Imagine having such a bad take you get a video made about it

@percsie3072

2 жыл бұрын

Probably made it because he gets this take a lot not because of any one person.

@TheBestFormOfHumor

2 жыл бұрын

Feel like it's the other way around

@thiccboi8225

2 жыл бұрын

@@TheBestFormOfHumor this comment makes literally 0 sense

@puglinbrute9264

2 жыл бұрын

Fr

@TheBestFormOfHumor

2 жыл бұрын

@@thiccboi8225 my comment or his comment?

“How many different possibilities are there?” “37,636” “How many did we win?” “One”

@ramanahveljeyaseelan5406

Жыл бұрын

Wolf in Orlando regional finals ( I think that was the one idk) How many did we win Aaron zheng : "50%"

@D3sdinova

Жыл бұрын

This is without paralysis, confusion, misses and stuff too.

@armontesimpson6216

Жыл бұрын

Underated avengers comment🎉

@Boba.Crystallization

Жыл бұрын

@@D3sdinova that doesnt even count

@trentwilliams2963

Жыл бұрын

It actually feels like that sometimes

To be fair to the commentor, they mentioned game length, and the number of game states varies is exponential with the number of turns. So the total game states are (81)^x and (37636)^y for any given game, where x,y are the number of turns in a game. That means you have to see how quickly x catches y. log(194) / log(9) is about 2.397, meaning 81^24 will be higher than 37636^10. So, if singles games have more than 2.397 times as many turns as a VGC game, they'd have more total game states. To illustrate this, the average VGC game is 6 to 10 turns. A 6 turn VGC game has 2.84 * 10^27 game states, and a 10-turn VGC game has a total of (37636)^10 = 5.7 * 10^45 game states. By comparison, a 24-turn single battle has (81)^24 = 6.46 * 10^45 different game states, which is more than a 10 turn VGC game. And when you think about some metas, like the 200+ turn GSC games, they have 4.9 * 10^381 game states. But let's be real, all these numbers are obviously overexaggerated in practice. In principle, there's probably at most usually only 4 viable choices per singles turn per side (some switches aren't worth considering, some moves are obviously bad) and maybe at most 12 actions per turn you'd choose from in VGC (redirect moves/protect that don't have multiple possible targets, certain combinations of moves and switches you'd never actually do, etc). That makes VGC games have 3.8 * 10^21 "real" game states in a 10-turn game (a high estimate), and in a 20-turn singles game (a low estimate), maybe 1.2 * 10^24 more game states in a singles match. So, realistically speaking, a short singles game still has 300 times as many game states as a long VGC game. To be clear, I'm not actually saying singles is a more difficult game than VGC. That's a separate debate. But singles has more game states because of the higher amount of turns, even if each VGC turn individually has more game states. So in the pure computational sense (i.e. how large an expected decision tree is), they're right. Exponential growth rates >>> multiplicative.

@mariomitchell2864

Жыл бұрын

I was just about to state this. Good write up.

@alexisserrano9807

Жыл бұрын

W comment

@lordkosta926

Жыл бұрын

yeah, additionally you would almost never actually target your partner with any of your moves just like the options go down the further the game goes because you end up having less and less pokemon. 4 pokemon vs 4 pokemon compared to 6 pokemon vs 6 pokemon is an additional factor especially considering the last point. Both modes are incredibly complex with doubles having more options available to both players from the get go and singles requiring a long series of correct choices to win a single match.

@sptflcrw8583

Жыл бұрын

W comment. This video screams VGC elitism imo

@JulianneStingray

Жыл бұрын

@@sptflcrw8583 Big agree. Why can’t we just enjoy both formats or just like the one we play??

I play both a lot, and I would say that the difficulty in VGC and Singles are in different places. VGC has a lot of “frontloaded” work, determining sets, managing probability, tuning stats for certain thresholds, memorizing matchups and understanding them, and learning sequencing and speed control mechanics, and building an understanding of how you can manipulate the gamestate in your favor. Because games are much, much shorter in VGC, playing to your outs and snowballing an advantage are much more important. In singles, the work is “backloaded”. Because single battles are both much longer and less volatile, your in game micro decision making matters much more. Things like bluffing sets, pivoting, fighting a weather or hazard war, double switching, and other decision based methods of gaining advantages matter more, meaning that technical play becomes paramount over knowledge and planning because you have to be planning multiple turns in advance. A good example of this is that when piloting a bulky offense team against a defensive core in singles, you often have to plan double digit turns in advance and understand how you can make progress and start to break through, while in VGC, the entire game doesn’t last that long. This isn’t to say technical play is irrelevant in VGC, absolutely far from it, but in terms of the sheer number of decisions you will make in a single game, combined with the fact that in shorter games getting unlucky affects the game more, Singles will be more intensive.

@Abonio-rq1oq

5 ай бұрын

great comment

So many possibilities and it always ends the same, with me losing

@bewy5282

Жыл бұрын

loll

@miningandcraftingsince2013

Жыл бұрын

That used to be me as well

@Name-ru1kt

Жыл бұрын

Me who is insane at doubles and knows everything my opponent will do before they do. Also me: losses 3 pokemon to one in singles.

@UltimaKrecia

Жыл бұрын

Y theres also so many pokemons and combinations and its always the same 3 in every team.

@bon7029

Жыл бұрын

It's a matter of learning. I'm pretty bad at pokemon battles myself.

I bet you their only experience playing doubles is against npc trainers

@eisendrag

2 жыл бұрын

Probably played with bots in single player than actual people

@Chris-fz2ui

2 жыл бұрын

Singles aren't really more complex but since the games are way longer, the opportunity for misplays and hax goes waaayyyy up. In Doubles you have to be incredibly pro active but in singles since evrry turn your game plan is threatened to completely derail, you need to be insanely reactive. So it's not like any one of them is harder, they just require different ways of thinking

@anthonycannet1305

2 жыл бұрын

I’d argue that person barely plays pokémon if he doesn’t understand how much more complex double battles are intuitively

@Chris-fz2ui

2 жыл бұрын

@@anthonycannet1305 yeah ok Doubles are complex just like singles it's not astrophysics calm down

@bobrianfo104

2 жыл бұрын

Singles are so boring, it's way too easy to stall, the whole time you just try to set up a sweep with stealth rocks and dragon dance/swords dance/shell smash. I used to play monotype singles on showdown with a bug team, but ended up stuck in endless 100+ turn battles half of the time, just to have someone bitch about hax when they lost

Okay, but hear me out: in the Gen 5 Remakes, we do Triple Battles again.

The complex numbers dumb down a little when you realize 90% of Pokémon have protect as one of their moves in double battles

@zlkanglwrth2776

8 ай бұрын

Or that they all carry the same set

@Dune44

8 ай бұрын

And 50% of the time they use protect

@hailthequeenFM

7 ай бұрын

Ironically most Pokémon who run Protect are attackers.

@what.are.you.doing.stepbro

7 ай бұрын

As a player of both, vgc is infinitely harder and more complex than singles

@lordgrub12345

7 ай бұрын

And in singles literally every team has a mon with stealth rock or some hazard removal......

The guy who said that probably use ember flamethrower fire blast fire spin charizard

@thiccboi8225

2 жыл бұрын

Fire spin, blast burn, dragon Claw 🐐 if you know you know

@andreab.4646

2 жыл бұрын

I would say fire blast Flamethrower Strength Fly

@Squirtle_Squad_Supremacy

2 жыл бұрын

@@thiccboi8225 Pokemon Go lmao

@Squirtle_Squad_Supremacy

2 жыл бұрын

@@andreab.4646 Solar Beam

@littlebigguy

2 жыл бұрын

Fly, dragon claw, blast burn, flamethrower

"Not an opinion" I lost my last two brain cells reading that lol

@silverden8706

2 жыл бұрын

Yup, that was the big one ...

@dynawesome

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, it’s not an opinion It’s a false statement

@blablabla7796

2 жыл бұрын

But don’t double battles last a lot shorter than singles? (9x9)^25 is much larger than (194x194)^8. It’s 11 orders of magnitude larger for single battles.

@littlebigguy

2 жыл бұрын

@@blablabla7796 yes, because there are more options, its not as straightforward as singles battle, like you can't just use iron defense on a ferrothorn and call it a day in doubles, according to the pokemon website, the reason the format is doubles is because it runs alot more faster than singles so it keeps tournaments running smoothly, there both extremely complex, but doubles is more complex because it requires more predictions and reads, but singles is still complex

@blablabla7796

2 жыл бұрын

@@littlebigguy that’s a bit reductive. The length of the battles of singles gives it a lot more exponential growth. 2^1024 is much larger than 1024^2. The original video made a math argument but completely missed a different dimension to the equation. If the reason why doubles is more complex is because of the quality of the battle, then the argument should have been that. But everyone seems to he frothing in the mouth by the mere presence of some simple math.

I’d love to see a longer breakdown on the distinctions between the singles and doubles. As someone that watches competitive casually (lol) I think I see some of it, like seemingly more Pokémon having the move protect in doubles than singles.

Absolutely as a single player i wouldn't even dare tho go into doubles, it feels really overwhelming. Only complaint i have is i'd prefer Vgc to be 6v6 not 4v4 because i think it is a little short

Triple battles : imma about to end this man's whole career

@zanelambert1202

Жыл бұрын

Rotation battles: Remember me

@Shay96

Жыл бұрын

@@zanelambert1202 I miss Rotation Battles.

@Reesemike

Жыл бұрын

@@Shay96I don’t

@BoBnfishy

Жыл бұрын

They need sextuple battles. Just throw the whole team out and see what happens

@kiwi40238

Жыл бұрын

​@@BoBnfishy imagine two rotating platforms on your end and two on the opponent end with three pokemon per platform for a total of 12 pokemon on the field. Rotating double battles babyy.

"You can do the math" Says someone that didn't do the math

@stubbornviking8548

2 жыл бұрын

Another commenter did the math and Wolfey actually didn’t. By the same logic he uses, singles would be more complex. Not to say that I agree with that conclusion, but if we’re gonna be reductive we gotta do better than this misguided vid lmao

@uberculex

Жыл бұрын

@@bolt_beam Can we really use spam stealth rock on opponents rapid spin 30 times to run out PP as an example of depth?

@user-ym2tl5zf9k

Жыл бұрын

@@stubbornviking8548 nah double are shorter but way more complex

@eragon78

Жыл бұрын

@@uberculex I love how people like you respond when you clearly have never actually watched high level singles before. Its fine if you prefer doubles over singles, but dont act like you understand the competitive scene of singles when you very clearly do not.

@sebastiaan3265

Жыл бұрын

​@@uberculex a scenario that does not occur in singles lmao

I love both formats, but it's so wild to me that smogon singles held such a monopoly on the internet zeitgeist for so long as THE "competitive" way to play the game given the fact that doubles is literally the actual offical competitive format.

Doubles are more complicated, but also easier in a way, you have a good safety net to react to your opponent being at a very good spot.

@what.are.you.doing.stepbro

7 ай бұрын

U did not just say vgc is easier than singles💀 as a player of both vgc is infinitely harder

@Moleoflands

6 ай бұрын

VGC can be lost by making the wrong lead

@fed3758

6 ай бұрын

@@what.are.you.doing.stepbro I mainly meant I think it's easier to make a comeback Once a sweeper starts in singles If you don't have a counter you're fucked

@Moleoflands

6 ай бұрын

@@fed3758 it's easier to have a counter in singles than VGC. Sometimes you need to lead to counter or you lose, or you lead the counter and lose because either the counter died or the tempo loss is fatal

@fed3758

6 ай бұрын

@Moleoflands fair I'm mainly just speaking from singles experience here And how Annoying the format can be

This is Wolfey's way of saying he's trash at singles. Singles is way more complicated.

@FringeSpectre

2 жыл бұрын

This is your way of saying that YOU suck at doubles lol. I do to. It's okay, just admit it. Longer games do not mean more complicated. It just means more decisions, but those decisions aren't nearly as hard because there is so much more to consider when you and your opponent each have 2 pokemon on the field.

@SkepticNL

2 жыл бұрын

@@FringeSpectre You took that personal didn't you.

@sethlaske6338

2 жыл бұрын

I’m genuinely curious how singles is more complicated? In doubles you aren’t even sure which 4/6 Pokémon you are using or fighting against

@SkepticNL

2 жыл бұрын

Hes clearly joking?

@ericech7078

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed, singles is a far more complex meta to get ahold of than doubles. The individual turns are admittedly more difficult in doubles but the overall battle and meta is a lot more expansive than doubles for sure.

does this mean TCG is the true pinnacle of competitive pokemon?

@rubbegameing5370

2 жыл бұрын

ohno

@TaIathar

2 жыл бұрын

No because they're basically turning into Yugioh. Every game is a coinflip. Did you get a good matchup? Yes? You win (probably). No? You lose (probably). Did you win turn 1? Yes? Good. No? Make sure your opponent can't win on their turn 1 so you can make it to turn 2.

@rubbegameing5370

2 жыл бұрын

@@TaIathar Last time you played yugioh competitively?

@TaIathar

2 жыл бұрын

@@rubbegameing5370 Irrelevant because my post is about the accurate representation of powercreep which the Pokemon TCG is approaching Yugioh levels of. You can't tell me Pokemon of nowadays is the same as it was 10-20 years ago.

@Deadflower019

2 жыл бұрын

@@TaIathar You can't tell me that the Legend of Zelda franchise is the same as it was 10-20 years ago. You can't tell me that the Mario franchise is the same as it was 10 years ago. You can't tell me Minecraft is the same as it was 5-10 years ago.

Well, to be fair, there are some moves with limited target options : Protect is always on yourself, Earthquake is always on all mons, Snarl is always on both enemy mons, etc. Given how common is Protect on how rare is targeting your ally a serious option ; I feel like counting 9 options / pokemon would be more honest. That would change the 81 vs 37'636 to 81 vs 6241.

They both have complex intricacies- neither is easier or harder. They're so different that getting good at one has no correlation to being good at the other.

I honestly don't think both playstyle are comparable. Like sure in double every turn is very meaningful since you can do so many things, but single matchs last for way longer with a much bigger emphasis on switching. So basically doubles is more like sprint where your success is determined by a huge effort in a few turns, while singles is more like a marathon, where you need the mental stamina to pick the right option every turn. I think both formats have their merits, but I completely agree that at this point both formats are so different they are almost different games.

@Geassmaster55

Жыл бұрын

Singles are just a switch fest

@halconplays1494

Жыл бұрын

I completely agree, singles and doubles are basically different games and shouldn't be compared, both have equal amount of difficulty and it just depends on personal preference which one u like and play

@ripperpcb8650

Жыл бұрын

​@@halconplays1494 singles is easier there's always a very safe play to make if ur team is good ( u always have a tanky pokemon in the back)

@halconplays1494

Жыл бұрын

@@ripperpcb8650 seeing u say this makes me think u haven't played much singles at a high level because yes usually in the beginning u have some safe switches but as the game drags out (which most do) that becomes less true especially with hazards which affect singles way more than doubles imo because of the constant switching in singles, so that makes it so during late game a wrong move can be as deadly as it is in doubles

@ripperpcb8650

Жыл бұрын

@@halconplays1494 I have I have a higher rating on national dex than vgc I don't play ou (don't know y really) but hazards aren't as awful and if u play around well especially on gen 8 (haven't tried gen 9 singles) carrying the blob and another physical tank was good enough to get around any sweeper and yeah some hazards are annoying but heavy duty boots natural cure leftover defog rapid spin

Absolute pea brain from that guy saying singles is more complex

@demonshade4120

2 жыл бұрын

Doubles mechanically are more complex but singles have such a huge amount of depth as well. Not saying their more complex but I hate the argument that doubles is just better and requires more strategy. The require different strategy. Doubles matches last usually under 15 turns while single battles can go for 100s of turns on end. Singles are more battles of attriction and making predictions about what your opponent is going to do four tunes from now. Vgc is more offensive in nature making predictions in the present. They both require and immense amount of skill but one is not objectively harder than the other.

@dorkmork7349

2 жыл бұрын

@@demonshade4120 yea singles are definitely deep as hell also

@Soul-zg8sd

2 жыл бұрын

@@dorkmork7349 it takes 2 to go _deep_ tho

@andy502152004

2 жыл бұрын

Single being tricky mostly due to needing too much mind read

@GameOn0827

2 жыл бұрын

Singles is more complex. There is more to complexity than "potential move options". Given that each pokemon has near infinite combinations of move sets, items, abilities, and EVs, adding two additional pokemon to contend with drastically increases the complexity of the match.

Forgot to include chance based status effects and abilities that will create different game states, ig didnt forget but rather too big to consider in calc

Every turn of a double battle is obviously more complex (although this math basically assumes you only have 4 single target moves which just isnt the case but whatever). However, I dont think one is inherently harder than the other, they're simply different. Challenge and complexity isnt simply game states and options and comparing them on complexity is just kinda reductive

@PenguinSebs

2 жыл бұрын

Complexity is not the same as depth. Complexity is how many bits of info, possible outcomes, gamestates, etc there can be at any given turn. So Wolfey's definition is correct. Depth is the amount of skill that you can potentially acquire to correctly make the right calls at the right time. Even in a theoretically less complex system there can be just as much depth. For example, people like Bobby Fisher, who many consider to be the best chess player ever, have decried Chess for being mainly about memorizing board positions at this point. Comparatively, the less complex Go where the only possible play each turn is playing one piece, and each turn there's less space to put the pieces, thus reducing options, is considered far more in-depth.

@starlightpastel279

2 жыл бұрын

This argument is kinda fair but at the same time unnecessary and doesn’t apply here because if you actually read the comment he is replying to the other person is very clearly talking about the amount of possible game states and the math of how complex it is not the amount of depth to the game and wolfey was just saying the comment is wrong so while your point is completely valid it doesn’t apply here at all

@squirlyvgc

2 жыл бұрын

Neither is harder. How difficult the game is depends on how skilled your opponent is. Doubles is more complex, but that doesn’t make it harder.

@sptflcrw8583

2 жыл бұрын

@@starlightpastel279 Wolfey didn't even address the guy's comment

@GameOn0827

2 жыл бұрын

@@PenguinSebs even so, if you consider the near infinite complexity of each pokemon (moves/nature/EV/ability/item), having 50% more pokemon to deal with on both sides would make singles more complex.

Tbf they’re wrong, but their argument is that longer matches make it more complicated

@oireal7261

2 жыл бұрын

The shortest a match can be in VGC is 2 turns with two double knockouts, while the shortest in singles is 6 turns on a sweep. The thing they (the Twitter person) aren't considering is that you can also have extremely long VGC games too with even more decisions to make.

@jamesaditya5254

2 жыл бұрын

@@oireal7261 true if we disregard concedes. VGC can easily be decided in 1t if the double knockout is that impactful, but going down 5 to 6 in singles is not as decisive. Although it's probably up to suboptimal play (bad read during team preview) and/or teambuilding in case of VGC

@roccotopliff4843

2 жыл бұрын

Is a mile long line of paint or a painting more complex

@oireal7261

2 жыл бұрын

@@jamesaditya5254 If someone concedes in a single battle then it's over in one turn too lmao. But I do get where you're coming from, losing 1 of 6 mons is far less impactful than losing 2 of 4 in one turn - tis the reason suicide leads are so prominent in singles. However, the main takeaway imo is that even regardless of all this, the choice tree of a single turn in doubles far outweighs the possibilities in most single battles

@Chris-fz2ui

2 жыл бұрын

Singles aren't really more complex but since the games are way longer, the opportunity for misplays and hax goes waaayyyy up. In Doubles you have to be incredibly pro active but in singles since evrry turn your game plan is threatened to completely derail, you need to be insanely reactive. So it's not like any one of them is harder, they just require different ways of thinking. But yeah, Doubles matches can be decided much sooner than singles so it sort of depends on what one means by complexity

singles battles in Pokémon tend to be harder to master compared to doubles primarily because there are fewer options, less room for error, more predictability, and less complex strategy involved. The speed of Pokémon also plays a relatively bigger role in determining the outcome of a match.

@what.are.you.doing.stepbro

7 ай бұрын

Harder to master? Lol lol. Doubles player have to memorize how each move and ability react next to each other. Doubles have exclusive moves and abilities which dont work in singles. Also u have to know which pokemon can bring out the potential of your partner pokemon in the best way. Singles is just entry hazards and stall mostly nowadays

That's a lot of math to just tell me that I suck.

Dude from reddit puts it pretty well- "I play mostly singles for a few reasons. I appreciate the level of mindgames and complexity actually being able to switch adds, especially with doubling. Knowing when and how to double effectively, and going one step above and reading the double, is my favorite part of singles because it truly showcases a player's ability to get inside another player's head, and if they have a good enough understanding of how their team and the opponent's team functions to predict switches. I don't think that set diversity or teambuilding creativity is dead in OU, new sets are constantly being invented and enter and leave the meta, stuff like AV bulu which was previously a staple a few months ago have been refined and replaced by other sets, and even mons previously thought unviable or too niche (diancie, blacephalon, weavile) have their place in the metagame after people were willing to experiment with them and create teams that allowed them to shine. I don't know how to fully explain it, but when I play singles it feels like I have more of a solid gameplan with a team built around accomplishing it than vgc. All 6 mons serve a role and they come in and out of the field based on what role I need fulfilled at that moment, and being able to recognize for example when one mon isn't necessary anymore and sac it on a switch or sacing it just to get more chip on a wall that otherwise my sweeper couldn't break through is an interaction that I don't think is there in vgc. Knowing what to sac and when to just get a LITTLE bit more chip on something to put it in kill % is interesting and vgc obviously has similar things and has complex in match interactions that singles doesn't, but the sac game doesn't really exist. I also like the hazard game. Maybe slightly controversial? Managing hazards like rocks and tspikes I think adds more complexity to in-match gameplan (hyper offensive teams don't pack hazard removal at all while balance teams sometimes run multiple defogs) on whether to prioritize hazards or not, and when to go for the momentum play or go for defog to remove rocks when you think they're going to switch. Hazards also keep singles games moving because they lower % to kill for many mons and bring defensive mons within 2hko %'s, preventing balance mirror matches that drag out forever. I also think teambuilding is pretty diverse in OU as well and you can see archetypes that don't really exist in VGC like stall, and certain teams built around enabling one mon that isn't xerneas to set up and sweep. I like playing both vgc and singles for their own reasons. I don't think it's really fair to compare them, they have different metas and different objectives in how to properly play the format, but in USUM I've vastly preferred OU singles for some of the above reasons.."

@Chaunwilkerson

5 ай бұрын

Imo stall is the problem. It's why quit singles and started vgc.

While I agree with the conclusion, the math is just super reductive. If any pokemon is running protect, for example, it's already thrown out. It's a good hyperbole to demonstrate the point though.

@kazkui4865

2 жыл бұрын

He also gave doubles way more credit because he didn't include the option to use a move on yourself or the other mon in singles so he deffo fucked up a bit

@Warboy69

2 жыл бұрын

@@kazkui4865 he did when he said 3 options because u can hit your opponent if you watch the video you can see the Kyogre with the number three above it

@otsokarhu9695

2 жыл бұрын

@@kazkui4865 that's not an option in singles though.

@NoobGamer-ik4ed

2 жыл бұрын

@@kazkui4865 the option to use a move on yourself is still counted by the 4moves options. In singles, every move u use is either on you or the opponent, so there's no slot to choose.

@Deadflower019

2 жыл бұрын

It gets the point across

I think what they were referring to is board state. Doubles tends to be more of an offensive “hold forward” kind of format where your goal is to knock out Pokémon quick and often. Where Singles tends to be more defensive and set up oriented, as it takes more turns to knock out a problematic threat and switches are much more impactful with limited options.

How I felt when the Double Battle format spiked, while playing through Pokémon Colosseum/XD: Gale of Darkness (GCN), and every Trainer Battle, we’re ALWAYS Double Battles!

In literal terms, yes doubles are more complicated but as a seasoned singles and doubles player I think both formats have their areas where they become more complicated than eachother.

@danielhicks1824

Жыл бұрын

Yeah raw number of game states can be a misleading way to make comparisons. Fire emblem has an absurd number of gamestates, but is it a more complex game than chess?

@spagoongus140

Жыл бұрын

​@Daniel Hicks I think it depends on who you are. If you know video games it's simple to grasp, but if you don't play video games it's more complex.

@jamielusions

Жыл бұрын

Singles is a switchfest numbers game

@darthhydreigon820

Жыл бұрын

@@jamielusions if u cannot punish switching ur team is bad. its like if ur team cant punish indeedee + armarouge then ur team is also bad

@jamielusions

Жыл бұрын

@@darthhydreigon820 Those are entirely new sentences. All I said is that singles is a switchfest numbers game.

this is why i loved rotation battles. they added a huge layer of possible complexity to the battle format in a unique twist. i understand why it put so many people off, but i always loved them~

@NepSpoon

Жыл бұрын

I can understand why they removed them, but god I actually loved rotation battles

@loganmcadoo1271

Жыл бұрын

They removed it because they wanted people to argue over only singles or doubles

@My1xT

Жыл бұрын

"In a unique twist" Literally...

@HawkBreland

9 ай бұрын

and that is great that you like them. we should all be propping eachother up, not putting eachother down over the formats we play. I'm sorry the format you loved got dropped and I hope it comes back.

I feel that I struggle more with singles, which is why I like it better. I find it harder because you can’t have as much synergy as in doubles, which makes it harder to make a solid team. I also dislike doubles because towards the end of SwSh VGC, everyone was using Incin, Zacian, and either Groudon or Kyogre + a counter which just made it kinda repetitive. I mean, sure, there were other teams, but the top ones almost always contained the mons listed above. Singles, however, allows for almost any Pokémon with a good movepool and base stats to be usable. I also prefer singles because of this reason as it allows me to use my favorite Pokémon and win more easily than in doubles.

When I read the title I thought "does this really need an explanation?" I was shocked when I read the tweet

I feel like the gameplay around hazards and switching is complexity that doesn’t exist in doubles where there is a lot less total switching

@ChainsSSB

2 жыл бұрын

Switching isn't that complex, you literally just bring in a mon that can tank the incoming hit or you don't. In doubles, there's that but there's also protecting, dynamax, redirection, and all that.

@ChadBeetle

2 жыл бұрын

@@ChainsSSB what if your opponent predicts the switch and gets a hit/hazards/status/general momentum? doubles games plan up to the 15th turn; singles battles are planned to the 100th and up. not saying that one is harder since there’s more happening within the 15 turns in vgc but switching is infinitesimally more complicated in singles.

@ChainsSSB

2 жыл бұрын

@@ChadBeetle no one, in both doubles and singles, is looking forward enough in a game to predict more than at most 5 turns ahead lmao And as I said, everything you just mentioned just ties into the 50/50 of if you predict your opponent will switch to their Mon, which there's usually only one option of, or not. If you think they will, you switch to your own Mon that'll counter theirs or you set up, if not, then you just attack as normal. In doubles, they could switch, protect, dynamax, or any of those sorts of options that you also have to take into account, which makes predicting a lot harder.

@ChadBeetle

2 жыл бұрын

@@ChainsSSB singles play is easier to optimize plays but harder to keep up the best plays turn after turn. doubles matches end before it becomes a game of “wait for the other player to mess up.”we shouldn’t be comparing two formats that are so different they require different mindsets.

@SpecsJigglypuff

2 жыл бұрын

@@ChainsSSB there are good enough players that plan out sequences involving many turns ahead, and while the sequence isn’t guaranteed to happen how they think it will, it can affect what they do on a single turn. Planning 5+ moves ahead is quite common, its inherently what you do when forming a gameplan

Predicting what your opponent is going to do next (without baiting them) is basically finding a shiny Pokémon (without buffs)

@RaGiAn87

8 ай бұрын

Really? You cant predict a protect when low hp? A switch when unfavorable position? A fake out when coming in? You have to substract at least half the amount Wolf said in the video bc double battles is so repetitive its hilarious.

Isnt it (14+14-2)*2 for the total number of possible actions in doubles, and in the same sense 18 options in singles, 9*9 would mean their are 9 players

@joaobrito2653

7 ай бұрын

It’s a bit more tricky than that. You can Still have 14 options for your second Pokémon if you didn’t switch the first one out. You have to make separate calculations for situations where you switch the Pokémon on the left and situations where you don’t because the number of options available to the Pokémon on the right depend on this

I love to come back to this short. I used to always play singles mainly back in day. When doubles came in picture i got deeper into that and made teams specifically for that format. It really is almost a totally different game lol chess moves type shit

I think that while the conclusion is correct, doubles is more complex than singles imo, the math used to arrive at that answer is kinda iffy. It both oversells and undersells the complexity of Pokemon in general. I think that there is a difference between every possible game state and every relevant game state. For example, opponents movesets are a mystery. So while your opponent can only click 4 moves per pokemon, each pokemon threatens more than that. This is doubly true for doubles pokemon. On the other hand, there's always some amount of options which are just objectively bad and wrong and this is much more true about doubles than singles. You aren't going to waste one of your turns knocking out one of your own pokemon or using a purely positive support move on your opponent. At worst, you still have 1 relevant target per move, which is the same as singles at best. However it feels like the numbers are a bit padded by including options that are tantamount to throwing the game in the calculation. Even still, the difference in relevant game states is still so great that the padding probably isn't needed.

@ayo-whats-this

2 жыл бұрын

Tbh it's the same for single. In you're doing the maths, you can only do the absolute maths and calculate every single option. Even if some of them are horribly dumb. Even in single battle, most of the time you have like 3-4 different viable options to choose from. While that number is significantly higher in double battle. The person that made the tweet said that hey, since single battles can go up to 100 turns, the probability goes berserk. But tbh every single turn matters way less in singles as compared to doubles. And if you want to calculate the absolute probability, you have to do it both ways.

@joemoak9966

2 жыл бұрын

to be fair this was originally a tiktok video so he had to dumb down the math a bit

@anthonynorman7545

2 жыл бұрын

He did the same for singles though...

@joemoak9966

2 жыл бұрын

@@anthonynorman7545 I wasn’t talking about one or the other just that there’s a lot more to both formats than he mentioned

@mylorddio8272

2 жыл бұрын

Protect pretty much takes away any advantage Doubles might have had

The entire thing is whack, (how many things can happen) is not a good indicator of how hard something is. Like, yeah you have all these options but what if only like 5 of them are valid strategic choices? The rest are suboptimal or redundant in that situation. You’ve also got to remember that in singles, you don’t have a partner to cover for your weaknesses, you HAVE to hard tag/uturn and you won’t have any moves to protect your incoming Mon or to threaten the opponents mon. They’re just totally different games, a comparison of which is harder is completely whack

@axeldiaz7441

2 жыл бұрын

How many things can happen is 100% a good indicator in this specific case. Pokémon is all about what you can do vs what your opponent can do + variability in predictions, crits, and speed ties etc.. You can't seriously think that if, for example, each Pokémon has one move slot and couldn't switch that it wouldn't be hundreds of times easier than normal. There's just so much to take into account in terms of weaknesses/resistances already, let alone when you also take abilities into consideration, and deciding which course of action is best to take in any single game state is what separates the good from the great from the best. You think chess is hard because of all the rules? No it's because there's so many possibilities and things that can happen in the very first turn, you'll never ever in your entire life be able to predict exactly what your opponent will do so it's up to each player to advance when they can and cut their losses whenever possible while thinking about the exact same thing from their opponent's perspective.

@mrschrubelhupfyay6397

2 жыл бұрын

@@axeldiaz7441 thats not how chess works tho, the first turn is pretty irrelevant if u dont play garbage, chess is mainly about mid and endgame

@negate4828

Жыл бұрын

@@mrschrubelhupfyay6397 the moment you move your first pawn I guarantee you, your opponent has a plan in mind. You don't just randomly move pawns in chess

@octaviovilchez3096

Жыл бұрын

You are just saying that doubles is more complex in your own way

@DkKobaADV

Жыл бұрын

​@N E G A T E yes they've memorized lines to save time making choices. Just like we can see that theres no chance my groudon will use fire blast against kyogre with rain in effect.

funniest thing is it’s even more complicated than this since some moves target the whole stage, themselves or just their team which reduces the amount of options due to limited targeting which is just ludicrous at that point then there’s the move pool to consider when it comes to what 4 moves are chosen and it’s up to the player to figure it out before it’s revealed.

Singles have their own space I definitely respect and enjoy singles a bit more. But Doubles is definitely more complex and more entertaining from a spectator perspective so I understand why doubles is the official competitive scene

@xxxrobinhorx

Жыл бұрын

i believe singles to be more complex because in double battles they reward aggression and you can get away with more mistakes since you can have support pokes on the field with you. In singles, you are more rewarded by playing paciently with hazards and switches, and also a single pokemon on the enemy team can sweep your whole team if u make a mistake

@xxxrobinhorx

Жыл бұрын

that's just my take tho, i believe doubles are way more fun and also complex

@grapenut6094

Жыл бұрын

@@xxxrobinhorx Yup, 3v3 singles is bs too, completely different from 6v6 in that it also rewards hyper offense and has zero depth.

@paveluchitel

Жыл бұрын

@@xxxrobinhorx This is a good take, thats why this vid iritates me. Just because there are more states the difference between them is minimal in 2v2.

@tobigrantlbart

Жыл бұрын

​@@paveluchitel I get you, but the reason it talk about game states specifically is, because the tweet he is responding to says that gamestates are prove that singles is more complex.

There's far more nuance to it than just straight up measuring how many possibilities there are

@DkKobaADV

Жыл бұрын

This. You think about what moves the opposing pokemon is running. What could switch in? What is that potential pokemon going to do on a theoretical free turn where you choose not to double out? Etc.

You forgot the foundation of his argument: time. Without stall teams, Doubles are on average 10 turns where singles are on average 25 turns. 36000 to the power of 10 is less than 81 to the power of 25. But Imo it’s like comparing apples with oranges.

@Daeyae

2 жыл бұрын

You are not accounting for a reduction in options while pokemon faint and how early they do or don't faint which you can't assume, singles might lose a mon every 4 turns but doubles might keep all up until turn 7 then lose them all in 3, so it's more 81^3×63^3×etc and 36,000^7×10,000×2,500×100 or something

@dantespekken3549

2 жыл бұрын

I thought that pokemon tended to last longer in singles since it's a lot of switching an looking for win con while setting requirements up. Regardless I think saying one is for sure more complex than the other is always wrong.

@Daeyae

2 жыл бұрын

@@dantespekken3549 I assume in stall comps maybe, but most people would just do something like swords dance zacian and sweep in 8 turns

@dantespekken3549

2 жыл бұрын

@@Daeyae I don't think ubers is the most played tier, right? In most OU comps there is a lot of switching, even in non-stall comps, to find/create favorable situations, especially if you want to set-up. But I do agree with you that it is something unaccounted for.

@Daeyae

2 жыл бұрын

@@dantespekken3549 no idea what the most played one is tbf I just assumed uber was

There’s also the choice at the beginning over which Pokémon to bring from your team of 6. I feel like that adds an even deeper layer to it.

I guess by this math, 3v3 battle systems that by default tend to have WAY more than 4 skills per monster are mathematically harder and deeper then.

I still find doubles easier than singles. I can use more self-centered strats in Doubles that handle teamwork without significant stress involving my opponent's moves.

@Sh1ranu1

Жыл бұрын

I’d argue that while doubles have greater variety, the resources and tempo lost from a faint makes doubles incredibly lopsided. You just gain so much advantage so quickly

@demonshade4120

Жыл бұрын

@@Sh1ranu1 Also makes them way more hax prone. Three turn sleep or missing a hydro pump will lose you a VGC game. A singles game being 10x the length means the margin of error is 10x smaller leading to hax evening out.

@eragon78

Жыл бұрын

@@demonshade4120 Yea, good singles players are much less likely to get upset by worse singles players than the comparable to VGC because Singles is far more consistent. It also helps that the most played format in Singles is OU which tries to stay balanced by banning the most broken shit so you dont see the same 4 mons on every team. Doubles has this issue a lot in some formats where since things arent really moderated at all, you can have formats where every team is nearly identical with a few minor changes. Doubles is a lot more hit or miss when it comes to team variety because it entirely depends on if there are ultra broken mons in the meta or not, because if there are super broken mons, they arent getting banned and will just ruin the meta, unlike singles where they'll get banned to Ubers keeping OU much more diverse.

@willteresuka1104

9 ай бұрын

@@eragon78 scrub

It’s not as simple as that. Singles and Doubles are different skill sets, Doubles allows more creativity and gimmicks but isn’t strictly more skilled.

@davidjones9458

2 жыл бұрын

There’s more to account for in doubles. I can understand how people can make the argument that singles is more difficult because you’re much more limited and that in itself makes it more difficult but as Wolfey says at the end, they’re basically different games entirely. But if we’re talking which is harder at the top level (overall skill), it’s hands down doubles and even just down the fact that you’re almost always having to build a bigger plan than you would in singles. Team building is different as well but it’s up in the air which is more difficult between the two. Doubles you want to think about which Mons can complement each other well when they’re on the field together and in singles it’s about getting the most out of every slot and having good variety.

@CrazedKasaJizo

2 жыл бұрын

@@davidjones9458 I wouldn’t say overall skill goes to doubles, while there are aspects that give it a leg up on singles, singles games are often comprised of far more turns with less options to consider which balances them out. While one mistake may cost you a game in doubles while singles just puts you at a disadvantage, the opportunities to make mistakes are far more present in singles and requires you to stay at the top of your game to succeed. The relative need for consistency in your moves and predictions is what gives singles its difficulty. Team building is vastly different, however singles isn’t just about getting the most out of each Pokémon, it’s also seeing how well they work in their roles and in their roles to the team overall, relatively similar to doubles but with key differences. That’s just my take on it though

@Dark-Pikachu1

2 жыл бұрын

False everyone used same thing

@Dark-Pikachu1

2 жыл бұрын

Screens Tail wind strat

@etheriongaming517

Жыл бұрын

It is strictly more skill. Stop coping.

Single battles require you be more prepared incase the opponent does something unexpected, but with double battles you not only have to be prepared but also on the offensive, and you have to guess what 2 pokemon will do requiring a lot sharper of a mind, also while this is happening you have to trick your opponent with 2 pokemon too.

@wasntwas

Жыл бұрын

It's double trouble for a reason

While this is objectively true, it counts a lot of things that don't need to be counted, and assumes that all moves can freely target, ignoring the possibility of spread moves, setup, and nearly guaranteed protect.

I love double battles because of the freedom in them. I once made a team that revolved around their abilities and activating them with the second Pokemon. Know the ability Water Absorb or Dry Skin? They both restore HP when the Pokemon with the ability is hit with a water move. Surf, hits all Pokemon, not just the opponents just like Earthquake does. In this instance, my team that used that was Lapras and Vaporeon since they both had Water Absorb and could learn Surf. They would mutually heal each other while attacking both enemy Pokemon at the same time. I could've probably used better Water types with these abilities since they were both slow, but the tankiness they both had made the Surf combo quite effective, so being slow was fine since they would heal most of the damage anyways.

@Dark-Pikachu1

2 жыл бұрын

Regieleki though sounds bad

wouldn't the 4 moves be elevated to 8 for dynamax moves?

@andrewkrebs5608

2 жыл бұрын

In gen 8, yes. And that's an additional game state for something being dynamaxed as well

@daimiendeschamps4664

2 жыл бұрын

Yes but no,since you cant dynamax ur 2 pokemon

@louiesatterwhite3885

2 жыл бұрын

@@daimiendeschamps4664 can't at the same time, but either can be. That still contributes to game state count

@jettlaxholly

2 жыл бұрын

Ok but that’s also assuming every pokemon has no spread moves, does not carry any self targeting moves like protect or swords dance, and actually doesn’t include any status moves as it would just be max guard, which only targets one pokemon, yourself

@ayo-whats-this

2 жыл бұрын

That just doubles your output for one turn.

I still find it funny for how double battle focused competitive is there's only two double battles in the main game.

Usually the possible outcomes don't reach 14×14. If you use spread moves like Rock Slide/Muddy Water, there's only one outcome of hitting both targets. In typical VGC games almost every team uses Pokemon with spread moves. Plus, Protect is also so prevalent in Doubles, which further undermines the possibilities by producing only one outcome and three possible moves next turns since Protect will fail if used consecutively.

@RealPeasantLord

Жыл бұрын

Even if every move on every Pokemon in a doubles battle is a spread move, it’s still 1,156 possible gamestates Also protect doesn’t fail if used consecutively, it has its accuracy reduced for every consecutive usage, meaning you can protect more than twice in a row if your luck is good enough

The amount of strategies doubles has is insane.

I do agree with this but this isn't even the point the comment was making. Their point wasn't that each TURN is more complex it's that as the game keeps going on the sheer amount of stuff that can happen is more complex since single battles typically last significantly longer than doubles. Idk of it would matter but its at least worth saying it's kinda obvious they didn't mean it how this video portrays.

@pedrolim

2 жыл бұрын

If you wanna do a very simplistic math to number of possibilities in a full game: Singles: 81 per turn * 100 turns "= 8k Doubles: 30k ish per turn * 4 turns = 120k

@aw-tismo1676

2 жыл бұрын

@@pedrolim ​ @pedro lopes That's implying in doubles no pokemon goes down across those 4 turns, of course this is the same for singles but it's much more common for this to happen in doubles due to twice as many moves being used. Also if we use say singles OU there's a SIGNIFICANTLY higher number of possible pokemon to be used when compared to say Gen 8 VGC.

@CrazedKasaJizo

2 жыл бұрын

@@pedrolim The math Wolfe uses fudges a lot of numbers and makes great assumptions to prove a point. While I haven’t figured out the exact number, it’s certainly not the number he provided. Furthermore, it’s not a just numbers game either, the commenters argument isn’t about numbers either, making your reply irrelevant

@timy4322

2 жыл бұрын

The comment said do the math on game states to measure the complexity. The best way to measure that properly is going by a turn by turn basis. So wolfe did the math and came out with those numbers. It very much was the point he was making if you take everything he said literally.

@TheRedAzuki

2 жыл бұрын

@@aw-tismo1676 there needs to be like 400 turns of single to reach 1 turn of doubles in terms of possibilities.

Sidenote ive always been curious what vgc would be like if you brought all 6 pokemon to every game instead of 4

Smogon player here, it just does not require the same skills. Due to longer games and more Pokémon overall, singles are more oriented towards building a gameplan and managing your ressources, almost like chess. In doubles, the player capable to do an amazing play 3 turns in a row will win, while in singles, a player capable of doing 30 solid turns on average will win. Also, managing odds is a lot different, since on a longer battle there's statistically more chance for luck to interfere. Comparing the number of options really does not tell the whole story.

@ShadowSword88ee

8 ай бұрын

Doubles is more like chess than singles. Singles is like checkers in comparison.

@roskari8772

8 ай бұрын

​@@ShadowSword88eesounds like ur not very good at singles.

@lostxnxyou

7 ай бұрын

Nah. Singles is definitely less complex than doubles.

@FrenzyCh4n

7 ай бұрын

True, but that's like comparing Uno to Solitare, they are completely different with different skillsets.

@roskari8772

7 ай бұрын

@@lostxnxyou doubles is like 10 turns in total lol.

Then we have triple battles! Although removed, it's still a feature of the games back then!!

@jusquanorthwind1016

2 жыл бұрын

Triple and rotation battles were weird but neat.

@Kawaiikahili

2 жыл бұрын

@Sal the Shark Same here :3.

@octaviovilchez3096

Жыл бұрын

Triple battles were good on 5th gen. In sixth gen the console just can't handle 6 pokemon animation at the same time, that was a downgraded on experience. Plus TPC only promotes VGC and Smogon mostly Singles, there was no foundation for triple battles and they passed away.

It’s weird cause I struggle with singles waaaay more than doubles

He's right about being two completely different games, and even though the possibilities in doubles are much much higher, the set up's and follow up's are usually the same every game, there is very little variation when choosing a move from game to game

"There are tens of thousands of different possibilities!" "How many do we win? "One"

I feel like the complexity of a turn in doubles is certainly more than singles, and there's no arguing against that because it's simply true. However I wouldn't say singles is an easy format, you can't exactly compare the two. It just means that a decision for a turn in doubles is far more impactful on a game to game basis than the average singles game. Recovering from a mistake in doubles isn't impossible, but it's unlikely, whereas in singles a mistake is far less likely to cost you the game.

One thing explains this perfectly, helping hand.. moves along the lines of that, make double battle more complex that chess.. like there a legit "support pokemon" that only exist to bolster double battles.

I'd argue not as complex as argued. There is a preexisting meta that is much more strict in doubles compared to single. In doubles, the pool to pick from is often 20ish pokemon, while in singles, you can get pretty much anything as you can afford 1 or 2 fun/cheap gimmicks.

Little cup is the hardest format because it's hard to hit something so cute 😍

@leikfroakies

Жыл бұрын

Onix: 'Allow me to introduce myself'

@lucidreality2563

Жыл бұрын

Based

All I'm hearing is that a 6v6 would be peak Pokémon

@neroisntdead3681

Жыл бұрын

I feel like you need to keep atleast 1 pokemon in the back pocket to switch out of otherwise you would just take out the highest priority target with all 6 pokemon at once so maybe 5v5 would have more strategy to it

@happysquirtle466

Жыл бұрын

​@@neroisntdead3681 🤓

@vyor8837

Жыл бұрын

length increases the exponent and, uh, anything to the power of 80 is going to be faster than something to the power of 20, by a lot. Double battles cap at 18 options a turn(you don't want to target your own mons with attacks and you don't want to buff the other guy) and that's 8 move choices per mon(with targeting being a choice) and the option of both Pokemon switching in the same turn, variants go up to around 24, but lets assume something insane like 30 total options. Technically things like terastilization or mega evos add one option, but it only applies once do it's irrelevant. Now we know that the average game lasts to maybe 20 turns, and since there are 2 players that's 60^20, or 3.65e35, so 3 followed by 35 zeroes. Big number, right? Lets do the same thing for singles... Each turn gives 9 options each, ignoring tera, mega, and switching moves again, so 18 total between the players. Now the game goes on, I don't know, 40 turns? A shorter single battle to be sure, with the average being around 60, but lets keep with the short 40, so we have 18^40 getting us... 1.62e50. That's a 1 followed by *fifty zeros*. And that's for a short game. So yeah, singles is infinitely more complex than doubles.

@Platypus2814

Жыл бұрын

​@@vyor8837 The average doubles game does not last 20 turns, it rarely goes beyond 10, unless the opponent is running a stally build like dondozo, so your argument is even more pertinent. I would still argue that doubles are more complex, because in singles, it often comes down to 3 options - either they switch, attack or set up. Predicting which option they choose and who they switch into is still very complex nonetheless. In doubles you have so many possible variations that depends on who you protect with, the risk reward of double attacking a pokemon, and the possible mixup of which pokemon you send in at the start. However, I agree that, game state wise, singles is more complicated. The math proves it.

@vyor8837

Жыл бұрын

@@Platypus2814 I would argue they are different types of complex. While doubles has more per round strategy singles has a lot more pre-match strategy. Certainly, if doubles lasted more turns, on par with singles, it would have more game states... but each individual game would have a lot of identical game states just because of how uniform the meta tends to be. The opposite is the case for singles, each turn is less complex but each individual game will have more unique game states.

Imagine you used earthquake by accident and all the opponents pokemon had levatite while your partners pokemon didnt and was also fire type💀

Tripple battles and rotation battles: allow us to introduce ourselves

I mean, thanks for the video Wolfey, it's interesting content but uh... It doesn't really reply to the original tweet at all in any meaningful way. It says singles are harder because battles are way longer so you have to tough it out and make more decisions, not that single battles are harder on a turn by turn basis. I have no problem with the vid, but the tweet straight up shouldn't have been included. It's knocking down someone for no reason and responding with a bad faith argument as a result.

@DietWarlord

2 жыл бұрын

Lmao. He did the math on game states and decisions and quickly approached a much more complex system in VGC that dude completely ignored. He did exactly what the guy told him to and arrived at a different conclusion.

@criskooo2802

2 жыл бұрын

@@DietWarlord Precisely. Most people seems to ignore the fact that the tweet was the one bringing the math argument on first

@eragon78

Жыл бұрын

@@DietWarlord Not really because he only calculated it for one turn and not a whole battle. If you take 40,000 (rounding cuz lazy) possible situations for an average of say, 10 turns for doubles, and then take 81 possible situations for a total of say, 50 turns in singles, you have to calculate this using 40,000^10 vs 81*50. 81^50 is MUCH MUCH MUCH larger than 40,000^10. So even playing wolfie's game, he's just completely wrong because he doesnt account for the length of the average games. But like other people said, its a bad faith argument anyways. The raw number of possibilities doenst mean one is more complex or harder than another. S this whole video is kinda dumb and pointless. Its just inciting toxicity between people who enjoy singles and doubles and pitting them to fight against each other with nonsense arguments.

The playstyle of Doubles and Singles are so different that I really think it's fair to actually say they're different games kekw

Pokemon Challenges mentioned in a video (idk which one) that for nuzlockes he can make a plan for every single turn of the fight, but for double battles he'll usually at most get 3 turns in and then Wing it

Im a player who battles on smogeon singles, and i can without a doubt say that I can't even fathom the complexity of doubles and how complex that rabbit hole goes. Its so much easier controlling a singles battle compared to a doubles and i tip my hat to every major doubles player because i simply cannot wrap my head around so many variables, combinations, hurdles, obstacles, items, and abilities.

@pokemata1035

Жыл бұрын

Exactly I think singles are WAY more fun (my opinion) because you are focusing on one thing at a time focusing on two things while also predicting moves from two mons at once I just cannot fathom it lmao.

@yeetusdeleetus4697

Жыл бұрын

@@pokemata1035 Doubles aren't that complicated due to an extremely limited meta of about 20 viable and commonly used pokemon. Around 85-90% of high rank double battles play out almost identically

@pokemata1035

Жыл бұрын

@@yeetusdeleetus4697 I meant I have stupid brain that cannot understand how doubles work and brain is to stupid to comprehend two pokemon at once so I am gonna stick to my tiers singles NU, OU, and Ubers

@jordipernillo3026

Жыл бұрын

Not to mention that most all singles moves are usable in VGC, but not the other way around as there are doubles moves that are useless for singles

@gillateeen

Жыл бұрын

​@@yeetusdeleetus4697pachirisu and togedemaru were on tournament winning teams...

Y'all not taking the number of turns into account

doubles are indeed more complex, but still, you haven't applied the same principle in both cases, you made up the math a little bit

@peterschulkke6072

2 жыл бұрын

@@applejewce The fact that he counted hitting your oppponent

The move target is definitely where this falls apart. If you're using a single target move, it either has one option to help your teammate or yourself, or two options to attack your opponent, with only Weakness Policy or similar teams having that third option of attacking a teammate. Then there are moves that only have one option because they are spread moves, attacking two or three targets as one single option.

So the OP is correct in that over the course of a full battle there will likely be more possible games states in a singles battle due to the longer duration. That does not equate to complexity though and, in defense of OP, I'm not sure that's what they were claiming either.

Doubles > singles in my opinion

@thedetectove

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed in doubles stall is almost impossible. Unlike singles where it’s is very common and easy to do.

@chelseacomps829

2 жыл бұрын

Honestly nah but mostly because my favourite Pokémon are better in singles lol

@jam13roll66

2 жыл бұрын

It’s not an opinion; it’s a fact

@Samuel-qi7in

2 жыл бұрын

I just want doubles to have 6 Pokémon.

@obiwancannoli1920

2 жыл бұрын

I respect your opinion, however, I disagree

One thing that I think makes double battles look "simpler" is that they are usually shorter, while in singles they usually last quite longer. But this actually showcases how much more weight each decision carries in a double battle, where if you throw the wrong move or make the wrong switch you lose a quarter if not half of your team! Or the opponent can setup very advantageous states like trick room, or tailwind/max airstream, which if not contested give the player that landed it a massive advantage. In singles while losing a pokemon is still bad, it's easier to recoup the losses and you have many more pokemons to play with so you can threaten a lot of type of switch ins, which can make it hard to ko an opposing pokemon, but being unable to do so wont cost you the game, unlike in vgc. They both have very unique strategies and intricacies, but I totally agree that when you're playing vgc is the more complex and harder to maneuver game mode

I do think single battles are harder but more because I think varied roles matter more as a whole. Like starting off the game with early setup is insanely important, deciding to switch in rapid spinners to clear hazards is insanely important. This isn’t a jab at doubles because I personally prefer doubles, but I have a much harder time climbing the ladder in singles than in doubles. Just my opinion though.

Double battles are far more complex and it's not because of how many options you have. It's actually more so because of how many options your opponent has. In 1v1 battles your move options are usually pretty straightforward You might be able to get away with one round to pull off a setup move whether it be something to buff your pokémon or debuff your opponents but after that if you don't go on the assault you will fall behind very quickly so most of your moves are either going to be straight heavy hitters or damage plus buffs/debuffs. In 2v2 battles though You can have a heavy hitter with an assist both on The field at the same time. And your opponent probably will too. This allows for creating a lot more dynamic strategies that you now have to figure out how to counter. That's why most tournaments are 2v2 because it's more complicated which makes the fights a lot more interesting

Sorry Wolfey but the math nerd in me really wants to address the math you did in the VGC portion bc unfortunately there are too many assumptions for your number to ever actually be true and I'll go over the reasons why. Multi hit moves: In your math portion you said that every move has three targets and that each target results in a different game state. This doesn't apply to multi hit moves however as they have no choice in who to target (as they always target both opponents) and this change affects the number of possible game states. Non targeting moves: You also are forgetting that some moves don't even target, or rather only target the user. Moves like protect, swords dance, and substitute also only have one target (that being the user) limiting the number of game states. Misses: You are also only assuming every move clicked has 100% accuracy. Every move that has less than 100% accuracy has two different game states that result in clicking it, one where it hits and one where it misses. Multi target moves make this a lot more complicated as they have 4 possibilities in terms of hitting or missing their target. Fake out: While fake out is a move that a lot of mons tend to have it being useless after the first turn a mon is sent out means that while it is still a technically an option no player is ever going to actually select it the second turn the mon is out on the field or later limiting the number of cases. Dynamax: As if the number wasn't high enough dynamax makes them skyrocket. Suddenly if the dynamax is available you have to do all of this math again but for two different scenarios, one where the left pokemon maxs and another where the right one does. So as long as that dynamax is still available the number of possible game states is really really high. Niche cases: So there are some niche cases which may add to the number of game states possible in a turn. As an example, thunder never misses in the rain so it would stand to reason that in a turn with the rain active you wouldn't have to consider a game state where thunder misses, however, if the weather is changed during the turn then thunder can miss and that would be a different game state. All of these niche situations would have to be counted and considered for to properly count all the game states possible. So how many game states are there actually in any game in VGC? Well the answer constantly changes with every turn of the game so there is no one finite answer. Usually in every turn there will be at least one switch or one knockout on either side of the field and it is pretty unlikely that the pokemon switching in provides the exact same number of possible game states as the one leaving. Not to mention the numbers drop drastically once both dynamaxs have been activated. So there is no real answer you could properly give as a general rule expect for one with a lot of assumptions such as what you did. Thanks for listening to my ted talk

@carolej339

2 жыл бұрын

The misses thing isn't really relevant because what Wolfey is describing is more the potential number of actions both players on the field can make on any given turn. Misses accounts for the outcome, not the action chosen itself. E. G. You're still choosing to use Focus Blast on Target A, whether or not you miss it. If you were to count the outcome too, it would get needlessly (and irrelevantly, frankly) complicated, with things like damage rolls, STAB, type match ups, crit chance, held items, etc.

@francocordero32

Жыл бұрын

Don’t consider his math wrong nor yours. It’s just different assumptions, I would say for example, you tell nobody uses fake out as a move after the first turn but I’ve been in the situation where liepard could use copycat on glacier lance and the only possible option is fake out again to prevent it… it’s just an example but talks about how every game is just different

@alecbormia4523

Жыл бұрын

@@carolej339 I honestly don’t know which one he was trying to say. It seems like he’s doing what you said but then he uses the term “game states”. And game states describes not what move you pick but the outcome of those moves. Also oh god I forgot about damage rolls and critical hits. That means the numbers go astronomically higher lmao.

@callmeavii

Жыл бұрын

Bro even in his optimal assumptions this math isn't correct.. For a single time hitting move with 100% accuracy on each pokemon If player 1 switches both his pokemon that is 4×3 or 12 options in switching If player one plays moves with both pokemon then his options are 4×3 +4×3(four moves on each pokemon and 3 pokemon to choose from to hit) total 24 options If he moves with one pokemon and switches another then that is 4 + 4×3 (4pokemon to switch into and 4 moves to attack 3 pokemon) which is 16 then ×2 bcuz he has to choose which pokemon to switch n which to attack with which gives 32 options for this configuration.... Thus total comes out to be 12 + 24 + 32 options for player 1 which is 68 options... Times 68 for another player and the actual possibles situations to play out are 68² or 4624 possibilities after each move ... And for single player his math is correct so no problems there And if you add complexities... I'll give like a 25% generous increase in possibilities.. that is still 4624+1156 or 5780 states after each turn... which is far below his suggested 37636 states.. Thank you for listening to my ted talk too

@alecbormia4523

Жыл бұрын

@@callmeavii but your math also has the same problems as the ones I talked about so that number isn’t right either. You’re ignoring miss possibilities, multi hit + non targeting moves as well as dynamax where you have to consider all these options all over again for every separate possible scenario involving maxing.

Yea but don’t double battles last considerably shorter. Than say a stall v stall game.

@mimipeahes5848

2 жыл бұрын

Is stalling adding complexity though. A game being longer does not mean you make more considered choices or employ interesting and complex strategies.

@Interiorcrocodilealigator10838

2 жыл бұрын

@@mimipeahes5848 fair point, stall is brainless. Wolfey’s argument is simply the possibilities of moves u can make in a turn. However if games are shorter, then eventually singles simply adds up to more possibilities the longer it lasts. That is the purpose of asking what abt long games.

He didn’t even make fun of the person and still floored them

Lot of cases where this isn’t always the case considering most mons run protect or a spread move that lessen the number but I do agree with you.

@etheriongaming517

Жыл бұрын

Of course there are very very few cases where you choose to hit your teammate. Regardless.

@KeeganKeegan

Жыл бұрын

@@etheriongaming517 the option is still there, but the amount of choices is deceptive. It’s still much more than singles though.

I play both singles and doubles, in doubles it's pretty easy because most ppl usually do the same thing and bring the same pokemon as everyone else 9/10 times look at previous worlds teams. Single battles have a bit more of an unexpected twist to them. All and all in my opinion it's all about how someone's brain works. If your good at thinking on your feet and on the fly you'll do well in doubles but if you actually need to think hard a bout moves and can't process information fast enough single battle is the way to go.

@cooperhawk988

2 жыл бұрын

So basically: if you’re good at thinking go doubles, if not go singles.

in fairness, youre also not considering how much longer single battles go for. there are so many more turns in a single battle, it really is like a different game. imo it doesnt make sense to call one more complex than the other, since theyre played so differently and complex in different ways.

@rainbowturtle

2 жыл бұрын

Doubles still tends to be more complex, especially since single battles that run for hundreds of turns tend to just be stalling in one way or another. The complexity gets whittled down over long singles games.

@Rafaeu777

Жыл бұрын

​@@rainbowturtle You talk as if it were easy to play during a stall phase, I even believe that the moment a player understands how to play against stall and with stall is a barrier that many cannot pass, and end up stuck in 1500-1600.

"Do the math" is a wild statement when the math says youre wrong.

As someone who tried to learn both, I did at least some progress in singles, was even at the #7 on Smogon ladder in Gen 1 Ubers, while in doubles I can't even reach Master Ball rank with a good rental team that suits my playstyle perfectly. Doubles are definitely much harder.

I have played both VGC and a lot of different single formats and I’d say that some singles meta games are more complex (mainly in team building) then some VGC ones but single battles are rarely ever more complex in the actual battle then VGC ones so I’d rank ag singles more difficult to team build for while VGC more difficult to actually play

@nolchannel4950

Жыл бұрын

Singles is literally solved and requires a variety of tier lists and banlists to even hope to have a meta.

@mr.i6527

Жыл бұрын

​​@@nolchannel4950 lol whut. Dude VGC has ban lists and viability lists too. If VGC didn't have the rules game freak made for it the community would also have to step up and make banlists of their own to avoid a meta of 6 Zacians on every team.

@nolchannel4950

Жыл бұрын

@@mr.i6527 A "one mon" clause, "one item clause", and "no/limited legendaries" is far simpler than what Smogon needs to do to keep it fair.

@mr.i6527

Жыл бұрын

@@nolchannel4950 Is evasion clause, no baton pass, no moody, no okho moves, sleep cluase, no dmax, no arena trap/shadow tag, no endless battles, no ubers really that complicated lol. So smogon's 11 rules vs VGC's 4 (you forgot no timer stalling). Its literally a single digits difference lol. None the less, VGC and smogon have rules to prevent it from descending into chaos either way you slice it. What really takes more effort is the banning process, but atleast we have one. Most vgc players hate dmax but have to stick with it, while smogon was able to nip that in the bud early. We can't also just nerf stuff like gamefreak can, so we are more proactive in getting rid of problematic things. While yall had to deal with dark void ruining every match it was in untill gen 7, we had sleep clause to prevent sleep from doing the same to our metagame. So while it might be more complicated, atleast we have ways to stop broken things to ruining the meta other than just to wait for gamefreak to nerf it. And keep in mind, the banning process is only this way because the community decided it would be better that way. They used to just instant ban everything, but made it more democratic when wifi battling became popular.

@eragon78

Жыл бұрын

@@nolchannel4950 Singles isnt even close to being solved. Have you ever literally even watched good players play singles or played it yourself? You seem to have no idea how singles works based on your statement. It isnt even CLOSE to being a solved game.

As someone who plays single battles and is pretty above average, I do not understand a thing about vgc it is, as you say, a completely different game.

Another factor if you want to be funny. Every status condition, crit rate, chance-based action is more varied in doubles as there's 4 pokemon to get those rolls per turn instead of 2. An incalculable number of different game states can occur by move 2.

@plutonicattic7995

7 ай бұрын

Yeah but singles matches on average last for far more turns, and given the exponential nature of possibities and all the random chance, that statistically does make singles more complicated. Also not even close to incalcuable. Its below a million.

uva academy math lesson be like

vgc, bss and 6v6 are all completely different games. vgc gets tricky because of the doubles format and the mind games of only bringing 4 pokemon. bss (battle spot singles/battle station singles/3v3 singles) is tricky and very fast paced because of the mind games of only bringing 3 pokemon and can get hard because a bad lead can make or break a game before the first turn. it's like an in-between of vgc and 6v6, and has been around since Pokemon Stadium on the N64 6v6 singles gets tricky because you need to be able to deal with your opponent's entire team. personally i find vgc the most infuriating because doubles aren't my thing (thanks to Pokemon Colosseum and sometimes taking over 100 battles to reach Masterball on bad months) 3v3 singles is my favorite format because of the fast pace and that bringing a pokemon you like that isn't ideal in the current meta won't break your team as much as in other formats. ideally, every pokemon trainer should experience all 3 of these battle formats at some point

Singles are way more fun imo. I believe that the focus of predictions to get into a winning scenario is way more prevalent in singles because of switches being able to be heavily punished by a double target in doubles. I also believe that the length of singles make them way more enjoyable, which is purely me more enjoying putting pieces in place for a late sweep, instead of the way shorter doubles.

@Zay-zg8js

Жыл бұрын

bruh all the switching is what makes singles boring and annoying

@eragon78

Жыл бұрын

@@Zay-zg8js To some people. Switching in singles shows how far ahead people are thinking. Its all about getting in the mind of your opponent. If you do a bad switch, you can get punished hard. Switching isnt free, its a major cost. But it can be beneficial if you switch into a favorable match up when your opponent didnt predict it. But it can also be extremely risky too. And thats fine if you dont like that stuff. But its far from boring to everyone. There is a lot of depth and strategy behind switching which quite a lot of people like. Its not a simple mindless option because if you do it without thinking you're just going to get destroyed by a good player.

i think the pattern of doubles captures the essence of pokémon much better. it’s kinda hard to say the games about teamwork when only one pokémon acts at a time, and the closest thing to team interaction is switching out to a different pokémon (as your opponent does the same thing, and so you both switch again three more times)

As someone who went from singles to doubles, singles is like what checkers I'd and doubles to chess.

I think they’re both complicated but like wolfey said they’re completely different also I think complexity has a lot more to it than the raw amount of options at your disposal

I do agree, doubles are more complex. But that’s not how it works. If you have a Kyogre and a Zapdos and the other person has Landorous-T and Regieleki it will never happen the cenario where you thunder your kyogre and then ice beam your Zapdos while the oponent max earth move his regieleki right after a extreme speed in the landorus. With that math you did, that’s an option (and objectively bad options are much rarer in singles. In doubles, every targetable move has at least 1 wrong target, but it can be more). What makes VGC more difficult imo is the 4 out of 6 choice and how double target can just nuke a pokemon. That leads to much more volatile turns, where the entire match up is, often, decided by one mistake (in single you can make more mistakes since you have other 5 pokemon, and double targeting is not a thing).