Talk:Skill (Shuffle)

Mega Effects on Normal Skills

To be more clear on what that title means, can Mega Audino still use Opportunist? Or Mega Lucario use Pummel? CycloneGU (talk) 16:39, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

From what I can tell, Power of 4 no longer activates with Mega Kangaskhan, so I imagine it's the same for the other Pokémon. --Abcboy (talk) 00:18, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

French translations

Hi ! I took a look at your job and I just added the french translation for missing skills and Manetric in the list of skills. It's really a nice job, congrats :) Chiwi★ (Talk) 09:20, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Shuffle vs Shuffle Mobile

Why are there two tables? Do some Skills function differently? Or is it just because of the different Pokémon available? If there are Skills that function differently, I think it would be worthwhile to specifically note that somewhere. --SnorlaxMonster 07:18, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

About a third of them differ in one way or another. --Abcboy (talk) 10:06, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Type Immunities to Status Effects

I've just found this on Reddit. Is that true? And if yes, can we consider to put it in the article somehow?

An unrelate question: Is the "Damage calculation" section suitable best here? Or it should be on the main Pokémon Shuffle page? Or even the List of Pokémon by Pokémon Shuffle list number page (which lists Attack Power for each Pokémon and Level).

Another unrelate question: How do Vitality Drain and Poisonous Mist work? Do they even activate-able?

Thanks for your help! --Yen01 (talk) 16:20, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Skill Boosters

Does anyone have any idea what these do, the exact effects or what the actual boosts are? PartHunter (talk) 12:28, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Someone gave me this a while ago. http://pastebin.com/0Br7Arc5

Now how would we add all that here without making a mess? Unowninator (talk) 23:31, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

I've been trying to think about how to do this for a while, and it would basically require a full overhaul of the table. The mostly unnecessary index number column could be removed, and the Japanese name column could also be removed since it seems like all of that information is already in the tables on the bottom of the page (and isn't very crucial to have front and center for most people reading the English version of this page). Additionally, the notes and Pokemon columns could easily be narrowed a bit if needed. As for implemenation of the Skill Booster stuff, I imagine it would be placed between where Chance and Notes are right now. Start with a Skill Booster Column, subdivided into columns for lv. 2-5, and maybe another one before them that would designate whether damage or activation rates are boosted, then the Exp. Group Column to the right of all that. The descriptions of what it and the exp groups mean would probably have to go above the table somewhere.

Also, note that the additional resources linked in that pastebin show the boosts per level on the unreleased skills, but not their EXP Groups, in case you or somebody else would like to give this a try. - unsigned comment from VioletPumpkin (talk • contribs)

The status immunity chart as requested.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PokemonShuffle/comments/3npjsf/type_immunities_to_status_effects/

Sorry, but unless there's an easier way to remake it here, I can't do it. Unowninator (talk) 03:04, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. Also, Suicune is before Mew in the Shuffle Dex order (which is what the order used on this page is). I'm fine with having Skill Swapper ones being at the end. VioletPumpkin (talk) 03:15, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

The Effectiveness chart seems like a nearly perfect fit for copying and pasting. The rows do not need to be altered. They should use the Bulbepedia order rather than the order on the link-to chart. That means that it is just the columns that need to be adjusted. --Marlofkark (talk) 12:51, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

That could certainly work, but I think that it's probably safe to remove Astonish and its clones and just mention that all other Skills activate regardless of the opponent's type. All of the paralysis Skills could probably be grouped together too. VioletPumpkin (talk) 13:31, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

I've taken up most of your suggestions, but for now I did not group paralysis skills because that would need us make an (unofficial) grouping and explain it beforehand. I feel it is visible by the table anyway. Nescientist (talk) 12:40, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there's more to this immunity than just being immune to status conditions, but if it falls into lines by the status condition they inflict, it sounds like it has more to do with status conditions than Skills... So I've removed the table from here. (Someone is free to enlighten me regarding anything I'm missing here.)

If a table is ever needed again, though, this is better than the one that I just removed:

Burned				X	X	X		X		X	X					X
Frozen		X		X				X	X	X			X	X	X			X
Paralyzed			X	X				X	X				X	X		X		X
Asleep		X				X		X	X			X			X	X	X
Spooked		X		X	X	X	X		X			X			X	X	X

Tiddlywinks (talk) 06:13, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

How is that one better? It doesn't fit on my screen. Unowninator (talk) 06:29, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

...I want to say "So?" I mean, the other was bigger...

Anyway, the other had far too jarring colors. Tiddlywinks (talk) 06:35, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

That was bigger? Because I didn't notice any problems with it. *checks older version*

The old one looks smaller to me. And it fits on my screen pretty well. Unowninator (talk) 06:39, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

If it matters to you, you can screenshot both and I can see if there's anything going on the might be fixed. But otherwise, I don't know what to tell you. Tiddlywinks (talk) 06:47, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Here you go. [1] Unowninator (talk) 06:58, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Oh! I copied the header from the Skill list, but this one doesn't at all need to be sortable. (And I almost never have Javascript on, so I don't notice...) Fixed. Tiddlywinks (talk) 07:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Much better, thanks. Unowninator (talk) 07:12, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I added the original table mainly because I read this and thought it was consensus in the way I added it. Anyway, I feel what Tiddlywinks did is much better, and that it should be about status really. Nescientist (talk) 12:13, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Skill Swapper

IMO, there should be separate columns for Pokémon that have the Skill by default, and Pokémon that can have the Skill with a Skill Swapper. --SnorlaxMonster 14:26, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

After looking at it for a while, I agree. Aside from sloppiness, the biggest issue is that it isn't necessarily clear that the asterisks only apply to the Pokemon they're next to. VioletPumpkin (talk) 22:35, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that (I'm the one that added them); my primary focus was just adding them at all. =/ Unowninator (talk) 03:00, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

No need to apologize, I'm glad that somebody added them. I was just suggesting a better layout. --SnorlaxMonster 03:48, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Seconded. It was certainly acceptable the way it was, and it's better to have that information than not. Upon a closer look, it just seemed like there was a better option, especially if the number of Pokemon eligible increase in the future. VioletPumpkin (talk) 03:57, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks guys; those replies made me feel better. :) Unowninator (talk) 04:32, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Suggestion: change of Skill Level groups

I suggest to change the current Skill Level groups from the top table to the bottom table as shown below, for easier editing when referencing pastebin.com/U6BNnbkr. If nobody strongly disagrees about this, I wish somebody can later change the table and every skill affected in the article, Thanks!

	Group A	Group B	Group C	Group D	Group E	Group F	Group G	Group H	Group I
Level 1	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Level 2	3	2	5	2	5	5	10	2	15
Level 3	10	9	15	9	20	30	50	9	45
Level 4	25	30	40	30	40	70	100	27	100
Level 5	50	70	70	100	100	120	200	54	150

	Group A	Group B	Group C	Group D	Group E	Group F	Group G	Group H	Group I
Level 1	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Level 2	3	2	2	5	2	5	5	15	10
Level 3	10	9	9	15	9	20	30	45	50
Level 4	25	27	30	40	30	40	70	100	100
Level 5	50	54	70	70	100	100	120	150	200

Karlo918 (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

It'll be very confusing since whatever's Group C will be D and vice-versa. I think it's too late to change it. Unowninator (talk) 19:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Obviously whoever's making the edit will change all the Skill listings to match the renamed groups. It's not that big a deal, Unowninator. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 05:08, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

It'll be very confusing, and I doubt it'll be just me. Besides, what happens if they add even more Skill groups? Unless it's at 200+ points to the max, we'd have to rename them all over again, and possibly again. Think about it. Unowninator (talk) 05:17, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

(resetting indent) It's just a matter of the confusion/annoyingness of actually making the edit; once it's made, anyone who visits the page should have no confusion, because the whole article will be entirely consistent with itself.

For a parallel situation, let me point you to the Experience article. We list the core series experience groups from fastest to slowest, even though only the middle four existed at first and the other two were added later on. This seems like the same situation to me: when groups are added, we should naturally re-order them to be in the correct order. It just wouldn't make sense to have the 54 and 150 groups tacked onto the end unless the reader already knows those groups were added later.

While I'm here rambling, let me make a suggestion to address your concern about further additions in the future: instead of labeling skill groups A, B, C and so on, let's just make that column "skill points to max out" or something to that effect. For the 70s and 100s, we can further specify "70 (type 1)" and "70 (type 2)" or something like that. That way, if/when more skill groups are added, we can just add their values in the proper spots without having to shuffle names around. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 05:36, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

I do like the type 1 and 2 thing; it would save me the trouble of checking the top of the grid for certain ones. Unowninator (talk) 06:13, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

If there are no objections from anyone, I'd like to do this when I get some free time sometime in the next week or so. Anyone have any more input before I do that? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 18:57, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

As long as it doesn't involve switching the letters around, I've no objections, otherwise it'll just make unnecessary confusion as I said earlier. Unowninator (talk) 19:00, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, the change would be that there wouldn't be any letters at all anymore, and the table column would be "Skill Points to max". Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 19:06, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Removing Pokémon from Table

Just to explain my last edit, I have determined after some thought that we don't need to keep a pair of cells in the table for Pokémon using the skill. We already have the data updated as it releases at List of Pokémon by Pokémon Shuffle list number, and it's easily sortable there as it is. Pokémon IDs in the game, as well as names and pictures, are all right there and easy to check. Usage in a table on this page, meanwhile, is more susceptible to errors, and is clunky at best. So from here on, please use List of Pokémon by Pokémon Shuffle list number for any information about which Pokémon use which skill. Cheers. =) CycloneGU (talk) 02:24, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

I completely disagree. For one thing, I find it helpful to organize them by the amount of Pokemon. Second, I feel that this way is fine. Please bring it back. Unowninator?! (talk) 03:45, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I agree wholeheartedly. Perhaps the Pokemon can be added back to this page if someone can figure a better presentation, but as it was, it wasn't just error-prone and clunky, but impossible to use CTRL+F to find the Pokemon you wanted to look up. (And Unowninator, re: the comparison you made in your edit summary: it's really not the same thing! Having the icons on this page is not like having Pokemon listings on individual move pages; it's much more like having them on List of moves, which we don't for the same reason: it's error-prone, clunky, and difficult to navigate.) Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 03:46, 19 May 2017 (UTC)