How to handle in-game teams on PokeBase (give your opinion!)

Question

Hey guys! I want to talk about in-game teams on PokeBase, so we can decide exactly what our rules are for them. Hopefully this thread will give you some points to discuss. There is an anonymous poll at the end, so you can make your thoughts count even if you don't want to write something.

The problem

In-game team questions are an awkward fit on PokeBase. They come in many shapes and forms, are quite repetitive, and are often of poor quality. Let's make sense of it with some categories:

1. Some questions about in-game teams are quite general, and can be 'reused' by other people, e.g. "What's the best strategy to beat Totem Lurantis?" or "Is Gallade or Gardevoir more useful in Platinum playthroughs?"
2. Other in-game team questions are limited only to one person's team, e.g. "What should my last member be?" or "What Pokemon should I replace?"
3. Some in-game team questions meet in the middle, e.g. "How can I beat Totem Lurantis using my team?"
4. There are also completely open-ended "Rate my in-game team" posts, which we currently don't allow anywhere.

I want us to decide finally where each of these questions belongs on the site, if anywhere at all.

Why bother?

A lot of people think in-game team advice/rates are not important or needed. Our own rules list says in-game teams "do not need much work, just a variety of types and moves". However, I don't completely agree with this, and would like to know what other people think. Here are my arguments:

• The people who come to us asking for in-game team advice probably already know that they need type variety, etc. They are here to learn the most effective and most efficient techniques available. That information should be within PokeBase's capacity to provide.
• Deciding upon good/ efficient strategies for in-game is not a trivial process. Here is an example on Smogon (main board) showing the research and optimisation that can go into this topic. None of it is required to beat Cynthia or whatnot, but it certainly could make the process easier.
• Common concerns, e.g. people being uptight about replacing Pokemon or not giving enough detail, could be stamped out in the rules.
• "Rate my in-game team" posts haven't been given a proper trial run, at least not under any modern ruleset. We don't know if it would work until we try it. We can stop if it doesn't work.

The fact people ask questions about in-game teams at all shows there are people who value the advice. The question is whether we, as a community, value giving out the advice. What do you think?

I expect people's response to that question will depend on which 'category' of in-game team questions (as described above) we're talking about.

Quality standards

Another factor that I expect will sway people's opinion is whether they enjoy having the questions on PokeBase. This comes down to how well-written they tend to be.

A lot of people, myself included, have a negative view of "help me with my team" questions (i.e. category 2, 3 and 4) because they lack detail and effort. However, we can use the rules to force people to put in effort and detail, or else we can remove the posts. Would these rules give some assurance?

• Questions asking for help with in-game teams must include levels*, items, abilities and moves for all Pokemon on the team. (Add natures?)
• For totally open-ended "Rate my team" posts, the asker must indicate how far through the playthrough they are, or clearly state that the team is a plan.
• The asker must give a brief explanation of each Pokemon on their team, or an equivalent description that gives some context for the post.
• The post must specify the exact game being played (e.g. specifically Sapphire, not R/S/E).

^{* levels are not needed if the team is a plan}

Do you have other ideas for requirements? Is this too much, too little, or just right? Would you enjoy giving in-game team advice if these requirements were added?

Where should they go?

If we allow any in-game team questions, then we need to decide which section they should be posted on. Each category potentially fits somewhere different. I have some opinions on this topic -- feel free to give your thoughts, too.

• The goal of the main section is to be a collection of information, advice, and solutions to problems. Category 1 certainly fits the brief, and category 3 possibly does. However, I'd say #2 and #4 don't, because other people can't always use advice for other people's teams.
• The RMT section currently houses "Rate my competitive team" and "Last member for my competitive team" questions, which have a lot in common with category 2 and 4. These could be grouped together on the RMT section, under the identity of "open-ended advice for teams".
• I think a helpful way to draw the line would be to say, "Any question that compels you to include your team belongs on the RMT section". This would give category 3 a home.

Then, there's the question of which categories we allow at all.

• I think category 1 questions are good quality, so they should be allowed (as they always have been).
• Category 2 and 4 questions were banned in the past, but I think with the new rules set out above, they would be OK. What do you think?
• Category 3 questions should be OK with the new rules, but there might not be much point having them. For example, "How can I beat Totem Lurantis with my team?" (#3) is possibly made obsolete by "What are the best strategies to beat Totem Lurantis?" (#1). Do you think so? Maybe it's OK if category 1 and 3 are on different sections.

Another possible issue is that mixing in-game teams with competitive teams on RMT could be disorganised and distracting. However, this could be limited somewhat with additional rules: e.g. question titles must clearly indicate what the team is. Would it still be a dealbreaker?

(Example: "[White in-game team] What changes can I make before the Elite Four?" v. "[Gen 8 OU] Trick Room offence with Melmetal")

Poll

To get a full picture of the everyone's thoughts, I made a poll where you can give your opinions on these topics. I'll share the results in a few days, and that will combine with the discussion to make a final viewpoint.

Click here to vote in the poll!

Feel free to give written feedback as well, as lengthy as you want it to be. We'll be using your opinions to make suggestions for a revamped rules page (coming soon), so tell us what you think.

Comments

I just voted in the poll, I think there should be a separate section for in-game teams and competitive teams, rather than stack all of them in one section. Otherwise, it would be better if we make standard tags, just like how smogon makes them.

> mixing in-game teams with competitive teams on RMT could be disorganised...

---

I just voted in the poll and would like to share my thoughts on this ******** issue which has been increasing now.

> Some questions about in-game teams are quite general, and can be 'reused' by other people

I'd like to support *only* these actually, but I voted for this and in the middle option. Exactly WHAT is the issue in levelling up, packing a good team, checking ******* Smogon for the VR's (it has for almost each Gen) and just PLAYING the goddamn game? Like please, ANY team can be good for a game! It ain't like competitive! Ergo, I think that In-Game Team rates would be a stupid idea and I'll absolutely hate them.

Guys the userbase of DB is filled with people who're under 13, don't know good enough grammar and ask weird questions. I'm not stressing on the grammar part because yes, some people's native language isn't English, but some people at least try to write as good as they can! Others just do "nah bro this pokimun is he is good". This point is totally different from what the poll is about, but I wanted to stress on this:
The good user base of Pokémon Database is declining.

Me, even I didn't want to come on when some users were posting twenty ******* questions a day, and I absolutely hate the RMT Section even now. If we let in-game teams there, good game people, I'm sure a lot of the people would get irritated by the stupid teams and would follow suit.

> The people who come to us asking for in-game team advice probably already know that they need type variety, etc. They are here to learn the most effective and most efficient techniques available. That information should be within PokeBase's capacity to provide.

Yeah I agree, so let's keep it till category 1. The rest of the categories are too open-minded and Jesus Christ it's too open-minded.

> The question is whether we, as a community, value giving out the advice. What do you think?

Well if I played any official games, I'll be ready to help anyone. Some people might know that I don't give a damn about points by now so I don't really care about BA's and all, and so I'll be ready to help anyone who requires any help if I get a briefing about a game.

The Quality Standards is the only thing that prompted me to read the whole post. We NEEEEEED to enforce these strongly, no matter which all categories are allowed. The users think 'tis a lax forum and post ******** but no, we *need* to have a better moderation. I don't mean about the Moderator level, all the Mods are doing their job perfectly, but at the Editor and Expert level we need some more volunteers who are capable enough. Let's make DB a better place guys.

> Where should they go?

Ig that we shouldn't allow total teams and should allow Category 1 only, so Pokébase seems fine to me.

That's it, I'll say something more when I get some time exams suck, and sorry if I swore too much it's a habit now (I'm a lot more active on Smogon that's why ;;).

---

I totally agree with Assault on this.

---

I like all the ideas in the question, and I like the idea of in game team rates, in the event that people are actually RATING them and not just saying "no, this mon is bad"
the rules and standards are good.
I disagree with Assault on this matter, and think that people wanting the most EFFICIENT method for it is a good thing. Teams can be more efficient, and yeah, you can BEAT the game with anything, but there's easier and harder ways.
I do a lot of Nuzlockes and other challenge runs and I think that "rate my nuzlocke team" is a great idea because nuzlocke runs have higher stakes attached, and people are often more likely to replace a team member, because they'd rather box it than let it die. Nuzlockes also have more limited team choices so its less open-ended.
The open-endedness isn't really a problem. RMT questions are already open-ended so why not include ingame teams in it?
And Assault said the information can be found on Smogon. We don't allow questions with answers that can be easily found ON THIS SITE. So what if it's on Smogon? Why not have it here too?

---

I think 1 and 2 belong on PokeBase, and are perfectly fine, because people could truly benefit from that data.

3 and 4 I feel should not be allowed, especially 3. With the example of totem lurantis, (or any example of how to beat ________) anybody could just answer with overleveling. Anything can be beaten in a Pokemon game without toooo much trouble, except something like the Battle frontier.

I also feel like questions like 4 are a little unnecessary. In game teams usually work just fine, as we've all said, and what you said about type variety might not be true, based on the amount of points/obvious experience in the game most people asking these questions have.
If we were to keep questions like 4, which would be very understandable, I think they should definitely go to rmt, but the title of the question asking something like this should always have the words "in game team" in them.

---

@Sixer do we want more mess in the RMT lol? It’s SUCH a MESS right now, people posting rates for the ‘AG’ tier with ******** Pokémon that’re not even viable in UU. We first need to actually sort that out and then check if there’ll be enough space or w/e left for in-game teams.
And yeah if we talk about RMT, can we have something like ‘pinned posts’? Like, with the rules and all do that people actually DO read them. If not pinned, we can bump them regularly so that they stay at the top or something. I guess this might just be a nice idea or something, I’d like the communities view on this one.
And yeah @Sixer, your arguments are nice but ic that you forgot one main fact: DB is really messed up now and first we need to improvise and improve it. Smogon has the free space and moderators on the *lower level* (translating to our Experts and Editors (that’s what they’re called right?), the Mods are fine), which can maintain the order in a sub-forum. If we have them here, more clutter. First we’ll have to sort this problem out and then do the needful. I also agree that we can have more information about in-game things here, but the quality of the newer users and the mess makes me frown upon the idea as a whole.
In-game is something totally different from competitive. Over-levelling works well for the gym leaders or w/e is in the game, mostly. Competitive is a different scenario, where some moms are viable are some are bad. You can just level up and win in games, whereas you NEED some advice on how to actually win in competitive. I hope you get my point, and yeah these also increase clutter...

---

Nuzlockes have quite a bit of a luck factor. You can’t just tell somebody to use X Pokémon, they would have to be lucky to find it on the first encounter of the route. Nuzlockes have a big luck factor-A pokemon may get killed by a crit, you may not be able to help that. Pokémon may die. It’s impossible to say with confidence what’s going to happen, thus making these teams hard to rate.


Regular In-Game teams….eh. That’s a mess waiting to happen-everyone will be using their favorites (and rightfully so. It’s in-game.) In-Game is super easy compared to competitive. I beat HG and it’s post-game with 3 electric types. I beat Diamond with an ONIX (not to mention that it was underleveled) on my team and 4/6 of my Pokémon having type overlap with one another. It’s pointless to even COMPARE it to competitive’s difficulty. It’s also quite a bit more efficient to just play the game with what you have than wait for an answer.

(besides, it’s a lot more fun to just play the game, no?)

---

I totally agree with Mr. Primal here.

---

@PrimordialSea I completely agree with you, I beat Cynthia, the hardest Champion, with a level 47 team that included graveler

---

how about nuzlocke? are they included as "in-game team"? normal playthrough and nuzlocke are pretty different

---

I just have one question - what is the damn POINT of rating in-game teams (#4). Why should we rate them, and why do people want them rated anyway? In-game teams are a matter of choice, and they're anyway for having fun, as Primal said. It just doesn't make any sense. If people really want to show other people their teams, they could just post them in the in-game team thread. #4 should certainly not be allowed anywhere. And regarding #3, there are people asking how to do impossible things, like beating Roxanne with one single Torchic, or Whitney with one single Mareep. These things should not be allowed at all, I mean, it's illogical and a waste of time. #1 and #2 should be allowed on Pokebase, and I completely agree with the quality standards. Amen.

---

I don't agree with everything that GeniusGatik942 said here tbh.
1. Getting teams rated does make "sense", as some people just want to win the game and don't care about "favorites" or anything. Now this is something that I expect would cause some issues if we don't allow in-game teams, as some people do like to battle with the "best" strategies available. So, even though mostly people DO have fun, some are a little more serious and it'd make "sense" for those teams.
2. I've never seen someone ask such a vague thing like beating Roxanne with one single Torchic. It's my fervent wish that such kind of ******** stays away from DB, but as for now, I, personally, haven't seen such things. I personally don't think that it'll be illogical and a waste of time, that's a bit on the extreme side.
I'll try to add something more later am busy rn.

---

https://pokemondb.net/pokebase/396450/how-can-i-beat-roxanne-with-only-one-torchic?show=396450#q396450

Here's the link for the torchic question. Such questions are... bad. Regarding Assault's comment, even I sit on hours at a end making Word docs on the best teams for each game, and no, I don' care about favs either, but the thing is, why the heck should people waste their time rating my team? It has absolutely no stakes, and you can just say overlevel everything. Instead of asking you to rate my in-game team, I can just ask about a certain battle I'm having trouble with, or about a certain type of Pokemon I want. The thing is, #2 and #3 make #4 obsolete.

---

When did I say I spend hours on end doing that thing that you said?
My point here is that these questions help the OP, a lot, I dare say. #4 is something that a lot of people won't like, but #2 and #3 still stand tall in the list. Imo, they both are nice enough, but the rules should be enforced so that they don't cause too much clutter.

---

So basically you're saying that #2 and #3 are good and #4 should be banned? Bcoz that's what I'm saying.

---

I really want to give my opinion but everything in this thread is too hard of English for me to follow so I’ll probably just dm fizz

---

Any estimate of when the poll results would come out, I'm highly curious.

---

I'd like to add my humble opinion on this matter.

In short, I think that questions #1 and #3 should be allowed on this site and that #2 and #4 should be banned. Here's why:

--Like everyone else said, #1 are interesting questions and benefit other users besides the asker. It is additionally enjoyable to discuss the best Pokemon for certain situations in-game.

--The main reason why I think #3 should be allowed is because not every player is going to use the same strategy on certain parts of a game. For example (and an incredibly simple example at that), in FireRed/LeafGreen the easiest method to beat Brock's gym would be to choose either Bulbasaur or Squirtle at the beginning of the game and use their super-effective moves to sweep his Rock Pokemon. But some players are going to choose Charmander and not have access to those moves (unless they grind that Charmander until it learns Metal Claw, but even then it still struggles against Onix). The best strategy for those who chose Charmander, then, is probably to catch a Mankey and grind it until it learns Karate Chop. This isn't really the best example, but my point is that different teams will use different strategies to clear certain areas of the games most efficciently. It's not like everyone's going to agree on one prime team for the easiest playthrough.

SIDE NOTE: I do agree with GeniusGatik and GmaxWaluigi with their qualms about #3; I just think that with these rules they shouldn't cause too much clutter. For questions where it's impossible to beat an area of a game with a certain team, like "How do I beat Roxxanne with one Torchic", I believe it would be okay if someone answered with, "It's impossible, sorry." As for over-leveling, most people I know personally who play Pokemon usually don't look to over-grinding as a solution to a part of the game they're struggling with; instead they try to form a strategy with their Pokemon that helps them in that situation. I think that if people were to ask questions like this (#3) here, they would be looking for strategies as an answer, not over-leveling.

-- I believe #2 should be banned and #4 should stay banned because they aren't very useful questions to begin with. As others have said, Pokemon isn't some high-difficulty game where you can easily lose to most trainers, and why not have fun learning about the game as you play instead of having your hand held by a walkthrough? 5 out of 6 of my pokemon in my first playthrough of X were weak to Water, and yet I swept the Water E4 guy with a TALONFLAME. I know the older games are harder than X, but even then almost anything works. So yeah, I don't see why #2 and #4 should be allowed here.

As for where #1 and #3 should be placed, Pokebase seems great for #1. I think #3 could possibly fit in RMT...? When a user asks #3, they could format the question as "Rate the effectiveness of my in-game team for x scenario". And then other users could suggest ideas to improve that team for that area of the game. I think it'd work just as long as the asker made it crystal-clear that they are asking about a specific in-game event.

These are just my opinions, and I know that a lot people probably disagree with my views. I feel strongly that #2 and #4 have no place here though. Other than that, I think your suggestions are great, Fizz!

---

#1 seems fine to me-despite being mostly easy, Pokémon games have a FEW hard fights that a few questions for strategies would be fine for (Ultra Necrozma, Cynthia, Whitney, etc.) but having too many of these could get annoying.

#2 is eh. Pretty low quality honestly.

#3 is also pretty…eh. Overlevelling is the clear answer most of the time, and it’s also easy to find (using this site and Bulbapedia) TMs that would work well against the trainer/Pokémon they’re struggling with.

#4 I would continue to not allow.

---

All of the category definitely have some pros and cons
#4 is definitely not allowed
#3 is a bit in the middle, some people are new to pokemon or dont know that much about the games, and they just play along but loses a lot (like me when i was playing ruby)
#2 is a bit meh, ive seen a lot of people ask this and i dont know how they feel when #2 is not allowed
#1 is allowed, but i think we could make it like the "moveset question" and "best in-game team question". If you dont get what i mean, im gonna explain it, "how to defeat totem lurantis" we need just one of that, just 1. They can just search for it and see whats recommended by the answerer

---

Thanks so much for your comments guys. I hoped a few of you would go right through these suggestions, and that's what happened. Glad I did this.
I read everything and I've narrowed things down to some options, which you can read below. Let us know what you'd prefer.

Answer 1

Thanks for voting and for writing comments everyone. This is the clearest the response we've ever gotten on this issue, which will be very helpful to us suggesting changes to the rules very soon.

Poll results

What to do now?

I had a feeling the results (specifically, #4) would go this way. I made a pitch for #4 to see if people wanted to try it out with some quality assurances. In the end though, it looks like "rate my in-game team" posts are very unfavourable, so they will stay banned. In-game team advice will also stay off the RMT section, based on the results of question 2.

From there, it gets interesting. I was a bit surprised how many of you were accepting of #2, given its similarities to #4. I tried writing a rule that allows 1+2 and bans 3+4, but I found that difficult because it boils down to "we'll help you with your team if you ask in this way and not this other way". It sounds arbitrary and it would be hard to draw the line -- signs of a bad rule. (Allowing 1+3 and banning 2+4 was similarly hard, and doesn't make sense given the poll results anyway.)

That leaves two options: allow 1 and ban 2/3/4 (option A), or allow 1/2/3 and ban 4 (option B). I had a go writing rules for each of these options. For option B, I considered the feedback on question 3, which suggested the new rules were slightly too lenient. Have a look:

Option A

Strategy advice for playthroughs must be generalised. PokéBase questions should be re-usable by anyone, so we don't give advice for individual people's teams. However, you can ask general questions like "What are the best strategies to beat Totem Lurantis?" and "Which of Aggron and Golem is more effective for Emerald playthroughs?"

Option B

Advice for in-game teams must be focused. Open-ended "rate my in-game team" questions are not allowed, but you can ask for help with specific battles or optimisations, e.g. what the final member should be. If you post your in-game team, you must include the following:

• Items, abilities, moves and natures for every Pokemon, plus levels where applicable.
• Indication of exactly which game you're playing and exactly what issue you need help with.
• A brief explanation of each Pokemon on the team (or something equivalent), plus a distinctive title (i.e. not "help with my Emerald team").

Which do you prefer? Would you like another poll? :p

Personally, I prefer option A because I think it's the most in line with the purpose of the platform. It's a lot simpler, and it doesn't depend on the "quality standards" part which I don't think everybody will agree on. However, option B lets us continue allowing some popular question types.

If we do go with option A, I was thinking of posting some new threads like "What are the most efficient Pokemon for [game] playthroughs?", which would cover any gaps in our content on PokeBase. This would be different from the existing igtq threads because it would focus on ranking individual Pokemon and optimising them for the entire playthrough. If we did that, then I think banning 2/3/4 would be fair enough. What do you think?

Comments

Ayy that’s cool. Will pen down my thoughts here when I get free, but for the time being, I support #1.

---

Here it becomes tough. If a beginner asks a question generally (opt A), he/she might find it difficult to find an exact answer to suit him / her. The asker might want to use his / her favorites, but the answer contradicts the asker's views. The asker might have gone too much ahead... For example, let's consider that the asker is challenging the Elite-4 and is struggling against Caitlin and Shauntal, and doesn't have any Dark type. In this case, the best strategy for the asker may be different (as it is just a headache to go back and catch a Sandile / Scraggy), while for others it may be different. (I am just taking an example). For the answerers, it is very easy to answer when the askers provide their team, and thus, requires less research. If the answerers apply some efforts to their answer, research many sources, and answer the question in such a way that the above issues won't be created (the asker is satisfied) and it is reusable by other people.

By adopting the above measures, I think it is definitely better to go with option A.

---

i dont know what i feel about this, as there a LOT of people uses #2 and #3, the asker and even the answerer, so i think we better of make a poll then commenting

---

The users that ask questions that would need option B are new users who never read the rules.  Based on this, I think that option A is generally better so that it is much more strict, shutting down the new users who would break the rules.  This won't prevent this from happening, but it will hopefully lessen it by just banning those questions.

---

I think option 2 is more fair to the people, even if it will be a little annoying sometimes.

---

Option A seems to be ahead, but there's enough support for B that I wanted to do this poll: https://pokemondb.net/pokebase/meta/78301
Please vote so we have a full picture of what you guys want :)

---

There're like only four-five people responding for this (people vote more in the poll though). Can we have some more people to jot down their suggestions and thoughts :[.