It's lower in the suspect stats...Stratos
| 36 | Dragonite | 4.65662% | 10710 | 6.057% | 0 | 0.000% |
Doubles OU Suspect (1695) stats for 2015-06 said:| 44 | Dragonite | 3.69902% | 7546 | 6.568% | 4524 | 6.761% |
And people call me a shitposter. Also, is there a reason why PU never gets any drops?Yeah but I also really like Zapdos
I think NU just hates PU and wants to see it crumble into a tier where only Rattata is available... or just sheer stupid luck.And people call me a shitposter. Also, is there a reason why PU never gets any drops?
Ok so I intended to bring up something like this but decided to read the thread and see if it had been addressed, lo and behold it has (twice, actually, yes I read the second one as well).First of all, there's a decent amount of theorymonning behind where the last four EVs go in a lot of cases (important for Life Orb / Leftovers numbers or for optimizing bulk), but I see what you mean. I, at one point, did work on combining similar spreads, but figuring out where to draw the line is annoying (for instance, should Hasty and Naive be combined?). The best solution is probably to change the entire way I report EV spreads and natures and do graphs that show how often each Pokemon runs:
and then report the two most common EV numbers (enforce, say, that the EVs cannot be within 8 points of each other..?)
- Max EVs, Boosting nature
- Max EVs, Neutral nature
- Neutral nature, no EVs
- Hindering nature, no EVs
This type of report would be most useful for opposing damage calcs (you see that your attack is a guaranteed KO for 252 Neutral, and that only 12% of that Pokemon run 252+, so you decide to go for it), but the flip side is that it wouldn't be useful at all for building teams (but honestly, if you're using moveset stats rather than analyses to build your teams, I think you have larger problems).
Thoughts?
See the FAQ in the second post.What do the Raw and Real numbers/percentages mean?
So for the 1825 weighted stats, is 1825 the baseline?See the FAQ in the second post.
Heck, it'd also be an actual good use of the "Real" usage stat. And a good statistic to cite when discussing suspects/possible suspectsSo for the 1825 weighted stats, is 1825 the baseline?
Also is there way you could put a win percentage stat on there based on how many games that pokemon won and lost?
Everyone's win ratio would be 50/50, but the Pokemon won't be.MagikaripIsOP , win percentage is a meaningless statistic, since we do matchmaking on our ladders. In a perfect world with a perfect matchmaking algorithm (and a perfect distribution of player skills), everyone's W-L ratio would be 50/50. Average weight and viability ceiling are MUCH better metrics for how "winning" a Pokemon is.
This kind of analysis, frankly, doesn't work, for the same reason average weight is a shitty metric. This is because, just because a Pokemon is powerful doesn't mean the average player uses it well. Let's say, for the sake of example, that Pikachu is the best, most overpowered Pokemon in the game. Then you'd have the top players using Pikachu to great effect and winning their matches. The problem is that since Pikachu is the anime mascot, you also have 100x as many players who have NO IDEA what they're doing who are using it and dragging the ratios / averages down.Everyone's win ratio would be 50/50, but the Pokemon won't be.
Clash Royale and various other games have skill based matchmaking but the developers still balance things (cards in Royale's case) based on it's win ratio. Clash Royale and Smogon have very similar ranking systems but that doesn't stop cards from being overpowered. It is similar to how Mega Kangaskhan or Soul Dew Lati@s should theoretically make the user have a higher chance to win games on the OU ladder.
That specific example only works for Pikachu though. For most Pokemon the people that actually use the pokemon at least somewhat correctly would outweigh the clueless players.This kind of analysis, frankly, doesn't work, for the same reason average weight is a shitty metric. This is because, just because a Pokemon is powerful doesn't mean the average player uses it well. Let's say, for the sake of example, that Pikachu is the best, most overpowered Pokemon in the game. Then you'd have the top players using Pikachu to great effect and winning their matches. The problem is that since Pikachu is the anime mascot, you also have 100x as many players who have NO IDEA what they're doing who are using it and dragging the ratios / averages down.
What you're trying to determine is how having a Pokemon on a team helps that team win. I tackled this problem from the opposite perspective: how much is a given Pokemon holding a team back? That is, if you have a certain Pokemon on your team, what's the best you'll be able to do on a ladder? This measure is called a Pokemon's viability ceiling, and I encourage you to read more about that here: http://www.smogon.com/forums/thread...re-of-how-far-a-pokemon-can-take-you.3546373/
You'd be surprised. PS is *very* active, and only a small fraction of players (especially in tiers like OU) are what most of us would consider competitive.That specific example only works for Pikachu though. For most Pokemon the people that actually use the pokemon at least somewhat correctly would outweigh the clueless players.