generation as a result!

[@nlb137]

@@starwarriorterra8373 I think the fact that people *can* be confused by what was and wasn't intentional kinds shows how truly game breaking glitches/bugs differ from the "what where the devs thinking" inconsistencies. Like, gen 1 bodyslam is *probably* an oversight? Just lazy "how do we make fire type immune to burn, ice type immune to freeze, and poison types immune to poison? I know, just make everything immune to secondary effects from their own type. Body Slam? What's that?" coding... but it *could* have been intentional, because it works consistently and doesn't crash the game. But there is *no way in hell* that desyncs were intended.

[@smob0]

I wonder if fly and dig should be patched too. Earthquake is too common of a move to make dig good, but fly could be a decent move. Probably not meta defining or anything due to the problem of letting your opponent switch out, but it gives you a pseudo protect against hyperbeam, and is a pretty common base power 70 flying move, where as wing attack and peck are 35. Outside of drill peck, flying doesn't really get stab in gen 1.

[@CabeliotCometier]

Dig isn't actually weak to earthquake in Gen 1, that mechanic was introduced in Gen 2

[@smob0]

@@CabeliotCometier I forgot about that, but I was more saying dig might just be outclassed by earthquake, where as fly is probably the best flying move outside of drill peck, which is rare, zapdos is the only OU that gets it.

[@CabeliotCometier]

@@smob0 I know there are a few Pokemon that would really like Earthquake for ground coverage but are stuck with Dig. However, Dig has a significant disadvantage compared to Fly in Gen 1: There's a type that's immune to dig. In Gen 3 onwards, there are attacks that can hit in the air or completely disable fly, but I consider that an ok trade-off.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Dig and Fly don't outright break the game, so it's not something people are chomping at the bit to patch. They just cause a game state that's, erm, very unfair. Desync Clause Mod exists to prevent the game becoming unplayable rather than a PP stall war. Most of the Pokemon that would benefit from these moves would honestly stay garbage outside of like, Articuno maybe? It's not worth sacrificing tier integrity. I may make a video on this topic in general down the line as it's by far one of the most interesting ones.

[@IGreenScreenThings]

Such good content, you need sooo many more subs

[@doopness785]

I wonder if this same desync bug can happen on the 3DS versions of RBY.

[@ryjelsum]

i can't really find anything specific, but there aren't really many if any patches to the VC versions of gen 1 and 2. any that do exist are basically unintentional as a result of the VC emulator essentially ignoring code that would crash a real console. so i would guess that it still does work unless they completely reimplemented the link battle protocol

[@ChibiRuah]

I get purist want to keep the game the same but I lean more to moddeding out interaction like this. Banning counter would imho make the the game less interesting. It’s not oppressive and encourages counter play (imho very good traits). I understand if the move only competitive functions is to desync that a ban just be better though. For me, a meta game that is interesting and fun is more important than purity. I will recognize this is my own taste and it’s up to the rby community to decide if purity or patching is the path forward.

[@LethalBubbles]

I used counter chansey on gen 4 (using a leaf green move tutor) was still good

[@chinacaat1880]

the arguement that its modding the game is kinda a ship thats sailed a while ago its not like normal battles have sleep clause or freeze clause

[@PKMNwww411_MkII]

Pokemon Stadium doesn't have this problem.

[@dm9910]

I'm all for leaving in gen 1 unintended mechanics that still result in a playable game. Nobody's asking for toxic, various stat calculation glitches, or 1/256 to be fixed. But when it literally just arbitrarily crashes the game it's bonkers to me that some people are in favor of keeping that. And this Ortheore guy needs to go touch some grass or something

[@matthewdodd1262]

Both sides have valid arguments. Vying to keep the moves unmodded keeps the game as close to cartridge as possible. This is how showdown likes to keep it. Just ban them instead so no desyncs. However, if that means a move such as counter, which is an important part of different kits, such as certain Chansey variant, will be gone. The mod to force a gen 1 miss instead of a desync is.... I guess the best way to please both parties. It fixes the desync problem using a method technically possible on a cartridge

[@Technocolor00]

The only thing I find odd with patching counter is not patching other glitches like fly/dig para glitch of the 1 in 256 miss. I don't really care much is just think its inconsistent 🤷

[@BlueCardGanks592]

Pokemon purists sound like they’d be the worst at parties 😂

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Oh they absolutely are, don't you worry

[@imablisy]

Smogon players are drifting away from playing sims and playing their own game. They intentionally don’t follow gen 3 cartridge mechanics cuz they don’t like it.

[@samueljackson3512]

Which mechanics?

[@imablisy]

@@samueljackson3512 Who switches out first / takes sandstorm damage first / gets lefties first is not based on speed in gen 3. This can have huge repercussions because how in g3, if you die to spikes on a switch in, the turn ends. It can also change stuff like intimidate wars.

[@slowburgundyy574]

I've bee getting into gen 3 competitive and really enjoy it. Compared to the base game where the mechanics are kinda dogshit and desperately needed many QoL changed made in gen 4 onwards, the competitive side makes up for it.

[@Living_End]

Why can they fix this but not the para fly/dig glitch?

[@Bowserking-ol2oz]

Nice content keep it up 👍🏻

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Thank youuuu!

[@MagicIsaacSage]

I'm still wondering why Gen 1 competitive uses GB as the base mechanics, and not Stadium. Some of these debates are a non-issue/already solved, even in the JP Stadium 1.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Consistency with everything else, and a few undesirable changes in both. Stadium Zero cuts valuable Pokemon like Rhydon, while Stadium 1 nerfs Hyper Beam and buffs Substitute in ways controversial in the community.

[@TheWrathAbove]

@Aces I believe a lot of blanace changes to stadium was testing out stuff for gen 2

[@InfernoScorpion14]

Does this kind of thing still happen in Pokemon Stadium? And if not, why doesn't the competitive scene use a battle simulator with those mechanics?

[@PlaguevonKarma]

It doesn't happen in Stadium but the game also has a myriad of mechanical differences outside of that, eg. Hyper Beam always recharges on use, which slows the meta to a crawl.

[@InfernoScorpion14]

@@PlaguevonKarma Ah I see, understandable. I can see why that would shake things up. I can't speak for a whole community but in a situation where you're facing a game-breaking bug, I would probably defer to Stadium's fix/workaround, personally.

[@bungusbajablast2877]

desyncs conceptually don't exist in stadium

[@lillithplays6514]

New challenge: find something in Gen 1 that DOESN'T destroy the game.

[@bungusbajablast2877]

mist it can't even 1/256

[@champion1859]

Valid? OK I can see it but would you really be that fussed about it? Would you rather have a good move banned because it follows the games code or would you rather have it fixed and thus be usable. I think fixing it was definitely the right decision. Desyncs were never intended so there was no "betraying" involved it was just fixing a bug in the code

[@haidynwendlandt2479]

I really don’t understand when people claim that patching the game is “undermining the purity of the game” because it’s unintentional. And sure, there are plenty of RBY mechanics like the 1/256 glitch and the Dig Paralysis Immunity that are either dealt with or banned, but these don’t literally stop the game from working. Some will argue that “where do you draw the line on patches” and it’s like…fix whatever makes the game explode.

[@windowsforvista]

How did it take until 2020 to find this issue? Presumably someone had their game glitching out in the 90s when playing with their friends, right?

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Most likely, but it's very difficult to tell what's happening on cartridge, it doesn't give you much information at all. Something as obscure as hovering over moves before switching wouldn't be easy to traceback without an emulator.

[@terraknight2384]

Wow, can't believe all that scrutiny on counter but none at all directed towards paralysis. Paralysis prevents dig and fly from being used as well so obviously the status is hindering too much.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

你还好吗？

[@terraknight2384]

@@PlaguevonKarma I agree

[@Bongyes]

Ok, i am late (or maybe not - RBY is OLD) to the party. This debate beetween purists vs "well we can fix it so lets fix it, it makes game more enjoyable" group seems to have one crucial ommision as it doesnt seem to adress... bugs. One big aspect of the bugs is that those games have way more than 151 pokemon. You need absolutely zero arbitrary code execution/hacking to obtain such creatures (which means those pokemon are obtainable on the actual original cartridge). Not only then, it also has many friends. While Missingno in himself wouldnt be viable much (mono typing, bad movepool and horrible bulk + speed) as Big Yellow videos show, some of them are absolute monsters (i think top contenders reach over 600+ base stat in game with 4 stats) which would make Snorlax look like it belongs in 7U in comparison. The other abomination that you can unleash (well, only in yellow) is something called Q. This Missingno cousin allows you with some hard-but-possible-on-actual-hardware glitches to basically transfer movepool from one pokemon to another along with stats. This would make tierlists basically collapse as essentialy every pokemon becomes gigachad strong Smeargle. Just move mew's movepool to Mewtwo to destroy everything. You can even transfer those creations to Pokemon Stadium, but thats not really the topic here. What purists preserve is not RBY as a game (so... you know, grabbing it and playing it as it is with all avaliable), what they want to preserve is gameplay that was happening in tournaments of old which were played using link cables. You know, enviroment where no move was banned (not a single one). Sure, there were other bans like sleep clause etc. but nothing about counter (or psywave or that matter). Yes, i am aware those things are very close, but they are not the same. Because nothing outside of arbitrary community rules (bans, clauses etc.) makes you unable to whip out on our roster a Graveler that flies or Blastoise that breathes fire in link cable matches.

[@dannylopez5976]

Why isn't Stadium the standard for competitive with working mechanics and all?

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Many bug fixes make game slower and less fun. Eg. Hyper Beam recharging on any use is really bad for offensive play

[@crystalkirby]

I wonder if this was fixed in the 3DS releases of this these games...

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Nope!

[@crystalkirby]

@@PlaguevonKarma I didn't think so 😂 I'm also... Impressed at the speed of that reply! You've got a new subscriber too, your content is fantastic 👍🏻

[@cadencenavigator958]

In my opinion, modding was the correct decision here. I don't play competitive, so obvs take what I'm gonna say with a huge tablespoon of salt, but I think that if they'd had the time and expertise to fix desyncs they would have. You really don't want things like that to happen in your game, especially for a competitive scene, and we already had sleep clause and evasion bans, so... either way it's not going to be correct to what's on the console. Nothing stops you from going into a link battle with Double Team or Sand Attack, but it's long since been decided that those moves suck, and for good reason.

[@ENCHANTMEN_]

What if the move was allowed, but in the event a player uses a move that causes a desync, they automatically lose the battle?

[@lpfan4491]

Ok, but why?

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Some desyncs are a bit ambiguous, particularly in some situations regarding thawing. Alternate losing conditions are also very undesirable for adding potential wincons for cheese teams.

[@ENCHANTMEN_]

@@lpfan4491 It'd be an option that's arguably more faithful to the cartridge; causing a desync in the original games would effectively end the battle since glitch mons/moves will usually end up being used. (e.g. one game is expecting to receive what Pokemon the opponent is switching to, but receives the ID of a move instead, resulting in that player seeing their opponent send out a glitch pokemon) Alternatively, due to the differing gamestates in each game, it's possible that one player wins on one Gameboy and the other wins on the other Gameboy. If such a thing were to happen in a real RBY battle there would need to be some way to determine who the winner is (or if it's a tie), or maybe they'd do a do-over of the match or something. The sleep/freeze clause does say that for cartridge players, in the event that the opponent sleeps/freezes more than one of their Pokemon at once, they are able to request a redo of the match, so there is some precedent to the redo option.

[@ENCHANTMEN_]

@@PlaguevonKarma That's a good point, a player could try to fish for a desync for a cheese win. That issue still exists even if it were made to be a draw/redo since a player who is losing could fish for a desync. That said, intentionally trying to get a desync in order to draw when you're losing might make for interesting gameplay. Similar to a stalemate in chess, a player who is winning would need to be wary in order to secure their win, lest the opponent force a draw. That'd require playtesting, though, since it could just as easily result in less enjoyable gameplay (I'm certainly no expert)

[@radrow]

I don't see how banning a move is a less "pure" solution as compared to fixing a move to one of the *already present* two behaviors. Bans are undeniably breaking changes to the rules - but for some reason people take it much easier than applying perfectly obvious fixups. I don't get it.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

I think it's mainly for immersion reasons. It can take away the sense of playing "the real" game as it was all those years ago.

[@malareon]

how does counter interact with substitute in this generation, please be as specific and through as possible.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

It's as if it were a normal move. It won't trigger on Substitute itself to my knowledge, and I don't believe the damage taken to make the Substitute is stored. However, Counter will hit the Substitute if triggered while the opponent has one, and it'll take damage as normal. When Counter is triggered, think of it as Seismic Toss or any other set damage move: it'll ignore type immunity, and deal a flat amount of damage, while still having the 1/256 miss. Hope this helps!

[@malareon]

@@PlaguevonKarma i was also wandering what happens when a mon is behind a sub and the opponent uses a normal/fighting move to break the sub, the mon that was behind the sub then uses counter, does it fail or no cause i have heard conflicting things about this.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

@@malareon Substitute, as far as I know, does not affect either of these conditions. If a Pokemon behind a Substitute is hit by a move that triggers Counter, it will hit for (as far as I know) the full damage of the attack. Likewise, a Pokemon can Counter and destroy a Substitute as normal.

[@malareon]

@@PlaguevonKarma so theoretically is player a's snorelax attacks with body slam on player b's chansey while the chansey is behind the sub and player b's chansey uses counter, would snorelax die sense body slam normally does about 39% or so and 39% of chansey's health is over half of snorelax's health?

[@PlaguevonKarma]

yes

[@ToastNova]

not as funny as Jrose11 countering items in pokemon crystal

[@SnoFitzroy]

wait what?

[@TheAuron32]

Big Yellow sent me, i dont play competitive and never will but i LOVE seeing how games work, or in this case, DONT work.

[@sadizz455]

purist argument is weird because desyncs aren't intended, plus the 255 miss chance isnt intended as well.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

There's arguments that 1/256 was intentional, actually. In Stadium, rather than "fix" it, they made it double roll. That's a significantly higher amount of work compared to changing a control character. Regardless, we take the game at face value, glitches and all. Developer intention is a highly subjective field, as it's almost entirely emotional. Splitting hairs and speaking for developers is weird. So purists are really just about being consistent with the game itself. This makes sense.

[@chompythebeast]

@@PlaguevonKarma Authorial intent only goes so far and matters so much. It also doesn't help that Japanese game devs are particularly inscrutable, talking relatively little about things like development foibles, therefore making it all the harder to determine what is bug and what is feature. But yeah, art doesn't exist entirely as a statement made bybrhe artist, it lives on the interaction between that and the observer, of course. So a purist in love with the art would just leave things as they are, perceived warts and all, making few or no exceptions or alterations. -God- the author is dead, and we have killed him

[@tysondennis1016]

I’m sure the RGB programmers weren’t paid.😊

[@PlaguevonKarma]

There's actually a story here - during development, all three main developers quit, leaving Game Freak without anyone to work on the battle system and so on. Junichi Masuda, the composer, had to learn Unix among other things to finish the game. Given Link Battles were a last-minute addition, it's likely why the desyncs exist at all.

[@rosewarrior706]

You were never playing RBY you were playing a game trying to simulate it if you feel like it's not faithful emulate it and connect that's as close as you can get

[@PlaguevonKarma]

I play it in both ways! There's some cool netplay sets on my channel!

[@stunttmastaaflixx]

i like how u start every vid w sum stupid bit or meme

[@shingshongshamalama]

"Gamers" will seriously say with their whole ass stuff like "I love being unable to play the game because the devs coded something poorly and trying to play the game fucking breaks it. I love it when the game forces me to be unable to play it."

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Based tbh

[@drmann15]

Unban Fly!

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Na

[@GamingKindling]

I can't believe people are upset about this making it "unreplicable on cartridge" when RBY OU already is thanks to Sleep and Freeze clause.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Thing is, they hate that too LOL

[@gypsysprite4824]

so, my view on this matter regarding gen 1's glitchy BS sums up as: If it glitches out in singleplayer, Keep it. If it's bugs are PvP exclusive, feel free to ignore it. So the Dig/Fly glitches? Keep em' banned Desyncs from Psywave and Counter? Please don't ban Of course, i wouldn't be suprised if there is something i'm missing to complicate things, but mnyeh

[@fivell1481]

E

[@kemosonicfan123lbp]

Wouldn't it be a better compromise to allow the game to crash, but automatically disqualify the player who causes the game to crash/desync? The implication is that you're playing the game on two gameboys facing each other after all.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

That creates an alternate losing condition, which is undesirable

[@kemosonicfan123lbp]

@@PlaguevonKarma that is true. However it seems like the more realistic thing if we're assuming that these battles are happening in a moderated setting on two real gameboys. It's more desirable than being unfaithful to the cartridges, at the very least.

[@exi_dudi2037]

@@kemosonicfan123lbp I'm not a rby player so take this with a lot of salt but wouldn't the option that makes the game more competitive be the best one

[@kemosonicfan123lbp]

@@exi_dudi2037 depends on what's desired from the format. If accuracy and faithfulness to the real game is what people value about the format, then my approach would be most preferable. If competitiveness was the priority then a different approach would be in order

[@exi_dudi2037]

@@kemosonicfan123lbp at least I always saw smogon as the place for competitive Pokemon, even in some of the more obscure and more gimmicky OMs and metagames

[@Seth_Hezekiah]

I hate purists in any form. Twitch plays pokemon? People got upset that they created democracy mode to be able to save hours of time. How dare they make the game more fun for everyone due to a glitch that they patched. Oh, you put a human player into an ai tournament to enhance the story. How dare you. Seriously. Shush.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Ahahaha, I respect their conviction. The "mods" are really minor in RBY and don't really change much, so it's kinda w/e for me.

[@dominicjannazo7144]

you need to slow down or enunciate more, many sentences you say are very difficult to understand

[@arga400]

If the purist REALLY wanted the Cartrige experience they would be advocating for Desyncing being part of the game. Your match got desync? Too bad it's just part of the game :^)

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Their argument is to ban the moves involved, rather than simulate desyncs.

[@lpfan4491]

@@PlaguevonKarma I mean, Alan has a good point. It doesn't really matter what the argument was when it makes little sense. The most purist thing to do would be to keep all the issues, because removing certain moves is potentially changing the metagame to a significant degree.(I'd argue in the case of a good move it's a bigger deviation from being cardridge accurate than fixing the desync) If we prioritize playability over accuracy to begin with, then why argue about a choice for playability going against accuracy?

[@alexandercolefield9523]

For me it's not just going against cartridge purity, but also historical gameplay. On older simulators they could never get counter to work properly either (must be a hard move to code right) so it was basically banned anyway. For me that's a 2:1 against the move in the meta game.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

On older simulators they got Counter to work, just not with the accurate mechanics.

[@mylorddio8272]

I'm gonna say no. At the point were you mod the move or patch it it's not the move anymore, should have just banned it. The Battle Simulator is just that a Simulator so if the simulator cant replacat the move or it's to much of an issue because of it's brokenness then ban the move. It's a clear cut double Standard because they had no issue with Psy Wave being banned for the longest time but when it was a competitive viable move they patched it and it's not RBY at that point (also Sleep and Freeze mod have pressadent because of Pokemon Stadium)

[@PlaguevonKarma]

You didn't quite listen to the point on Psywave. It was banned on a different website with different policies regarding desyncs. While the community overlap was there, Smogon had no hand in it and began addressing desyncs when Counter's issues were discovered.