@miku - congrats on breaking 100 with a fun team :)
@peterko - was interesting to hear your thoughts on the trick stuff, and how badly you can still get haxed (marowak story). in fact i thought i would have something similar to report this morning (will post below).
my memory is not always good, but as for that record, I remember exactly where the minute hand was on my watch after each set of 7...basically the first 21 were 27 minutes, so an average of 9 minutes...there was probably one, max two battles where starmie didn´t sweep all 3 just like that...after that it took 51 minutes, which is 12 minutes and 45 seconds per set of seven average...again, starmie-chomp did their stuff and there were very few matches that took a bit longer
see this makes me wonder if your memory wasnt quite serving you right. i have literally timed how long it takes starmie to defeat a trainer in 3 turns, and it is 1:10 between the exact same points in two consecutive battles. there is also 1:15-1:20 lost between sets, depending on which door you walk through (lol). so that actually adds up to an absolute minimum of 9:25 x 3 = 28:15 for starmie finishing battles 1-21 in 3 turns each. but we also have to add some extra time for palmer's speeches, and his stupid slow walk. if there was even one battle that starmie didnt OHKO everything, i dont think it would be even possible to do 1-21 in under 30 mins. i'm not calling you a liar, but suggesting that maybe the timer you were using (or your memory) may not have been 100% accurate.
it's really not worth arguing about i guess, but i'm just concerned that perhaps that is a record that will be impossible to surpass (not that anyone really tries it seriously).
- Thanks, I guess it is quite decent... although I won't be surprised if someone like Jumpman knocks off my record as soon as it appears.
- Lucky I never encountered non-lead Thick Club Marowak during a Registeel 'sweep' then. I also never came across a Choice Band Rhyperior.
And sadly, it's going to be a while before I can make and upload the video for proof, and I'm not posting my official record post without the proof... so it'll be a few days before that happens.
One more question regarding that upcoming post:
Since the chance of a critical hit is 1 in 16 (supposedly...), does that mean the chance of any given group of 3 consecutive attacks all being crits is 1 in 4096 (16 x 3)? I'm talking about any 3 given moves side-by-side, I know that each individual move has a 1/16 chance... it's combination probability that I'm uncertain of.
... I'm asking that since that's what lead to my loss.
really cant wait to see your video on youtube!! and yeah, jumpman is probably waaaaaay past 300 lol :(
IT WAS ME
OK??? MEEEEEEEEE
lol
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!
yes, he did. he also posted that he lost to the very things his team had no business losing to, iirc heracross staraptor and metagross (which are coincidentally the things i've warned all trick users to watch out for beforehand, though you shouldn't misinterpret this as me having to remind you all i'm the best) :)
really enjoyed your analysis of the OHKO'ers. i'm giving this trick stuff a try, and i will certainly benefit from your advice.
please don't get me wrong - i am not one of these people saying "oh you're so lucky". far from it. in fact, there was an acknowledgement that my SSB team needs luck to get 100. i dont mean it needs luck to ever get there, but that in every attempt at getting to 100, there might be a say 80% chance that crazy-hax wont finish me, meaning that i have to have "luck" on my side. but of course, with repeated attempts, sooner or later it will work out for me. i mean that team got over 200 in emerald, and i put that down to luck (its defeat did not come at the hands of a OHKO team like i thought it would, but rather an armaldo that got a few stat boosts from ancient power). trick teams do have a very small number of real "problem opponents", so that the odds of losing any given battle might be say 1/1000, but even then to get to 1000 battles you have about a 2/3 chance - the chance of failing is about the same as the chance of sheer cold hitting - and i dont think any of us would be comfortable watching the AI attempt to hit us with sheer cold, with an entire 1000-streak hinging on its failure to hit lol....
also, i am by no means accusing you of taking any credit for my "success" with teams similar to yours. youve never said anything along those lines, and im not trying to pretend you did. i was just saying that two people on different sides of the globe can have no knowledge of eachother, yet come up with very similar teams (for nearly identical reasons). the point was more that it's silly to try and assign "ownership" to teams/ideas. however, it IS an important point to make that the people who have come up with the most successful teams have been very kind to share their ideas/strategies, so others can (and do) copy them and have successes of their own. it does suck to come up with something and then see people take it and invest much more time/effort than you are able to invest yourself, and then surpass your own benchmarks (and possibly start to act like they're superior). it's definitely not what i am trying to do.
basically: don't ask (repeatedly) for my help when i am not the least bit inclined to give it to you, especially if i don't want you getting a big record with a team i know can do it, and then refuse to acknowledge/apologize for calling someone the luckest man on earth after you borrowed one of his #1-record pokes to surpass him, and then tell me my pearl loss at 499 "wasnt that bad" and that my team isn't good enough to deal with bad luck
i guess at the end of the day i should let numbers do the talking, so i'll just say that barring another "lightning strike", i will have a surprise for you guys in ~10 days (you guys dont *really* think i haven't surpassed 190 or whatever from like may, do you?)
i really hope this wasnt aimed at me. i am pretty sure i have never asked for help in how to use someone else's team (especially since there is sufficient information in the thread already). in fact, i am working on a trick team revolved around salamence, but have only asked one person (Dr Dimentio) in private for his opinion. i'd prefer to be able to say i at least did *something* on my own, even if i do steal the trick idea. your team is ridiculously good, and the 499 proves that entirely. if you had "better luck" you would have encountered that (extremely tricky) team and its (extremely crappy) hax at like battle 50 - you would have just said ah bugger it, and started again and probably never faced it again in your life, and still been going at 1337 by now.
looking forward to hearing about your new surprise. 1337 in the battle factory? haha.......
well, anyway, like i said about, im planning to try a trick team based around latias+registeel+salamence. latias because of all the trick leads ive used and seen discussed in this thread, i think latias has the most useful options available to it. registeel because when your two attackers need to be focused around combined resistences, you'd be MAD to not have a steel type (and who could possibly do it better than registeel). salamence because of its slightly superior combined resistence (only type not resisted is electric - i didnt like the fact that registeel+garchomp had problems with ground/fighting - granted, latias resists those moves, but i have seen leads use focus blast for eg), and also because between them they have resistences to basically all the crazy-120 moves apart from thunder and volt tackle (registeel ftw). salamence also has intimidate which could help if latias is unable to get enough charms in. also a second line of defense against that insane gastrodon (switch to absorb all IB+EP).
anyway, im still waiting on the salamence i plan to use (bred by rename card), so i figured i'd give it a go with garchomp in its place. yes i am using peterko's EXACT team. i have to say i like the fact that SD lets you set up in only a few turns, so i will be watching closely with salamence to see if his need for more setting up turns is too much of a weakness. it also should be said that i had had the idea for using garchomp as a third sweeper in a trick team a long time ago (my idea back then was cresselia+scizor+garchomp). i think i could even give some kind of evidence - i asked rename card (same guy) to breed me a garchomp which i planned to use in the BT back in my trading thread. this is not to say it was all my idea, or that peterko copied me (lolololol) but just to make myself feel *slightly* better for using a team that is completely identical to peterko's (which IS what i'm doing).
anyway, a couple of observations as i made my way from 49-84 in the last couple of days.
- thought i would get clever against a jolteon lead. switched to registeel to take the shadow ball and draw the thunderbolt on turn 2. went back to latias, and got TB'd as planned. then i tricked, but it did shadow ball. i should have known this would happen, but anyway, i learned the "hard way" (not really, steel just set up and then laughed).
- another moment of "almost cleverness" happened in a battle i almost lost. i'd dealt with a lead CB aero - i charmed it a couple of times and switched in steel, keeping latias alive (still had its scarf which is awesome). steel set up fully and in came donphan. fissure breaks suib, and iron head fails to OHKO. should have switched i guess, but my streak was low and i didnt care too much. fissure #2 hits and +6/+6/+6 steel went down. latias back in, expecting SE, used trick - success as SE missed. latias recovered/charmed until the last SE was used. then my stupidity - i tricked again so i could lock it onto seed bomb, but it struggled to death (IH took it to red before) even after it got its item back (i guess it "selects" the move before the turn and then does that no matter what). next turn lucario comes out, and i know it has dragon pulse (which it will use for sure). latias now has a choice scarf, and can only use trick (makes lucario faster than garchomp) or switch to chomp (yes i tried using thunderwave but i was locked). so i just switched chomp in (makes no difference) who survived DP and EQ'd it.
i guess that last battle illustrates the idea of "experience" over luck. there were ways i could have dealth with it far better, but you have to learn the hard way. i expect that if i ever do get a good streak, it will be after plenty of low ones.
- also had a really gay match where a lead metagross got 4 attack rises out of its first 5 MM's. including one on turn one. after turn 1 i was happy to see it did less than 50%, so i planned to twave it as well (charm no good) and recover to some decent health. but it got the attack rise straight up meaning i was gone next turn if it hit. i still twaved it, but sure enough it hit and got a second rise. so steel came in and had to start from behind in the stat rise count. eventually he got set up (no amnesias though because i just HAD TO get rid of this metagross) and i wasnt strong enough to renew my substitute on the last turn. next trainer was slowbro who obliged me by missing a couple of focus blasts (yes it did lol) and i think the 3rd poke was easy enough. seriously though, what are you supposed to do in the face of 4 attack rises on a metagross?!?!?!?!?!
