Taking your skill up a notch

Okay, one thing I've always wondered is how to make the leap from an average battler, to a great one. I'm not talking about how to build up your skills, and learning everything about the metagame. I've been playing for a good, long while and could hold my own in debates over the deepest parts of the metagame, but I seem to be stuck at slightly above average. So, I ask the veteran and new battlers alike, in your opinion, what makes a good battler, great?

I've been playing competitive on and off since 2009, though I don't really consider myself an amazing battler, maybe average or above average. The highest point of my competitive career was when I reached the upper ladder in BW NU and won against several competent battlers (I also probably reached the upper ladder in DPP OU as well, but that's so long ago that I've forgot already lol). I've been asking myself the same question, and several answers has come up to me.

The most important contributor to become better in battling, I think, is to get involved with people with the same mindset. The only reason I became relatively successful in BW NU was because the people around me back then were in the same mindset that NU was fun to play. We shared strategies, helped each other make teams, and debated about whether Smogon should ban Musharna or not. I wish I could have taken a step further like Danica, who got heavily involved in BW NU up to the point where she became an active Smogon user, and even a Moderator.

Lastly, as cliche as this sounds, I think it's very important to just keep battling. There's always lots of things to discover and learn. Just not in the lower ladders (especially OU's lower ladder, which is cancer). You can't just keep theorymoning every team you make and not testing it.

There are also other things, like teambuilding with proper synergy, prediction, and familiarity with the general sets used by several Pokemon, but I think these two are the most important.

I agree with Zeffy. I may not be very skilled either (in fact I've only started learning about the metagame late 2012) but I know that everything I see in this section and on the server is making me learn more about the metagame, and as he said get involved with people who have the same mindset as the tier you're studying so that you know how everything works and what the standard sets are to use in that tier.

Also, it never hurts to test your team out on Showdown so you can see if there's a gaping flaw in the team that can be fixed and patch up the issues you had. But as Zeffy said, the best way to improve your skills is to keep battling so you can become more familiar with how everything ticks. Testing your team is always good to open room for improvement because that way other players who are more skilled can help point out what is wrong.

Also, having good synergy in your team is another key to succeeding. Work out what strategies or even Pokemon complement each other, and then get yourself familiar with their standard sets and then, you should eventually get a good team going. With all the helpful resources out there, there's always a way to improve your skills.

In my opinion, XY is much less of a team matchup metagame than some recent metagames (with the notable exception of BP of course), which means that battles are more heavily influenced by individual execution. And that's the biggest difference in success I think.

Great teams are nice but are only successful through a lot of reps, which allows you to learn how to use your team, what to preserve, sacrifice, etc. against certain match-ups, and how to play around weak points. After awhile, it sort of becomes second nature, and I find the process of gelling with a well-built team to be tremendously fun. While by no means perfect, I find that general indicators of battling skill include aptitude at double switching (or more broadly, keeping momentum), sacrificing skillfully (and choosing the Pokemon correctly), and exploiting opposing weaknesses.

Metagame knowledge is necessary as a baseline but guarantees nothing. My inability to function throughout most of Gen 4 is proof enough of this. Zeffy is right--you just have to keep battling and adjusting to the metagame. And that last part is a shame, or my OU team from two months ago would be a lot better than it is now. :P

You want to know how you can make the important leap that differentiate the great players from the above-average ones, in order to succeed, that is a good question that should be made in a particular moment of the competitive career, but you are the only one who has the answer.

I hate when people come to battle with the same pokemon, same strategies, highly predictable moves, and a dreadful capacity to face defeat (rage quits). This is the regular, above-average trainer, imo. When you keep doing exactly what others do every day, you gonna stuck in the same position. I ask myself, "what I can do to differentiate myself from these people?," "in which ways I can improve my skills without falling into monotony?" I'm not going to reach one end answering these, because I found answers everyday. Is my own perspective, something that I see in relation to the game that I develop in the battles, and, because of this, is why I'm the only one who can answer my questions in order to fulfill my needs for improvement.

You know how do you play and what you can improve in relation to other players. Answer your questions, fulfill your needs, and you going to do the leap to a great player level.

I hope this work a little. Wishing you success in your next step as competitive trainer :)

Are you ♥♥♥♥ing kidding me? XY OU is HEAVILY match-up dependent, which imo makes it awful to play.

As for the actual question, I look at myself as a rather mediocre player. I've peaked 3rd on the XY Ubers ladder, I reached 1,7k during the Mega Luke suspect test in XY OU (pretty much the only time I've played that tier), as well as peaking 2nd on the RBY ladder, and 1st on the GSC (my fav meta), ADV and BW UU ladder (this was a while ago). I've played competitively since late 2012 or something, though I knew about the competitive scene, Smogon etc. since 2007.

What makes a good player great? The ability to adapt. Of course being able to predict switches and such makes you somewhat good, the ability to adapt to each playstyle and metagame is more important in my eyes. Being able to build solid teams to use in tournament play separates the great fom the good.

Still, being able to make plays is obviously important too.

Great example: http://http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-ou-12000

Smogon Tour semifinal, Bloo vs Leftiez. Insane early-game plays by Leftiez and just as good late-game plays by Bloo.

Lets seeeee. In gen 4 i got to #1 on the OU, UU, NU and Suspect ladders multiple times, ubers sucked and never appealed to me so i just didnt play it. I also went something like 108-4 on wifi when DP first came out. Last gen i basically did the same as in gen 4, #1 in OU, UU, NU multiple times and also RBY and GSC on PO. RU and ubers are poser tiers so i never played them. Lets all be modest. :)

Now id probably look at myself as a mediocre player tbh. I play more casually now and i dont really have enough time/dont really care anymore etc etc. Gamefreak caters to the lesser player now and more to mindless strategies/pokemon i.e "i know lets put an unblockable rapid spin in the game" or "we should totally make ghost and dark moves OP as hell" or "lets give everything base 160 attack". At least crits were nerfed this gen, which imo was a big detriment to the past gens i wont get deep into it, but letting me get +6 +6 with my Curselax means you DESERVE to lose and not take it out with some no skill noob of a move cheap crit fishing garbage. Well....now you cant anymore. :) Anyway who knows, i might come out of retirement or play some ADV one day.

The ladder is probably the biggest indicator of skill imo over tourney battles because it showcases consistency (best of 3 is better for "skill" in tourneys because any noob can luck hax you once). Speaking of the ladder, id recommend playing it alot if you want to improve. The lower ladder battles/battlers are absolutely terrible, but as you get higher you should hopefully get better users. Take note of what happens, what you're weak to, what works, what doesn't, change and adapt. Even now when i play casually i go into auto pilot because you get used to all of the aforementioned. Also dont do stupid things. I see alot of people doing absolutely synapse things these days for no reason. See; Switching Rotom-W or something into Charizard when its clearly going to mega.. :|

Practice makes perfect, play a lot and you will get better. Try approaching pokemon like a game of chess...plan and micromanage. Even if the ladder becomes so easy that you can just autopilot to victory, it's better to challenge yourself to think about this stuff anyways. This might sound obvious but be strategic when making your teams too. For example pairing two pokemon with similar counters, so that one can damage it for the other to break through. I also recommend reading guides and watching videos. Smogons magazine the smog and its articles aren't as good as they used to be, but anything issue 18 or prior is ptobably okay. Playing tactics are transcendent across gens so don't worry if an article references an older meta game. There are some decent players on yt ingest the bad ones too, you might be able to learn something from watching them play.



Also a lot of people have said 'adapt' but not expanded. Each battle should be treated differently. At the beginning of a game, look which of your pokes threatens your opponent and which of his are most threatening to you. Your plays should try to reflect this, attempt to weaken your opponents counters to your important pokes, while making plays that make it air tight for his to get in or sweep.

Antebellum said:

Try approaching pokemon like a game of chess...plan and micromanage.

Click to expand...

No. XY OU, or any XY metagame in general can not be compared to chess. XY OU is extremely match-up dependent, something chess isn't, where the only "advantage" you get is starting with white pieces.

If you want to compare chess to a metagame, it's GSC OU.

Antebellum said:

Also a lot of people have said 'adapt' but not expanded. Each battle should be treated differently. At the beginning of a game, look which of your pokes threatens your opponent and which of his are most threatening to you. Your plays should try to reflect this, attempt to weaken your opponents counters to your important pokes, while making plays that make it air tight for his to get in or sweep.

Click to expand...

This is kindergarten knowledge. Everybody knows this.

MoxieInfinite said:

No. XY OU, or any XY metagame in general can not be compared to chess. XY OU is extremely match-up dependent, something chess isn't, where the only "advantage" you get is starting with white pieces.

If you want to compare chess to a metagame, it's GSC OU.



This is kindergarten knowledge. Everybody knows this.

Click to expand...

The OP asked for help, it's better to be concise and lay everything out so that he can learn better. Also if you understand that concept as much as you claim and work it into your play, you would have been able to get higher than 1700 on the M lucario test. Explaining in detail is valuable so it's not a big deal if a random says its kindergarten knowledge. Your post would have been a lot more valuable if you explained what leftiez and bloo were doing instead of just saying that its important to "make plays". Explain that leftiez used his knowledge of bloo's win condition (trapping leftiez' Latias with ttar so that charizard y could sleep) to bring in his threatening diggersby. Also the chess example was a basic one, but still valid, pokemon is a game that's best won with strategy and planning, team matchup doesn't change that. If I went up against a grandmaster and he was missing a rook and knight from the start, he would likely still win. The better player will still beat the worse one 7 times out of 10 at least.

This has all been some pretty great advice, so thanks!

MoxieInfinite said:

This is kindergarten knowledge. Everybody knows this.

Click to expand...

Everyone might know it, but does everyone really understand it? A lot of the time, the key to becoming better is taking a step back and looking at the basics. So, when a person is asking for help, it's good just to mention the basics again.

Also, I can't watch the replay since it says the webpage doesn't exist. How sad.

Anyway, how do you guys feel about curveballs? You know, those spots on your team that throw something unexpected at your opponent. I feel like I have had one really successful team that topped at number six on the BW NU ladder (I don't care if you got a higher placement, that was really good for me). The entire team revolved around a sweeping Relicanth, which most people played as a defensive wall at the time. I was able to catch the opponent off guard most of the time and knock out at least half of their team, leaving a gaping hole that was too big to recover from. Do you think that having a curveball made the difference?

Nolafus said:

Also, I can't watch the replay since it says the webpage doesn't exist. How sad.

Click to expand...

I'll fix link when I have the time

or, use this link instead: http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-ou-12000

Antebellum said:

The OP asked for help, it's better to be concise and lay everything out so that he can learn better. Also if you understand that concept as much as you claim and work it into your play, you would have been able to get higher than 1700 on the M lucario test.

Click to expand...

The fact is that I only needed to get 1,7k on the ladder to actually vote, I saw no reason to get higher.
Also, the #1 spot had around 1820-ish, so 1,7k was top 100 iirc, so I wasn't all that bad.

But for you, I'll go back to XY OU, and I'll get to top 100 again(if I even can).
I haven't played OU since the MLuke test (aside from in Smogon Tour), so expect it to take a while.

Zeffy said:

or, use this link instead: http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-ou-12000

Click to expand...

Meh too much hax for it to be a "good" battle. Sure the crits, misses etc added suspense but yeah. I dont really see any outplaying. Seems like a crapshoot with crits and misses determining the outcome. See: Charizard Y would have hilariously swept once Latias was down because down even with no sand because the guy had no counter for it, even with no sun. He only came back because Focus Blast missed on Tar. :/

Dark Azelf said:

Meh too much hax for it to be a "good" battle. Sure the crits, misses etc added suspense but yeah. I dont really see any outplaying. Seems like a crapshoot with crits and misses determining the outcome. See: Charizard Y would have hilariously swept once Latias was down because down even with no sand because the guy had no counter for it, even with no sun. He only came back because Focus Blast missed on Tar. :/

Click to expand...

I never said the game was clean, I said it was good in terms of plays, which this one obviously was.

Nolafus said:

Anyway, how do you guys feel about curveballs? You know, those spots on your team that throw something unexpected at your opponent. I feel like I have had one really successful team that topped at number six on the BW NU ladder (I don't care if you got a higher placement, that was really good for me). The entire team revolved around a sweeping Relicanth, which most people played as a defensive wall at the time. I was able to catch the opponent off guard most of the time and knock out at least half of their team, leaving a gaping hole that was too big to recover from. Do you think that having a curveball made the difference?

Click to expand...

Having a "curveball" Pokemon can certainly be a big help to you. The problem is that there's a fine line between an unexpected set and one that's just stupid. So its hard for most people to come up with one that works. But if you can effectively use a Pokemon as a curveball, it works really nicely, because of the element of surprise.

wait why am I joining in on this conversation, I'm not a terribly skilled battler