Bulbapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Choice item lock glitch

2020-09-12T17:16:25Z

LinkNinjaMaster: Added a missing Level 2 heading

==Glitch's possible presence in Gen VIII==
Hello to anyone that may read this. I am starting this discussion page because I have noticed how this article states that the choice item lock glitch was resolved in Generation VIII (8). However, I came across this article by searching for the glitch after watching a youtube video demonstrating a few glitches in Sword & Shield, among of which this one was included. The video in question, including the timestamp where they start excecuting it, is this one: https://youtu.be/c9S5jy_qjtM?t=267
Now, I would update the article to reflect this myself, but I'm not familiar with the editing standards, and I assume that we would also need further testing to corroborate that the most recent update of the game still has this glitch present. I do not own the Gen 8 games, and so am unable to test it on my own. That's why I would like to ask for assistance of whoever reads this and is able to test the glitch by themselves. I hope someone notices this and is able to help. Thanks. --[[User:LinkNinjaMaster|LinkNinjaMaster]] ([[User talk:LinkNinjaMaster|talk]]) 16:54, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Choice item lock glitch

2020-09-12T16:54:00Z

LinkNinjaMaster: Statement that the glitch was resolved in Gen VIII might be wrong, petition to test & confirm

Hello to anyone that may read this. I am starting this discussion page because I have noticed how this article states that the choice item lock glitch was resolved in Generation VIII (8). However, I came across this article by searching for the glitch after watching a youtube video demonstrating a few glitches in Sword & Shield, among of which this one was included. The video in question, including the timestamp where they start excecuting it, is this one: https://youtu.be/c9S5jy_qjtM?t=267
Now, I would update the article to reflect this myself, but I'm not familiar with the editing standards, and I assume that we would also need further testing to corroborate that the most recent update of the game still has this glitch present. I do not own the Gen 8 games, and so am unable to test it on my own. That's why I would like to ask for assistance of whoever reads this and is able to test the glitch by themselves. I hope someone notices this and is able to help. Thanks. --[[User:LinkNinjaMaster|LinkNinjaMaster]] ([[User talk:LinkNinjaMaster|talk]]) 16:54, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Experience

2014-12-23T07:04:09Z

LinkNinjaMaster: /* Gen VI experience formula */ new section

== The erratic formula ==

Erratic (600000)
E = -1/50*l^4 + 2*l^3 for level<=50

http://www.math.miami.edu/~jam/azure/forum/tuff/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001260

It's mentioned in the thread that level 45 does not work for that. Level 45 is 100273, not 100237. [[User:Sheep|Sheep]] 16:42, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Nevermind the previous message, I figured it out myself. [[User:Sheep|Sheep]] 18:09, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

== Simplify the formulas ==

<pre>
Was that copied from matlab or something? It can be simplified...

((0.814 - 0.02*(((n - 69) / 3) - (((n - 69) / 3) modulo 1)) - ep(((n - 69) modulo 3))(n^3)

((0.814 - 0.02*(((n - 69) / 3) - float_part((n - 69) / 3) ) - ep(((n - 69) modulo 3))(n^3)
((0.814 - 0.02*( int((n - 69) / 3) ) - ep(((n - 69) modulo 3))(n^3)
((0.814 - 0.02*( int(n/3 - 23) ) - ep(((n - 69) modulo 3))(n^3)
((0.814 + 0.46 - 0.02*( int(n/3) ) - ep(((n - 69) modulo 3))(n^3)

int( ( 1.274 - 0.02*(int(n/3)) - ep(n%3) ) * (n^3) )
That would be easier to read.
</pre>

<pre>2*(1 - 0.01n)*(n3)
= int( 2n3 - 0.02n4 )</pre>

<pre>( 1 - ((n - 50)*0.01) ) * (n^3)
= int( 1.5n3 - 0.01n4 )</pre>

<pre>(1.6 - 0.01n) * (n3)
= int( 1.6n3 - 0.01n4 )</pre>



[[User:Qgpr|Qgpr]]03:05, 01 Mar 2005

I really want to avoid using expressions that are not standard math notation. I don't even know if there's a way to represent some integer rounding using standard math notation, just some pseudo-code, that's why I stuck mod 1 subtraction in there. My plan was to simplify/clean it up once TeX was implemented on bulbapedia.

In the meanwhile you can simplify them. Just keep "mod" or "modulo" instead of "%" and avoid "int()." [[User:Sheep|Sheep]] 20:20, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The big problem is that when I first read that I got confused. No person that would bother to understand that formula wouldn't know how to program anyways, to represent that rounding you use ||x|| I think, maximum integer, unless I got the symbol wrong, long time I don't touch math.
I'll leave that formula but also add the simplification for anyone that wants someting simplier to read.
I will also simplify your standard math formulas, but won't add the ||x|| because I am not sure if its the right symbol, those - 69 can be taken out of modulo since they will be equal to zero.
[[User:Qgpr|Qgpr]] 20:03, 5 Mar 2005 (GMT-5)

: |x| is modul'''us''' - gives the absolute value of function, i.e. |-0.5| = 0.5. Modul'''o''' is simply represented as ''mod'' in mathematics. Anyway, while we do not have TeX at the moment, you can try this instead - leave the original math formula as a <nowiki></nowiki>, and copy the image from Wikipedia (it will generate the image on preview, so you can download that and reupload it here. Don't overdo it of course.)

: ||x|| ( double | ) is what I was taught here at college, but I guess is not an standard, however I found what it seems is the standard, and used the UTF code to show it. However <*pre> is not happy with <*sub>, you should find a way around because mine doesn't look that good. By the way it was "greatest integer" not maximum, problems for using a direct translation. [[User:Qgpr|Qgpr]] 22:16, 5 Mar 2005 (GMT-5)

First shot at a TeX markup image. Using

<pre>
\begin{math}
b \star x \rightarrow \frac{b}{x} - (\frac{b}{x}\;mod\;1)
\end{math}

\addvspace{.2cm}

\begin{math}
e(n) = \left\{
\begin{array}{clrr}
n^3(\frac{100 - n}{50}); & 0 < n \leq 50 \\*
n^3(\frac{150 - n}{100}); & 51 \leq n \leq 68 \\*
n^3(1.274 - \frac{1}{50}(n\star3) - p(n\;mod\;3)); & 69 \leq n \leq 98 \\*
n^3(\frac{160 - n}{100}); & 99 \leq n \leq 100 \\*
\end{array}
\right\}
\end{math}

\addvspace{.2cm}

\begin{math}
p(x) = \left\{
\begin{array}{clrr}
0.000; & x = 0 \\*
0.008; & x = 1 \\*
0.014; & x = 2 \\*
\end{array}
\right\}
\end{math}
</pre>

I came up with

Kind of cramped. Does it meet the approval of you two? Looking for revisions before I even post it. Especially since I forgot how to properly represent a custom operator (\star). Is that how? [[User:Sheep|Sheep]] 03:32, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This seems better:
<pre>\begin{equation}
E(n) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\frac{n^{3} \left(100 - n\right)}{50}, & \textrm{if $0 < n \leq 50$} \\
\frac{n^{3} \left(150 - n\right)}{100}, & \textrm{if $51 < n \leq 68$} \\
n^{3} \left(1.274 - \frac{1}{50}\left\lfloor\frac{n}{3}\right\rfloor -p\left(n \bmod 3\right)\right), & \textrm{if $69 < n \leq 98$} \\
\frac{n^{3} \left(160 - n\right)}{100}, & \textrm{if $99 < n \leq 100$}
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}

\begin{equation}
p(m) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
0.000, & \textrm{if $m = 0$} \\
0.008, & \textrm{if $m = 1$} \\
0.014, & \textrm{if $m = 2$}
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
</pre>

But when I tested it on Wikipedia, there were a few problems, so if we do get around to installing Texvc, we'll have to go hammer those problems out. Also, I'd appreciate it if we could find the exact fractions for those decimalised numbers - after all, the computer works in binary, not decimal - hence we won't have 0.008, we might instead have 523/65536 (or maybe 8/1000, but the result would still be stored as a binary fraction) - [[User:Zhen Lin|刘 (劉) 振霖]] 07:22, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I updated texerratic.png up there with something that looks more like yours. I didn't use Wikipedia for mine, I was using TeXnicCenter. I think the decimals are all right how they are, because they actually are more correct. I don't know exactly how the games handle decimal arithmetic, but it appears that the formulas use values accurate to 3 decimal places. (525/65536) or (523/65536) are not exactly 0.008, and if you put in those values, you'll get numbers that are off (I got about 6 points off for level 70). [[User:Sheep|Sheep]] 13:47, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Mmm. Since the experience points have to be accurate to about 7sf - I think the fractions should therefore be accurate to 7sf as well. But it might well be that they did use integer multiplication + division (× 8 ÷ 1000) rather than a simpler constant floating point multiplication (× (1 + 402653/224) × 2-7) - which is approximately how accurate a single-precision IEEE 754 binary fraction is. Funnily enough, IEEE 754 single-precision fractions are accurate to approx 7sf (without exponentiation) by defintion (this one is 0.008 correct to 11sf)). - [[User:Zhen Lin|刘 (劉) 振霖]] 14:40, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hmm. I just learned from Meowth that the game simply stores the values for these as constants in the game, so the fractions are just best-fit and the formula is not used in-game - [[User:Zhen Lin|刘 (劉) 振霖]] 14:44, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

So we need to reach a conclusion. There will be a note added that says these values are stored in the game as constants, not calculated. The formulas, I guess, do not have to be specific to any system of number storage now, so are we saying that the decimal constants are acceptable? [[User:Sheep|Sheep]] 15:04, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

===quick question===
Why does Level redirect here? An even better question is, why does this page link to Level, thus linking back to itself? --[[user:greengiant|greengiant]]

Sorry my reply is formatted wrong, I don't know how to do it normally yet. Anyway, the last time I checked, [[Level]] is its own, seperate article. Maybe they fixed the problem you saw before. {{SUBST:Superbreeder]] [[User talk:Superbreeder|What's up?]] 23:30, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

== Modify this! ==

Can someone modify the erratic and the fluctuating part of experience? I want to understand it like all the other ones!

:I think those formulas should be explained. It would help quite a lot of people who want to understand those formulas but haven't seen them before.[[User:Dullstar|Dullstar]] 02:16, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

== Color-Coded ==

I color-coded the exp type descriptions to more-or-less match the colors used on the graph. I did this to make it easier to distinguish them from eachother. I wonder where I can find the look-up table in the game, I bet I can simplify those two honking large piecewise formulas. [[User:Twigpi|Twigpi]] 15:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
:See [http://www.upokecenter.com/games/rs/guides/exptable.html http://www.upokecenter.com/games/rs/guides/exptable.html]. The "1,050,000" in one of the top columns is a typo (should be "1,059,860"). At Level 1, the Experience is always "0" (here, they have it at "1"). [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 22:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

== Organize Pokémon ==

I really think there should be either a list of Pokémon by experience types or a category for each type. You can find out on each particular Pokémon's page, but there is no way to find Pokémon based on their experience type. [[User:Cheesus Is Lord|Cheesus Is Lord]] 13:23 23 January 2008

:Here is the whole list. Someone could modify it and put it into the main article.
<pre>
600000
Nincada/Ninjask/Shedinja
Volbeat
Swablu/Altaria
Zangoose
Lileep/Cradily
Anorith/Armaldo
Feebas/Milotic
Clamperl/Huntail/Gorebyss
Cranidos/Rampardos
Shieldon/Bastiodon
Finneon/Lumineon

800000
Cleffa/Clefairy/Clefable
Igglybuff/Jigglypuff/Wigglytuff
Happiny/Chansey/Blissey
Ledyba/Ledian
Spinarak/Ariados
Togepi/Togetic/Togekiss
Marill/Azumarill
Aipom/Ambipom
Misdreavus/Mismagius
Snubbull/Granbull
Corsola
Delibird
Smeargle
Skitty/Delcatty
Mawile
Spoink/Grumpig
Spinda
Lunatone
Solrock
Shuppet/Banette
Duskull/Dusclops/Dusknoir
Chingling/Chimecho
Luvdisc
Glameow/Purugly

1000000
Caterpie/Metapod/Butterfree
Weedle/Kakuna/Beedrill
Rattata/Raticate
Spearow/Fearow
Ekans/Arbok
Pichu/Pikachu/Raichu
Sandshrew/Sandslash
Vulpix/Ninetales
Zubat/Golbat/Crobat
Paras/Parasect
Venonat/Venomoth
Diglett/Dugtrio
Meowth/Persian
Psyduck/Golduck
Mankey/Primeape
Ponyta/Rapidash
Slowpoke/Slowbro/Slowking
Magnemite/Magneton/Magnezone
Farfetch'd
Doduo/Dodrio
Seel/Dewgong
Grimer/Muk
Onix/Steelix
Drowzee/Hypno
Krabby/Kingler
Voltorb/Electrode
Cubone/Marowak
Tyrogue/Hitmonlee/Hitmonchan/Hitmontop
Lickitung/Lickilicky
Koffing/Weezing
Tangela/Tangrowth
Kangaskhan
Horsea/Seadra/Kingdra
Goldeen/Seaking
Mime Jr./Mr. Mime
Scyther/Scizor
Smoochum/Jynx
Elekid/Electabuzz/Electivire
Magby/Magmar/Magmortar
Ditto
Eevee/Vaporeon/Jolteon/Flareon/Espeon/Umbreon/Leafeon/Glaceon
Porygon/Porygon2/Porygon-Z
Omanyte/Omastar
Kabuto/Kabutops
Sentret/Furret
Hoothoot/Noctowl
Natu/Xatu
Bonsly/Sudowoodo
Yanma/Yanmega
Wooper/Quagsire
Unown
Wobbuffet
Girafarig
Dunsparce
Qwilfish
Teddiursa/Ursaring
Slugma/Magcargo
Remoraid/Octillery
Phanpy/Donphan
Poochyena/Mightyena
Zigzagoon/Linoone
Wurmple/Silcoon/Beautifly/Cascoon/Dustox
Wingull/Pelipper
Surskit/Masquerain
Nosepass/Probopass
Meditite/Medicham
Plusle
Minun
Numel/Camerupt
Torkoal
Barboach/Whiscash
Baltoy/Claydol
Castform
Snorunt/Glalie/Froslass
Bidoof/Bibarel
Burmy/Wormadam/Mothim
Pachirisu
Buizel/Floatzel
Cherubi/Cherrim
Shellos/Gastrodon
Buneary/Lopunny
Stunky/Skuntank
Bronzor/Bronzong
Spiritomb
Croagunk/Toxicroak
Rotom

1059860
Bulbasaur/Ivysaur/Venusaur
Charmander/Charmeleon/Charizard
Squirtle/Wartortle/Blastoise
Pidgey/Pidgeotto/Pidgeot
Nidoran-F/Nidorina/Nidoqueen
Nidoran-M/Nidorino/Nidoking
Oddish/Gloom/Vileplume/Bellossom
Poliwag/Poliwhirl/Poliwrath/Politoed
Abra/Kadabra/Alakazam
Machop/Machoke/Machamp
Bellsprout/Weepinbell/Victreebel
Geodude/Graveler/Golem
Gastly/Haunter/Gengar
Mew
Chikorita/Bayleef/Meganium
Cyndaquil/Quilava/Typhlosion
Totodile/Croconaw/Feraligatr
Mareep/Flaaffy/Ampharos
Hoppip/Skiploom/Jumpluff
Sunkern/Sunflora
Murkrow/Honchkrow
Gligar/Gliscor
Shuckle
Sneasel/Weavile
Celebi
Treecko/Grovyle/Sceptile
Torchic/Combusken/Blaziken
Mudkip/Marshtomp/Swampert
Lotad/Lombre/Ludicolo
Seedot/Nuzleaf/Shiftry
Taillow/Swellow
Whismur/Loudred/Exploud
Sableye
Budew/Roselia/Roserade
Trapinch/Vibrava/Flygon
Cacnea/Cacturne
Kecleon
Absol
Spheal/Sealeo/Walrein
Turtwig/Grotle/Torterra
Chimchar/Monferno/Infernape
Piplup/Prinplup/Empoleon
Starly/Staravia/Staraptor
Kricketot/Kricketune
Shinx/Luxio/Luxray
Combee/Vespiquen
Chatot
Riolu/Lucario
Shaymin

1250000
Growlithe/Arcanine
Tentacool/Tentacruel
Shellder/Cloyster
Exeggcute/Exeggutor
Rhyhorn/Rhydon/Rhyperior
Staryu/Starmie
Pinsir
Tauros
Magikarp/Gyarados
Lapras
Aerodactyl
Munchlax/Snorlax
Articuno
Zapdos
Moltres
Dratini/Dragonair/Dragonite
Mewtwo
Chinchou/Lanturn
Heracross
Swinub/Piloswine/Mamoswine
Mantyke/Mantine
Skarmory
Houndour/Houndoom
Stantler
Miltank
Raikou
Entei
Suicune
Larvitar/Pupitar/Tyranitar
Lugia
Ho-Oh
Ralts/Kirlia/Gardevoir/Gallade
Slakoth/Vigoroth/Slaking
Aron/Lairon/Aggron
Electrike/Manetric
Carvahna/Sharpedo
Tropius
Relicanth
Bagon/Shelgon/Salamence
Beldum/Metang/Metagross
Regirock
Regice
Registeel
Latias
Latios
Kyogre
Groudon
Rayquaza
Jirachi
Deoxys
Gible/Gabite/Garchomp
Hippopotas/Hippowdon
Skorupi/Drapion
Carnivine
Snover/Abomasnow
Uxie
Mesprit
Azelf
Dialga
Palkia
Heatran
Regigigas
Giratina
Cresselia
Phione
Manaphy
Darkrai
Arceus

1640000
Shroomish/Breloom
Makuhita/Hariyama
Illumise
Gulpin/Swalot
Wailmer/Wailord
Seviper
Corphish/Crawdaunt
Drifloon/Drifblim
</pre>
:[[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 20:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I like this idea and think it would be useful. Anyone else agree? [[User:Eric the espeon|Eric the espeon]] 19:43, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
:Yes, but I don't know if it belongs on this page. We could create categories, but I think I like the idea of another page better, like List of Pokémon by experience requirement, or something. — [[User:Laoris|Laoris]] ([[User_Talk:Laoris|Blah]]) 19:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Makes sense, and link to that list from here? [[User:Eric the espeon|Eric the espeon]] 18:19, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

== ??? ==

If the formula returns a decimal, is the result rounded up or down? --[[User talk:Shiny Noctowl|Shiny Noctowl]] 15:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
:Always rounded down, I believe. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 22:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

== Hmm... ==

Does anyone else think that a chart that lists the experience needed to reach each level in an experience group would be a good addition to this page? '''[[User:TTEchidna|''TTE'']][[User talk:TTEchidna|chidna]]''' 05:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

:yes [[User:MathijsP|MathijsP]] 07:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
::I added the charts, but, as I had a computer program generate them, I haven't been able to check the piecewise ones yet. It would be good if someone else could check the piecewise functions ("erratic" and "fluctuating") to make sure they're correct. --[[User:Shiny Noctowl|Shiny Noctowl]] 00:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
:::the "Erratic" one is messed up. lvl 98 is 1.2 million, and lvl 99 is under 600,000. also, thats a lot of text, so, i added the show/hide ability. -- '''[[User:MAGNEDETH|MAG]][[User:MAGNEDETH#Interesting Stuff|NE]][[User talk:MAGNEDETH|DETH]]''' 00:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
::::It's still messed up. Can you fix it please? --[[User:Shiny Noctowl|Shiny Noctowl]] 00:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::i dont know how to fix it, i just added the show/hide things. im just noting its not right. you said you had a computer do it. try again? -- '''[[User:MAGNEDETH|MAG]][[User:MAGNEDETH#Interesting Stuff|NE]][[User talk:MAGNEDETH|DETH]]''' 00:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::The formula for Level 98 comes out to 583539, which is correct. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 23:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::::well thats fine, but currently it says lvl 98 is 1185901, which it wrong. -- '''[[User:MAGNEDETH|MAG]][[User:MAGNEDETH#Interesting Stuff|NE]][[User talk:MAGNEDETH|DETH]]''' 23:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

== Pokémon Gold/Silver Version ROM - Hack-O-Matic - "Secret" Experience functions ==

I'm sure someone else has noticed that if you use the ROM hack tool Hack-O-Matic to open a Pokémon Gold/Silver ROM and edit Pokémon, there will be eight "experience gradient" choices for each Pokémon as opposed to the four that were actually used in Generation II. I've figured out three of the four "secret" functions, and due to a glitch in Hack-O-Matic I can't examine the fourth one. 
Hack-O-Matic displays the eight experience functions as eight "types" (the numbers go from Level 2 to 100):
{| width="100%" class="expandable"
|
===1===
Formula is 0.25n^3 + 15n^2 + 205n – 107
|-
|
<pre>
365
649
969
1324
1717
2148
2621
3135
3693
4295
4945
5642
6389
7186
8037
8941
9901
10917
11993
13128
14325
15584
16909
18299
19757
21283
22881
24550
26293
28110
30005
31977
34029
36161
38377
40676
43061
45532
48093
50743
53485
56319
59249
62274
65397
68618
71941
75365
78893
82525
86265
90112
94069
98136
102317
106611
111021
115547
120193
124958
129845
134854
139989
145249
150637
156153
161801
167580
173493
179540
185725
192047
198509
205111
211857
218746
225781
232962
240293
247773
255405
263189
271129
279224
287477
295888
304461
313195
322093
331155
340385
349782
359349
369086
378997
389081
399341
409777
420393
</pre>
|}
===2===
Same as Fifth Type
{| width="100%" class="expandable"
|
===3===
0.75n^3 + 10n^2 – 30
|-
|
<pre>
16
80
178
313
492
717
994
1326
1720
2178
2706
3307
3988
4751
5602
6544
7584
8724
9970
11325
12796
14385
16098
17938
19912
22022
24274
26671
29220
31923
34786
37812
41008
44376
47922
51649
55564
59669
63970
68470
73176
78090
83218
88563
94132
99927
105954
112216
118720
125468
132466
139717
147228
155001
163042
171354
179944
188814
197970
207415
217156
227195
237538
248188
259152
270432
282034
293961
306220
318813
331746
345022
358648
372626
386962
401659
416724
432159
447970
464160
480736
497700
515058
532813
550972
569537
588514
607906
627720
647958
668626
689727
711268
733251
755682
778564
801904
825704
849970
</pre>
|}
{| width="100%" class="expandable"
|
===4===
0.75n^3 + 20n^2 – 70
|-
|
<pre>
16
130
298
523
812
1167
1594
2096
2680
3348
4106
4957
5908
6961
8122
9394
10784
12294
13930
15695
17596
19635
21818
24148
26632
29272
32074
35041
38180
41493
44986
48662
52528
56586
60842
65299
69964
74839
79930
85240
90776
96540
102538
108773
115252
121977
128954
136186
143680
151438
159466
167767
176348
185211
194362
203804
213544
223584
233930
244585
255556
266845
278458
290398
302672
315282
328234
341531
355180
369183
383546
398272
413368
428836
444682
460909
477524
494529
511930
529730
547936
566550
585578
605023
624892
645187
665914
687076
708680
730728
753226
776177
799588
823461
847802
872614
897904
923674
949930
</pre>
|}
===5===
First Type
===6===
Fourth Type
===7===
Sixth Type
===8===
Unknown due to glitch in Hack-O-Matic. Hack-O-Matic provides graphs for each experience function, but they may not be accurate. Do you want me to upload that graph's picture anyway? 
Are these "hidden" experience functions notable enough to be added to the article somewhere? Thanks. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 20:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I dont understand any of this? Could you make it clearer for the average user to be able to read, if an average person sees that they wont be able to understand it, only smart people will --[[User:Guardian|Guardian]][[Special:Contributions/Guardian| of]][[User talk:Guardian| Earth]] |[[GSDS|SGMS 2010]]
:When a Pokémon gains experience it levels up. Different Pokémon level up at different rates, and take different amounts of experience to gain each level. Some Pokémon level up faster than others. The amount of experience a Pokémon needs to gain a level is determined by one of eight possible formulas. That's really the premise of the whole article. — [[User:Laoris|Laoris]] ([[User_Talk:Laoris|Blah]]) 18:27, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

oh ok thank you, it was that last line "The amount of experience a Pokémon needs to gain a level is determined by one of eight possible formulas." I didnt really get till you explained it. I just thought they made the pokemon that way, i wasnt aware there was a formula, if this is in the article, can we have the easier to understand version, your version, underneath the complicated bit. --[[User:Guardian|Guardian]][[Special:Contributions/Guardian| of]][[User talk:Guardian| Earth]] |[[GSDS|SGMS 2010]]
:I'll add some clarification to the article later. — [[User:Laoris|Laoris]] ([[User_Talk:Laoris|Blah]]) 18:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

:''Reeeeeaaaaaaally'' late reply here, but I wrote Hack-O-Matic ages ago. I can tell you that those graphs are definitely not accurate. (I don't remember how exactly I made them, but they're very rough estimations.) I never really examined how the game computes the different EXP growth rates, but I know that four of them are "real" and four of them are "glitched" (and there might even be more than those four glitches). If I had to guess, I'd assume all the EXP growth functions are the same function with different constants plugged in, and the glitch rates just put in strange constants, resulting in silly things like 100K EXP to level 100. [[User:HyperHacker|⬡]] ([[User talk:HyperHacker|talk]]) 12:26, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

== List of base experence yeald ==

Can someone add this in as a hide able table?{{unsigned|Eric the espeon}}''; massive amount of data hidden by {{u|the dark lord trombonator|trom}}.''

:Already in [[List of Pokémon by effort value yield]]. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 00:42, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
No, that is EV yield.. The list I provided was base EXP yield. Quite a major difference there. [[User:Eric the espeon|Eric the espeon]] 17:57, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
:If you take a look at the article, there's a column marked "Exp.", which contains exactly the same data that you have provided. Confusing, I know. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 19:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok, fair enough. This article should probably link to that list then, no? [[User:Eric the espeon|Eric the espeon]] 21:59, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

==Negative EXP==
According to the "medium slow" formula, the EXP for level 1 should be -54. This is exploited in the [http://tasvideos.org/950M.html Pokémon Blue TAS]. However there's no sign of this in the article. Was it fixed in later games? {{unsigned|Gyorokpeter }}
:It was fixed as of Generation III at the latest, I believe. According to the article, "Due most likely to the issue of speed when using these formulas, the GBA games will simply use a {{wp|lookup table}} for each value of any type instead of computing them. Because of this, these formulas are not actually part of the game mechanics." [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 05:41, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

== Experience gain in battle ==
The section on the experience gained in battle only mentions the total experience gained, and not how experience is spread throughout multiple participants in the battle. That information seems like a useful mechanic and should be appended by someone who can add it. --[[User:Naokohiro|Naokohiro]] 19:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
:It is divided evenly among participants, unless some participants have EXP share or whatever. In this case, they receive their share plus the bonus from the held item. —'''darklord[[User talk:The dark lord trombonator|trom]]''' 03:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
::How is it divided among arbitrary amounts of Pokémon involved in the battle, and Pokémon with Exp. Share, including cases where Pokémon have both an Exp. Share and participated in the battle? There are many different cases. For example, when some Pokémon have Exp. Share and some don't, but some of the Pokémon with Exp. Share participated and some didn't, but also some Pokémon without Exp. Share that did participate, etc. --[[User:Naokohiro|Naokohiro]] 04:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
:::I don't know exactly how experience is divided among multiple Exp. Share holders (does each Pokémon with Exp. Share receive (1/(number of Exp. Shares + 1))*(total experience), or does each receive (1/2)*(total experience)*(1/number of Exp. Shares), or something else?), but the experience '''that is not allocated solely as a result of Exp. Share being held''' is always divided evenly among the participants of the battle, regardless of whether or not those participants hold Exp. Share. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 06:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

== Switching??? ==

I'll give an example.

Say I have a Charizard out, and the opponent has Venusaur. The opponent switches to Blastoise, and later I switch to Raichu. If the opponent switches back to Venusaur, and I KO it, will my Charizard still gain exp? '''-''' [[User Talk:Axxonn|Axxonn]][[Special:Contributions/Axxonn|the]][[User talk:Axxonn|Awesometrainer]] 20:59, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
:No, at least not in my experience. The Pokémon must face the Pokémon since it has last been sent out from its Poké Ball. <sc>[[User:Werdnae|Werdnae]]</sc> [[User talk:Werdnae|(talk)]] 21:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
::Nope. Tried it before. [[User:Ht14|'''''ht''''']][[User talk:Ht14|''14'']] 21:59, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

== Errors with formulas? ==
I was just double-checking the erratic output based on the formula given, when I realized that the given formula is impossible, in programming terms. Specifically, the game would never output two values for levels 50, 68, and 98, as the current formula shows it does. So I checked to see what the correct distribution of the formulas was, and came up with the following: level 50 could go either way, as both formulas it is attributed to result in the same output, level 68 is calculated based on the second formula given, and level 98 is calculated on the final formula. In other words, the actual division of the formulas should be something along the lines of the first applying to levels below or equal to 50, the second applying to levels greater than 50 but less than or equal to 68, the third applying to levels greater than 68 but less than to 98 (or, to keep similar formatting, apply to levels greater than 68 but less than or equal to 97), and the final one applying to levels greater than or equal to 98 (or, to keep formatting, apply to levels greater than 97). [[User:Glitchfinder|Glitchfinder]] 03:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

It would also appear that quite a bit has been left out of the fluctuating piecewise function. Specifically, it would appear that the formula used for levels one through 14 will change based on the level modulo 3, resulting in three different yet very similar formulas for these levels. The middle levels, from 15 to 34, remain with the same formula that is given. However, it would appear that there are two separate formulas used for levels 35 to 100, determined by the level modulo 2. Here is the code I was using to test the function, which is written in Ruby:

test.fluctuating[1] = 0
for i in 2...101
if i >= 1 && i < 15 && i % 3 == 0
val = ((i.to_f ** 3.0) * ((24.0 + ((i.to_f) / 3.0)) / 50.0))
elsif i >= 1 && i < 15 && i % 3 == 1
val = ((i.to_f ** 3.0) * ((24.0 + ((i.to_f - 1.0) / 3.0)) / 50.0))
elsif i >= 1 && i < 15 && i % 3 == 2
val = ((i.to_f ** 3.0) * ((24.0 + ((i.to_f + 1.0) / 3.0)) / 50.0))
elsif i >= 15 && i < 35
val = ((i.to_f ** 3.0) * ((14.0 + i.to_f) / 50.0))
elsif i >= 35 && i <= 100 && i % 2 == 0
val = ((i.to_f ** 3.0) * ((32.0 + (i.to_f / 2.0)) / 50.0))
elsif i >= 35 && i <= 100 && i % 2 == 1
val = ((i.to_f ** 3.0) * ((32.0 + ((i.to_f - 1.0) / 2.0)) / 50.0))
end
test.fluctuating[i] = val.truncate
end
Please note that the code is given as a demonstration of how the formulas are chosen, and does not include the necessary setup for the test variable. I don't know the Wikipedia math functions well enough to replace the image, so it would be a good idea for someone else to do it instead. [[User:Glitchfinder|Glitchfinder]] 05:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
:I believe that the modulo operator business is already covered in the formulas, using the floor function symbol (looks a little like square brackets). But I do agree that the erratic functions' domains should be clarified as you said. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 05:25, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
::That would certainly explain the problem. There should probably be a note stating that those values are actually encased in a floor function, and not simply placed within brackets. (I had to look quite closely to see that they were in fact the floor function symbols, and not simply brackets, like I had assumed they were) [[User:Glitchfinder|Glitchfinder]] 05:47, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

== Understanding the formulas ==

Could anyone tell me what is ment with "N" in the formulas?
I can't find it anywhere on the page. {{unsigned|Ragnearoa}}
:"n" generally means "number" when used in equations as a variable, in this case... I believe the "n" stands for the base experience given out by a Pokemon. ▫▫'''[[User:Tina|ティナ]]'''[[User talk:Tina|♫]][[Special:Contributions/Tina|★]] 15:21, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
::"n" actually represents the level of the Pokémon. "e(n)" is therefore the number of Exp. Points a Pokémon needs to get from level 1 to level "n". [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 01:21, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

== Erratic formula ==

The erratic formula's piecewise functions are defined inclusively in all inequalities, and thus overlap.
[[Image:Math-formula5.png|left]] [[Image:Expcalc_erratic.png|right]]
<div style="clear:both"></div>
The left formula is how I believe it should be, the right is the current one. -- [[User:Pokey|Pokey]] 07:38, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
: At the overlaps, the values are equal. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 22:34, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

== Does Not Compute ==
The Trivia sections on the species pages for Arceus, Blissey and Chansey all state that they give 13,933 experience at level 100 when owned by a Trainer. But based on the way that the experience given in battle formula is written right now (with ''a'' being 1 plus an additional possible 1.2 depending on Trainer status, trade, and foreign language), it only equals 8,014, not 13,933.

''a''=2.2 ''b''=255 ''L''=100 ''a''+''b''+''L''=56,100 56,100/7=8,014

Add a Lucky Egg (multiply by 1.5) onto that and you only get 12,021. The only way to get the 13,933 is to multiply 1.5 for the trade and 1.7 for the foreign language ''after'' the initial Trainer experience (with ''a'' being 1.5) has been calculated, not to add .5 and .2 to ''a''. --[[User:Phantomjunkie|Phantom]][[User talk:Phantomjunkie|Junkie]] 17:17, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
:We'd better look into that. Perhaps you don't add 0.5 to a, but multiply a by 1.5 instead. I'll see about it. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 02:50, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
::Hold on, you mean: if you calculate 1.5x for the Lucky Egg, 1.7x for the foreign language trade, and 1.5x for the Trainer battle as well.
:::If we're going by that logic, it might actually be that you multiply everything, instead of adding to the multiplier. In which case it would actually be 14,753 experience points. I'll still have to look into it. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 02:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
::::Okay, I found out. I tried battling against a trainer's Level 28 Mime Jr. with a German-traded Gabite holding a Lucky Egg. The base Exp. is exactly 312, and it gained 1193, which is 1.5 x 1.7 x 1.5. So yes, you actually do need to multiply 1.5 twice, and the article as it stands now is wrong. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 03:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
:::::Fixed. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 03:57, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

== Minor wording issue ==
I didn't want to just go in and edit this without asking. The section on the Experience Underflow glitch contains the following sentence:
''It is due to this bug that no level 1 Pokémon can be found in the wild without glitching or hacking the game, and why, even though level 2-4 Pokémon can be found wild, Pokémon hatched at level 5 in the first two generations.''
However, since breeding and, by extension, hatching eggs wasn't added until Generation II, shouldn't the sentence be changed to state that "Pokémon hatched at level 5 in the second generation"? The following paragraph refers to level 5 hatching in Generation III, so I don't feel it's necessary to add it here. --[[User:Phantomjunkie|Phantom]][[User talk:Phantomjunkie|Junkie]] 08:08, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
:Changed to "''Pokémon hatched at level 5 when eggs were introduced in Generation II.''" [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 01:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

== Use of asymptotic notation ==

It's not really appropriate to use asymptotic notation in the manner this article does currently: the notion is not really useful unless the functions tend to 0 or infinity, as we can write many statements that say equally true and unhelpful things. For example, all six functions in the article are O(1) at n=100, or O(n), or O(n^10) (using the lim sup definition in the Wikipedia article, for example), none of which show the detail we want.

In other words, the notation is effectively meaningless the way it is being used. Perhaps considering f(x)-f(100) would be better.

Small extra note: to be rather fussy, similar remarks could be made about the way the article used "continuous" before I removed it: these functions are defined on the integers, and since there is no way of talking about limits on a finite set of integers, you can't talk about continuity either. (The integers are called discrete or totally disconnected because of the way the topologies on them must be defined, if anyone wants more detail.) Of course, this also means you can't use asymptotic notation in this case at all... [[User:Chappers|Chappers]] 00:32, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

: Alright, I'll remove that part. A friend of mine also said it was inappropriate too.
:: Also, about the "continuous" function part, I can see why it's notation abuse now. I just meant to say that it wasn't piecewise, and could be represented as one function. I guess "polynomial" is a good compromise if we can't really find a suitable word for it. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 19:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

== Where to put this? ==

[[File:ExpToNextLevel.png|300px|thumb|right|A graph showing the number of experience points required to go from one level to the next.]]

I created a table with the number of experience points required to go from one level to the ''next'' level, not just from level 1 to a level, but the formula won't fit anywhere.

Image is to the right. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 20:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

== Misleading names ==

The Medium Slow (a.k.a. Parabolic) function is not actually strictly slower than the Medium Fast (a.k.a Cubic) function.

The only functions that are actually strictly ordered in terms of speed of levelling up are the Slow, Medium Fast, and Fast functions. The other three are all quirky.

What I'd suggest is renaming the Medium Fast function to simply Medium, and rename the Medium Slow function to... something. I still need to come up with a name, hence why I haven't actually edited the page yet. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 00:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

:You could just change it to "Parabolic", but do leave a reminder that there exist different names for the experience functions. In my opinion "Erratic" and "Fluctuating" are okay names for their respective functions. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 04:51, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
::Or, to go with the quirky nature of the function compared to the others, rename it to "Quirky". Because "parabolic" is a huge misnomer. What do you think? (I didn't say anything about Erratic or Fluctiating... o_O) [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 17:25, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
:::Hard to say, since you're the first person I've ever seen to refer to that experience function as "Quirky". I just mentioned Erratic and Fluctuating because you didn't, and I wasn't sure what your own opinion was on those names. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 22:07, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
::::Well, I didn't mention those, but I think they're perfectly fine. It was just the four that were "ranked" by speed that I had a problem with - and even then it's only the Medium Slow one simply because it doesn't even fit into that rank nicely. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 13:34, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
::::Actually, even those three names should probably be changed to "Cubic", "Fast Cubic", and "Slow Cubic". It just doesn't make sense to rank them all by speed if they vary so much. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 13:36, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
:::::You could try something like "Fast (Cubic)", "Medium (Cubic)", and "Slow (Cubic)". As for 1059860, we might be able to get away with calling it "Parabolic" and adding a note that the name only refers to the existence of a "not-purely-cubic" part in the function. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 01:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
::::::Not to mention all the article-renaming we'd have to do. >_< [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 14:48, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

== Experience table for PMD ==

It seems random, at least from what I've played so far. I have a character named Vino the Torchic, and here's her experience table for levels 7 through 15:

{| class="roundy" border="2"
|-
! class="roundytl" style="background: #CF4000; color:#FFFFFF;" | Level
! class="roundytr" style="background: #CF4000; color:#FFFFFF;" | Exp.
|-
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 7
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 410
|-
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 8
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 700
|-
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 9
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 1250
|-
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 10
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 2250
|-
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 11
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 4150
|-
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 12
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 7290
|-
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 13
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 10430
|-
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 14
| style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 15430
|-
| class="roundybl" style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | 15
| class="roundybr" style="background: #FF7800; color:#FFFFFF;" | (etc.)
|}

I don't see a formula here at all. Does anybody have the full table? [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 23:43, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
:Okay, no, I did find a table, from UPokeCenter. But man, those numbers are arbitrary. From levels 16 through 24, the EXP. required to get to the next level is always 6000. o_O [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 23:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

== New Exp. gain formula ==

I'm doing research on it right now, by watching playthroughs. Apparently, there's actually a ''+1'' in the formula >_> [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 02:47, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, here it is:

[[File:Delta_exp_gen5.png]]

The only differences in the formula is that the 7 has now been changed to a 5, and the dL represents the level relationship factor, which I'm still trying to figure out. Also, a constant of 1 is now added to all experience point yields, probably to prevent defeated monsters from yielding 0 experience points due to a low dL modifier. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 03:00, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
:Do you know if any rounding down is involved in the calculation? [[User:Hexagon Theory|Hexagon Theory]] 03:50, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
::There is, but I don't know where it applies. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 14:00, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:This formula can't be correct; no matter where I apply or don't apply rounding, I get slightly higher or slightly lower values than the experience I actually get in the game. Also, unless this one formula gets special treatment out of all the formulas in the game, the Pokémon games round down after every division or any other operation resulting in a non-integer, so if this were literally it, the level factor could never be anything between 0 and 1. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] 14:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
::I think it multiplies by the defeated Pokémon's level + 2 first. It's been correct every time ''I've'' checked it, at any rate. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 03:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
:::Could you include some of your calculations and data? It could speed up finding out what's going on here. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] 23:00, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Okay, take your first battle with the other starters - Level 5 vs. Level 5 (a level multiplier of 1) gives you 43 experience points. The starters' base yield is 28, which is multiplied by 1.5 because it's a trainer battle, giving you 42. No other multipliers apply, so you add 1 to 42 which gives you 43. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 22:57, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
::::For that matter, could you report some of your own data? You might be applying the wrong formula. I'll set up a report section on the talk page for it.

Okay, I'm new here so I hope I'm not breaking any rules, but so far, the formula looks pretty accurate. I've only begun research on this a few days ago, battling my Yooterii against wild Pokemon around Route 1 of levels 2 through 4. I kept my Yooterii as the 'constant,' creating a data table as it levels from battles against wild Pokemon.

From the experiences gained, I've been able to construct this formula:

[(base experience)(level)/5] + 1 = total experience.

However, this is only when both the user's and wild Pokemon's levels are equal. The only question I have is what all of the variables represent, such as a and e. Again, I'm very new to this, so any explanation would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

P.S. I am constructing a large data table for various battles. Would anyone like to help me, or be interested in the data?

--[[User:Xazel|Xazel]] 06:50, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

: Sorry, but we got to all this information already. The only thing left to do now is to find out how the relative level multiplier works. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 00:26, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
:: Also, what the variables represent are on the page itself. a represents "trainer battle", t represents "trainer ownership", b represents "base", e represents "lucky egg", l represents "level", and s represents "share", or "exp.share". [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 00:26, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Can anyone tell me what the above ^2.5 power means? We're discussing this on Yahoo Answers and I'm trying to calculate what would actually happen if a level 70 Pokemon took down a level 70 Latias or Latios. It doesn't matter because they yield the same EXP Points at any given level. ([[User:MichaelXD|MichaelXD]] 09:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC))

== Base EXP ==

The page currently says that the Pokemon that gives the most base EXP is Blissey with 608 - only every other page on this wiki and on other sites says that it's only 255. (Tabunne, for the record, has a yield of 390.) It also says that the fifth-gen starters give the least at 28; this time, the NUMBER is right, but Magikarp still apparently only gives 20. What gives? --[[User:HeroicJay|HeroicJay]] 22:51, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
: Those yields are still from before Generation V. The information on other pages is correct for Generations IV and prior. I haven't had the time nor the patience to change them all yet. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 00:43, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
:: Magikarp's yield is now 40, BTW. Just so you know [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 00:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

== Report anomalies in the new Exp. gain formula ==

As far as we know right now, this is the new formula for experience used in Gen.5:

[[File:Delta_exp_gen5.png]]

If you think this formula might not apply to a certain type of battle, append your case to the bottom of this post with the following data:
*The Pokémon that was defeated, and its level.
*The Pokémon that were involved in the battle, and their levels.
*Whether the battle was a Trainer battle or not.
*Whether the Pokémon involved were holding any items.

Your support is much appreciated. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 23:01, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

=== Report 1 (example) ===

On the GameFAQ's forums, a user named JakeisaLie reported the following: A Level 48 Tabunne, was defeated by a level 52 Rotom holding a Lucky Egg, and yielded 5119 experience points instead of 5201 as the formula predicts.

The level difference multiplier, in this case, seems to be 72/79 (48 / 52+(2/3)), instead of 50/54 (48+2 / 50+2). [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 16:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

=== Watched some playthroughs of the first bit of the game... ===
... and what I found is below. I didn't record what Pokémon were used to battle, because I didn't think it was relevant. None of the Pokémon were holding any experience-affecting items. Format is <pre><level of player's Pokémon> vs. <level of defeated Pokémon> <defeated Pokémon>: <Exp. gained> (formula predicts <exp. expected from formula>)</pre>
{| width="100%" class="expandable"
|'''"Big" list (click "show")'''
|-
|
<pre>
Trainer battles:
Choroneko (56 base exp.):
Level 7 vs. level 7 Choroneko: 118 (formula predicts 118)
Level 9 vs. level 7 Choroneko: 96 (formula predicts 97)
Level 10 vs. level 7 Choroneko: 88 (formula predicts 89)

Level 11 vs. level 8 Choroneko: 102 (formula predicts 104)
Level 12 vs. level 8 Choroneko: 94 (formula predicts 97)
Level 13 vs. level 8 Choroneko: 86 (formula predicts 90)

Level 13 vs. level 10 Choroneko: 133 (formula predicts 135)
Level 14 vs. level 10 Choroneko: 123 (formula predicts 127)

Level 16 vs. level 12 Choroneko: 153 (formula predicts 157)

Dokkora (61 base exp.):
Level 16 vs. level 13 Dokkora: 195 (formula predicts 199)

Haderia (130 base exp.):
Level 20 vs. level 18 Haderia: 632 (formula predicts 639)

Mamepato (53 base exp.):
Level 16 and level 15 vs. level 13 Mamepato: 84 (level 16) and 90 (level 15) (formula predicts 87 and 92)

Meguroco (58 base exp.):
Level 22 vs. level 14 Meguroco: 151 (formula predicts 163)

Minezumi (51 base exp.):
Level 8 vs. level 7 Minezumi: 96 (formula predicts 97)
Level 10 vs. level 7 Minezumi: 79 (formula predicts 81)
Level 12 vs. level 7 Minezumi: 67 (formula predicts 69)
Level 13 vs. level 7 Minezumi: 61 (formula predicts 65)

Level 13 vs. level 10 Minezumi: 121 (formula predicts 123)
Level 14 vs. level 10 Minezumi: 112 (formula predicts 115)

Level 12 vs. level 12 Minezumi: 184 (formula predicts 184)
Level 12 and tag team partner vs. level 12 Minezumi: 92 (formula predicts 92)

Level 22 vs. level 14 Minezumi: 133 (formula predicts 143)
Level 22 19 vs. level 14 Minezumi: 66 78 (formula predicts 72 and 82)

Level 18 vs. level 16 Minezumi: 218 (formula predicts 221)

Miruhog (147 base exp.):
Level 21 vs. level 20 Miruhog: 840 (formula predicts 844)

Otamaro (59 base exp.):
Level 16 vs. level 13 Otamaro: 188 (formula predicts 192)

Panpour (63 base exp.):
Level 15 vs. level 10 Panpour: 129 (formula predicts 134)

Pansage (63 base exp.):
Level 15 vs. level 10 Pansage: 129 (formula predicts 134)

Level 10 vs. level 14 Pansage: 349 (formula predicts 353)
Level 14 vs. level 14 Pansage: 265 (formula predicts 265)

Pansear (63 base exp.):
Level 15 vs. level 10 Pansear: 129 (formula predicts 134)

Snivy (28 base exp.):
Level 12 vs. level 8 Snivy: 47 (formula predicts 49)
Level 10 and level 12 vs. level 8 Snivy: 28 (level 10) and 24 (level 12) (formula predicts 29 and 25)

Level 16 vs. level 14 Snivy: 103 (formula predicts 105)

Tepig (28 base exp.):
Level 10 vs. level 7 Tepig: 44 (formula predicts 45)
Level 13 vs. level 7 Tepig: 34 (formula predicts 36)

Yorterry (55 base exp.):
Level 10 vs. level 6 Yorterry: 66 (formula predicts 67)
Level 13 vs. level 6 Yorterry: 50 (formula predicts 53)

Level 10 vs. level 7 Yorterry: 86 (formula predicts 87)
Level 12 vs. level 7 Yorterry: 72 (formula predicts 75)
Level 13 vs. level 7 Yorterry: 66 (formula predicts 70)

Level 10 vs. level 11 Yorterry: 196 (formula predicts 197)
Level 13 vs. level 11 Yorterry: 156 (formula predicts 158)

Level 13 vs. level 12 Yorterry: 185 (formula predicts 185)

Level 18 vs. level 15 Yorterry: 207 (formula predicts 211)

Wild battles:
Choroneko (56 base exp.):
Level 14 and level 11 vs. level 8 Choroneko: 27 (level 14) and 34 (level 11) (formula predicts 29 and 38)

Minezumi (51 base exp.):
Level 6 vs. level 3 Minezumi: 20 (formula predicts 20)
Level 11 vs. level 8 Minezumi: 62 (formula predicts 63)

Yorterry (55 base exp.):
Level 6 vs. level 2 Yorterry: 12 (formula predicts 12)
Level 10 vs. level 6 Yorterry: 44 (formula predicts 45)
</pre>
|}
Hope it helps. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 01:24, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
: Thanks for the info, but just to clarify - are these Trainer battles? Because the formula seems to identify them as such. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 22:45, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
::I had them divided into two sections: "Trainer battles" (at the beginning) and "Wild battles" (at the end). Only the last five entries are wild battles. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 23:53, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

: Well. It certainly created more questions than it answered... my formula is definitely wrong, but it brings us nowhere closer in getting the actual formula right. >_> [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 02:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

: Could you get some higher-level ones? Those ones are better resolution, and leave less room for error. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 02:56, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
===A few more...===
These are all trainer battles.
<pre>
Level 45 and level 37 vs. level 43 Zuruzukin (171 base exp.): 1048 (level 45) and 1295 (level 37) (formula predicts 1057 and 1273)

Level 44 and level 38 vs. level 43 Roobushin (227 base exp.): 1427 (level 44) and 1674 (level 38) (formula predicts 1433 and 1648)

Level 44 and level 38 vs. level 43 Kojofu (70 base exp.): 441 (level 44) and 516 (level 38) (formula predicts 442 and 508)

Level 52 vs. level 45 Erufuun (168 base exp.): 1916 (formula predicts 1975)

Level 52 vs. level 45 Zeburaika (174 base exp.): 1984 (formula predicts 2045)
</pre>
I have to say, despite the formula not being completely accurate, it does give a pretty good rough idea of how much experience you're going to get. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 22:33, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

: I guess so. It's just that I just know that people are going to be disappointed when they don't actually get 1,581,409 points for defeating a level 100 Blissey in the way I mentioned. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 21:05, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
:: Although, given the looks of the variations in this formula, it looks like that fight would yield ''more'' than 1,581,409. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 21:09, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

{| width="100%" class="expandable"
|'''Even more trainer battles (click "show")'''
|-
|
<pre>
Level 41 and level 38 vs. level 45 Gigalith: 1697 and 1837 (formula predicts 1675 and 1801) Base exp. 227

Level 41 and level 38 vs. level 46 Shibirudon: 1816 and 1963 (formula predicts 1787 and 1921) Base exp. 232

Level 45 vs. level 45 Gigalith: 3065 (formula predicts 3065) Base exp. 227

Level 44 vs. level 46 Shibirudon: 3364 (formula predicts 3341) Base exp. 232

Level 43 vs. level 45 Erufuun: 2386 (formula predicts 2369) Base exp. 168

Level 43 vs. level 45 Zeburaika: 2471 (formula predicts 2454) Base exp. 174

Level 44 vs. level 45 Murando: 3059 (formula predicts 3049) Base exp. 221

Level 43 vs. level 45 Pendra: 3039 (formula predicts 3018) Base exp. 214

Level 43 vs. level 44 Oobemu: 2303 (formula predicts 2294) Base exp. 170

Level 43 vs. level 44 Kutairan: 2288 (formula predicts 2281) Base exp. 169

Level 43 vs. level 45 Doredia: 2386 (formula predicts 2369) Base exp. 168

Level 43 vs. level 44 Yanakkie: 2356 (formula predicts 2348) Base exp. 174

Level 43 and level 44 vs. level 44 Hiyakkie: 1178 and 1149 (formula predicts 1174 and 1149) Base exp. 174

Level 44 vs. level 44 Baokkie: 2297 (formula predicts 2297) Base exp. 174

Level 44 vs. level 43 Zuruzukin: 2149 (formula predicts 2158) Base exp. 171

Level 44 vs. level 43 Roobushin : 2854 (formula predicts 2865) Base exp. 227

Level 44 vs. level 43 Kojofu: 880 (formula predicts 884) Base exp. 70

Level 44 vs. level 43 Gochimiru: 1722 (formula predicts 1729) Base exp. 137

Level 44 vs. level 43 Hahakomori: 2778 (formula predicts 2789) Base exp. 221

Level 44 vs. level 44 Gigiaru: 2033 (formula predicts 2033) Base exp. 154

Level 44 vs. level 44 Darmanitan: 2218 (formula predicts 2218) Base exp. 168

Level 44 vs. level 44 Gamageroge: 2971 (formula predicts 2971) Base exp. 225
</pre>
|}
Existing formula tends to overestimate if the attacking Pokémon is higher level, and underestimate if the defending Pokémon is higher level (what you hinted at with the Blissey example). (Existing formula is correct if the two Pokémon are the same level.) [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 05:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
: I'm pretty sure now that it involves square roots (or other such concave functions) in some way. That means that my formula only underestimates for a little of the time - and then it goes back to overestimating. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 03:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

== ERRATIC behaviour in Mathematica ==

So, I went to type in the EXP per level into Wolfram Mathematica 6, in an attempt to come up with both better graphs and interesting phenomonons. The non-piecewise functions turned out fine. However, the erratic and fluct. formulas kept coming up with strange behaviour in their plots, which I was able to filter out. However, look at this plot for the erratic formula:

This is the derivitive of the function of the Erratic experience group. Look at the range 68-98. Any ideas as to what is causing this? I had typed the formula in direstly as was shown on the article. [[User:TruePikachu|--TruePikachu]] 20:37, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

:<nowiki>*Facepalm*</nowiki> Just zoomed in, seems to be caused by the Floor() function and the erratic nature of that portion of the growth curve, which is why it didn't show up for Fluct. The formulas weren't designed for this kind of manipulation...time to weite an interger-based derivitave function to better model this...

:Anyway, any ideas as to wether or not I should undergo this project? I can easily cut out the inputted formula (It is harder to include it rather than exclude it). The GenI formulas are rather well established, being elementry curves, but the GenIII curves I can do lots of research into, and add to the article under a different heading. For example, I can easily generate a graph of the 'changing multiplier' for these two functions, or superimpose all parts of the piecewise function (so someone could see what happens if one part of it is used for the entire function). [[User:TruePikachu|--TruePikachu]] 20:47, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
::I already created a changing multiplier graph. Third one down from the top. I also created an "EXP per level" graph (shown here on the talk page), but for lack of a place to put it, haven't put it onto the main page yet. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 03:19, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

== Reshiram and Zekrom don't gain experience? ==

For some reason, people are editing this onto the article, even though it isn't true, at least from what I've seen of the playthroughs. Why do people think that it doesn't yield experience? [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 00:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
:What that means is when you defeat one you don't gain experience. I wonder if this is true or not. --[[User:Landfish7|'''Land''']][[User talk:Landfish7|'''fish7''']]''' 01:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
::When facing the wild version mascot before facing N, defeating it yields no Exp, as when the battlt ends, it'll just be there in the overworld as if nothing happened. Facing the one N has will yield Exp though. [[User:Shiramu Kuromu|Shiramu Kuromu]] 03:18, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

== Question ==

If there was a Pokémon that would change it's Exp group upon evolution, what would happen? [[User:Shiramu Kuromu|Shiramu Kuromu]] 03:18, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
:In Generation III at least, the Pokémon would change level so that it would be consistent with the what the new group's experience formula would dictate.
:For example, if you hacked a Pikachu (1000000 at level 100) so that it would evolve into Gyarados (1250000 at level 100) at level 20, the Pikachu would only need 8000 exp. points to reach level 20. So suppose that the Pikachu receives 8000 exp. points, reaches level 20, and is allowed to evolve. But since Gyarados is in a different experience group, the Pokémon would actually drop down to level 18 (for Gyarados's group, 8000 points is only sufficient for level 18) immediately after evolution is complete. Meaning that when you check your Pokémon menu right after evolution, the Pokémon will appear as level 18, with 8000 exp. points.
:This has apparently been observed with a Generation III ROM, but I don't know exactly what would in other Generations. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 04:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
:Just realized that a potential question might arise with my example: Would the newly-evolved Gyarados attempt to learn {{m|Bite}} (a level 20 move), even though it's technically level 18 after evolution? Unfortunately I don't have the answer to that particular question. [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 05:06, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
::Based on what you've said about the situation, I'd guess no - after evolution, the new level is 18, period. Otherwise, the bug would be that it stays at Level 20, but as soon as it gains experience points, it reverts to 18. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 15:46, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
:::Well, a regular Magikarp evolving into Gyarados at level 20 would immediately try to learn Bite upon evolution (without leaving the evolution screen). In other words, we haven't even seen the new level of the Gyarados until after it attempts to learn Bite. Basically it's a question of when does the game "notice" that the Pokémon's experience group has changed - immediately upon evolution (i.e. while the evolution screen is active) or immediately after leaving the evolution screen? [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 17:09, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
::::That's a good point, actually. We'd need somebody to test that out. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 01:52, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

== Level multipliers in the new Exp. gain formula ==

We're going to have to change that article - it certainly is not adding the levels by 2 and dividing them.

I'm getting a table set up with the approximate multipliers. Perhaps we can figure something out. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 05:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

== underflow glitch==

can we get a detailed example of this please? {{unsigned|DJLO}}
:The medium-slow growth algorithm itself is 1.2L^3 - 15L^2 + 100L - 140. This is applied to {{p|Mew}} and all 3-stage evolutionary Pokémon except {{p|Dragonite}}, {{p|Butterfree}} and {{p|Beedrill}}. Substitute L for anything greater than 1 like 2 and the equation will suffice i.e. this would give 9.6 which floors down to 9 total experience for a level 2 medium-slow growth Pokémon. If you use 1 or 0 however you get a negative result, e.g. replacing L with level 1 gives -53.8 experience which floors down to -53. The main problem is that Pokémon experience is an unsigned integer; this means that negative numbers are essentially taken as a positive (w^X)-y value [where w^X is the highest value possible; {at least 2^8} and -y is the negative integer]. Pokémon experience is stored in three 8-bit bytes ((2^8)^3) so for a [[Mew Trick]]ed level 1 Pokémon with no experience we can use the analogy that it has ((2^8)^3)- 53 experience which is 16,777,109. Since 256^3 (16,777,216) is essentially the 'largest value' in this case, if this Pokémon got 54 experience it would revert back to a total experience of 0, though gaining less than 54 experience would cause the game to recalculate what level (very high) the Pokémon should be after a battle ends or the [[box trick]] is used. Since it is way over the total experience required for level 100 by far the level 100 cap comes in and makes the Pokémon level 100. --[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 21:00, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

::It is explained in depth in the article itself, no? [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 19:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

== Wait, how is a base yield of 28 lower than a base yield of 20? ==

"The Pokémon with the highest base experience yield is Blissey, with a base yield of 608. The Pokémon with the lowest base experience yield are Snivy, Tepig, and Oshawott, '''with a base yield of 28.'''

* Before Generation V, the Pokémon with the lowest base experience yield was '''Magikarp with a yield of 20,''' and the Pokémon with the highest base experience yields were Arceus, Happiny, Chansey, and Blissey, with a yield of 255."

Magikarp still has the lowest base yield. And this can't be generation only, as Blissey is in there. I'm not willing to correct anything until I know how this mistake was made (is 28 supposed to be 18? Did somebody think 28 is lower than 20? How did this happen?) {{unsigned|Shadowater}}
:Most of the base exp. yields changed from Generation IV to V. Blissey, for example, had its own base exp. changed from 255 in Generation IV to 608 in Generation V. Pokémon If you take a look at the base exp. column at [[List of Pokémon by effort value yield]], Magikarp now has the tenth lowest base exp, with 40 (up from 20 in Generation IV). [[User:Ultraflame|Ultraflame]] 01:49, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
::Ah, ok then. I had checked Magikarp's page to make sure, and it says 20 there, so I got confused by that --[[User:Shadowater|Shadowater]] 04:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

== My Pokémon got one EP less? ==
If I start in the yellow edition, I fight with my Pikachu against Gary's Eevee. I gain 97 EP, but why? It is a trainer battle (1,5), Eevee's base experiance is 92 in the first generation and it has level 5. If I multiply 1,5*92*5 and divide it with 7 (as it is described in the article), I got 98 EP and not 97. What's the reason for gaining 97 EP? I controlled it with wild Rattatas and Pidgeots in the same edition, and there the EP-gaining is right (with Rattata: 1*57*2 (1 = wild battle, 57 = Rattata's base experiance in Generation one, 2 = its level) divided with 7 = 16 EP for Pikachu. But I used a long time to find a solution of my problem, but I can't. Can anybody help me here?
--[[User:LaBumm|LaBumm]] 23:40, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
: Maybe it does the abL/7 thing before multiplying anything else, rounding down in the middle. That's the only explanation I can think of, and that gives 97.5, which rounds down to 97. [[User:Ztobor|Ztobor]] 12:54, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

== On the Gen V formula ==

According to poccil's post [http://www.smogon.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3372038#post3372038 here], Lucky Egg and trade multipliers are applied after the +1. Since I can't seem to replace the existing file, I have instead left the repaired formula on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&oldid=422238119 Wikipedia's sandbox]. Could someone perform the replacement of the formula? [[User:Arcorann|Arcorann]] 09:01, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
:Updated the image with yours. I skimmed the page to see if anything was wrong due to using the old formula, but it seemed to be using your formula anyway. However, it's possible that I missed something. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 05:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

== Experience Gain Formula Mistake? ==

I saw the experience gain formula and decided to test out. This is the situation: In a Generation IV game a Scyther who defeats a wild level 11 Rattata gains 89 EXP. points. The Scyther is with his original trainer, has no Lucky Egg, there is no EXP. Share in his team, and no EXP. All in the Bag to affect the outcome. Though, using the formula, Change in EXP would simplify to 561/7, which equals 80.14, or 80 EXP. I'd understand if it were off by 1 or 2 EXP but the gap is noticeable here. Could someone help me in finding out my mistake? I'm pretty sure I'm the one mistaken here. Thanks in advance to any help.
[[User:Chrispizza|Chrispizza]] 20:41, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
:I tried the exact same thing (Scyther KOing a lv 11 Rattata in Gen IV), and got 89 EXP as well. I don't think it was you that messed up, but the formula. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 07:07, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

== Gen IV International Pokémon ==

Does the 1.7 multiplier exist in pre Gen IV games? If not then this info should be added to this page. I only ask because a lot of the benefits of international trading weren't added until Gen IV. [[User:Jmvb|Jmvb]] 14:53, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
:I would doubt it. The byte which indicates its country of origin wasn't added until [[Pokémon data structure in Generation IV|Gen IV]], so I don't see how the Gen III game would have been able to tell. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 15:25, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

== Level 100 Exp. Share ==

If I battle a Pokémon with a level 100 Pokémon and another one in my party has an Exp. Share, does the one holding it get 100% of Exp. Points since the one battling doesn't? [[User:Mastergiygas11|MasterGiygas]] 23:16, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
:No. In generation IV at least, the 50% that would go to the level 100 Pokemon battling is lost. [[User:Werdnae|Werdnae]] [[User talk:Werdnae|(talk)]] 23:19, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
::Just tested, it gets 50% in 5th gen as well. -- [[User:Trainer Hunter|Trainer]] [[User talk:Trainer Hunter|Hunter]] -- 23:38, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
:::I used to do this in Gen III. It is true there as well. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 01:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

== A most accuracy GenV formula for Exp. Points gained in battle ==

(I'm spanish so, I'm sorry if my english isn't perfect)

I'm working and testing the actual formula for gain Exp. Points in battles and, in some cases, I noticed that the actual formula has some little mistakes in certain specific cases. I modified the actual formula, and with this new version I didn't fail any case until now. I will try to explain it as well as I can:

- Step 1: Calculate total Exp. Points.
totalExp = tct((b x L) x a)
NOTE: tct() meas truncate decimals.

- Step 2: Calculate particular Exp. Points.
This step is slightly different from the actual formula.
"aux1" is equal to 1 if the Pokémon has participated in the battle or 0 if not.
"aux2" is equal to 1 if the Pokémon has Exp. Share equipped or 0 if not.
"s1" is the number of Pokémon that participated in the battle and have not fainted. If any Pokémon in the party is holding an Exp. Share, "s1" is
equal to twice the number of Pokémon that participated instead.
"s2" is equal to twice the number of Pokémon holding the Exp. Share in the party.
partExp = (aux1 x tct(totalExp / (5 x s1))) + (aux2 x tct(totalExp / (5 x s2)))

- Step 3: Calculate Exp. Points per level multiplier.
This step is slightly different from the actual formula.
multiplier = tct((tct((2L + 10)^2.5) x 1000) / tct((L + Lp + 10)^2.5))

- Step 4: Semi final Exp. Points.
This step is slightly different from the actual formula.
sFinal = tct((partExp x multiplier) / 1000) + 1

- Step 5: Final Exp. Points.
finalExp = tct(tct(tct(sFinal x t) x e) x p)
NOTE: I can't test if that's the real order, because I don't have any international traded Pokémon and any Exp. Point Power.

: Amazing! I just make it into a better look equation, but I haven't test it yet
: Note that big brackets '[]' means truncate decimals

: [[File:Exp_process_1_totalexp.png]]

: [[File:Exp_process_2_partexp.png]]

: [[File:Exp_process_3_multiplier.png]]

: [[File:Exp_process_4_sfinal.png]]

: [[File:Exp_process_5_finalexp.png]]

:[[File:Exp_process_6_mixed.png]]
: Where
: b is the base experience yield of the fainted Pokémon′s species, listed here.
: L is the level of the fainted Pokémon.
: a is equal to 1 if the fainted Pokémon is wild, and 1.5 if the fainted Pokémon is owned by a Trainer.
: aux1 is equal to 1 if the Pokémon has participated in the battle or 0 if not.
: aux2 is equal to 1 if the Pokémon has Exp. Share equipped or 0 if not.
: s1 is the number of Pokémon that participated in the battle and have not fainted. If any Pokémon in the party is holding an Exp. Share, "s1" is equal to twice the number of Pokémon that participated instead.
: s2 is equal to twice the number of Pokémon holding the Exp. Share in the party.——[[User:Kolu|Kolu]] ([[User talk:Kolu|talk]]) 06:30, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

== EXP and Tag Battles ==

How does being in a story-based tag battle affect EXP (for example, when you're teamed with Bianca in Reversal Mountain in B&W2)? I don't think it's consistent between different games. [[User:Legionaireb|Legionaireb]] ([[User talk:Legionaireb|talk]]) 19:26, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

== Possibly minor page error ==

So, on the chart listing "Experience at each level" comparing the exp groups, at the top of the chart for Medium Slow on the "To next level" side, it reads 0 with use of the {{Template|tt}} template reading "63 in Generations I and II". This should ''probably'' either read 6 or 3, but probably not 63, since that would be more than the next number down. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 17:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
:Remember that in those generations the formula was actually broken at level 1. [[User:Werdnae|Werdnae]] [[User talk:Werdnae|(talk)]] 21:15, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
::Oh.... right..... Forgot, it's Gen I/II, where more than enough random pieces of code was broken, and level 1's weren't even legitimately obtainable. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 22:49, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

== "Unexplainable" deviation in Gen I? ==

The text states that in Gen I "... the calculated experience deviates by as much as three experience points from the experience received in-game, a deviance which cannot be accounted for by simple rounding errors."

I would like to know more about this. A 3-point deviation is certainly possible assuming that the game truncates any intermediate result to integers; for example, 13/7*1.5*1.5≈4.18, but int(int(int(13/7)*1.5)*1.5)=int(int(1*1.5)*1.5)=int(1*1.5)=1.

[[User:Bbbbbbbbba|Bbbbbbbbba]] ([[User talk:Bbbbbbbbba|talk]]) 15:56, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
:I put part of the data I gathered on [[User:Tiddlywinks/Gen I Exp/Party of 6|a user page]] (I have data for parties of 1-5 as well). You should just be able to import (copy/paste{{tt|*|You might want to copy from the source, because whenever I've tried to copy-paste directly between a webpage and OpenOffice Calc, it doesn't import correctly; I have to put it in a simple text editor in between}}) that data into a spreadsheet if you want, marking comma as the delimiter. About half of those result in some deviation (with a half-dozen or so deviating by 3). You're welcome to try to reconcile those with some rounding. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 16:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

::Try this sequence of operation:
::1. Divide the base exp of the enemy by the number of participating Pokémons. In case of Exp. All, divide the above result by the number of all Pokémons in party. Truncate the result (to an integer).
::2. Multiply by the level of the enemy, then divide by 7. Truncate the result.
::3. Multiply any factor of 1.5 (trade/trainer) that is applicable. Truncate after each multiplication.
::This should work like a charm.
::[Actually I "cheated" by reading the assembly code:)] [[User:Bbbbbbbbba|Bbbbbbbbba]] ([[User talk:Bbbbbbbbba|talk]]) 18:56, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
:::Yup, that does it for all the data I've got (except that you forgot an extra /2 for Exp. All in Step 1). Thanks! I think the main difference with everything I tried is that I was always multiplying enemy level and base exp together right away.
:::I really wish I could mark rounding in the formulas, but I'm still waiting for them to be updated for Gen VI, even. =( And I don't really want to try to explain it purely textually... [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 19:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

== What's wrong with EXP All? ==

:In Generation I, when Exp. All is in the Bag, every Pokémon in the player's party also receives some experience from Exp. All; that amount is equal to the amount that a battling Pokémon would have received (before any bonuses) divided by the number of Pokémon in the player's party (this method of calculation appears to be an error).

I don't see what the error is here. If you have 6 mons in your party and you defeat an opponent and win N EXP, each mon gains N/6 EXP. Is that not what happens? [[User:HyperHacker|⬡]] ([[User talk:HyperHacker|talk]]) 19:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
:In point of fact, if your party has 6 Pokemon and only one of them battles and Exp All is in the bag, they each actually get (N/2)/6 Exp (and the battler gets N/2 Exp). That's no problem.
:If you send 2 Pokemon out of a 6-Pokemon party in to battle, though, the battlers each get N/4 Exp and each of the 6 party Pokemon get (N/4)/6 Exp. But they should be getting (N/2)/6 Exp. The game should be using half the opponent's experience to divide among the party; instead it uses the amount that a battler receives, which will be less than N/2 if there is more than one battler. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 21:59, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

::I think I understand, but I'm still not clear... it divides the EXP into two pools (one for those who battled, one for those who didn't) of 50% each, except the non-battler pool isn't actually 50%, but (50 / #battlers)%?

::Maybe I'm just a derp, but I don't find either explanation completely clear. [[User:HyperHacker|⬡]] ([[User talk:HyperHacker|talk]]) 12:20, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
:::That's basically right. What it ''looks'' like is that someone thought, "Hey, I've got one guy battling so he's gonna receive 50% of the experience, then I need to divide 50% among the party...I can just divide the number that the guy in battle got, easy peasy!". And if they only tested it with one battler, that would look correct and they could have missed the mistake. On the other hand, it could be more of a bug and they meant to actually use the right value but forgot or didn't quite do it right somehow. It's hard to say. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 13:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

== B2W2 cap. ==

...I think they capped the yield at 100k in B2W2. I've seen Lv. 79 Blissey with all the bonuses (Pass Power, trade, Lucky Egg) giving exactly 100 000EXP. This is not the case [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYhC2ZTqVzY here]. {{unsigned|Eridanus}}

:This seems to be true. It can be seen [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKgGBh55kE here] for example. The video Eridanus linked to is from BW, not B2W2, so the change seems to have been implemented during Gen V. Maybe add this to / change the text in the Trivia section where the maximum value for Exp. Points amounting to >100k is said to be possible in 'Gen V'? [[User:Peterpansexuell|Peterpansexuell]] ([[User talk:Peterpansexuell|talk]]) 19:05, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

== Gen VI experience formula ==

So I'm not sure if this has been discussed or not, but I just noticed a few weeks ago, that experience in Generation VI is no longer divided between the number of Pokémon that took part in the battle. I thought this was exclusive to when the Exp. Share was turned on, but I discovered that it works the same even if the Exp. Share is turned off.
So, this means that, in previous generations, if two Pokémon took part in a battle where the yielded experience was, say, 1000, then each Pokémon would receive 500 experience points. But in Gen VI, both Pokémon will gain the whole 1000 exp. points, effectively doubling the total experience received. This also means that if three Pokémon take part in the battle, the total experience gained would be three times the normal amount, and if four Pokémon took part, it would be four times the total experience, and so on.
I believe it's already been included in the article, but it is hard to understand as it is now. So I was thinking that maybe it could be further explained in the Trivia section, as it is the first time experience points aren't divided between team members. [[User:LinkNinjaMaster|LinkNinjaMaster]] ([[User talk:LinkNinjaMaster|talk]]) 07:04, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Talk:List of glitches in Generation I

2014-05-16T05:13:01Z

LinkNinjaMaster:

==List of minor glitches==
These comments are here from when this article was located at "List of minor glitches", so they may no longer be applicable to this page. Please do not reply to them. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 07:44, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

===Surfing outside [[Turnback Cave]]===
I just thought that I'd point out that you can {{m|surf}} outside Turnback Cave with no music. What I did was I used {{m|Rock Climb}}, then immedietly got onto my [[List of key items in Generation IV#Bicycle|Bike]], then rode up to the water and press A (to surf). This all happened in a period of about 4 - 5 seconds, and I surfed around on the pond with no surfing music. It seems to only work the first time you try (I've done it twice), and this is for {{v2|Diamond}}. ~[[User:Takharii|Takhar]][[User talk:Takharii|eon]] 01:00, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
:Hm... Maybe we should get another source... Anyone? [[User:CuboneKing|Cu]][[User talk:CuboneKing|bo]][[Special:Contributions/CuboneKing|ne]][[Cubone (Pokémon)|King]] 01:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
::I've heard of situation around [[Spring Path]] where riding the bike causes the music to stop, but I couldn't get it to work. Can you repeat it? If not, it might just be dust jamming the system or something. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 01:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
:::I could make a video and YouTube it, if its neccesary, but yeah, it might be the game having trouble handling all the action, rather than a glitch. ~[[User:Takharii|Takhar]][[User talk:Takharii|eon]] 01:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
::::Well, a video would be good, but all I wanted to know was if it could be repeated. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 01:58, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
:::::Yes, what I meant was: I've had this happen to me on two separate occasions (different days). The glitch occurs, then I try to repeat it (get off the pond and repeat the steps taken) and it doesn't seem to work. So it only works sometimes. I'll try to make a video, anyway. ~[[User:Takharii|Takhar]][[User talk:Takharii|eon]] 02:01, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

===Glitch with supereffectiveness using a move normally not very effective===

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IeGdpFRGtQ

As seen here, {{m|Discharge}} was used by {{p|Maggyo}} against a {{p|Denchura}}. Strangely, it was deemed supereffective by the game. Should this be added? - [[User:050294|050294]] 03:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
:The video has been taken down, so it was likely a fake. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 13:01, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

===Kecleon glitch===
The following comments come from the talk page of the Kecleon glitch, which was merged into this page --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 12:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

====What====
What the heck is the {{p|Kecleon}} Glitch? [[User:Pokedex493|Pokedex493]] 18:38, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
:Also, the Kecleon Glitch article page should not be deleted because articles about glitches should always stay on there. [[User:Pokedex493|Pokedex493]] 18:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
::The article tells you exactly what it is. Also, the article should be deleted and the content paced on [[list of minor glitches]]. The whole purpose of that page is to stop pages like this from being created. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 01:39, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
:::Per SnorlaxMonster --[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 14:14, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

====Cause====
Note: This is based somewhat on presumed data. I'm pretty sure the game does this though.

Couldn't the cause of this come from the Kecleon only aiming for whoever its item or attacked it? If the Pass Scarf causes it to attack the enemy, the chain reaction would then cause it to act as a team member, as Kecleon's data {{tt|causes it to be on the opposite side of the one it attacked|I think it does at least}}. Since the enemy is then defeated, Kecleon follows the team to the next floor, but doesn't go farther than this because the game would {{tt|only|presumably}} make it ''act'' like a team member, rather than being one. [[User:Turtwig A|Turtwig's]] [[Turtwig (Pokémon)|A-B-Cs]] ([[User talk:Turtwig A|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Turtwig A|contribs]]) 12:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
:That seems right to me. That's basically how I thought it worked too. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 12:52, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
:That seems right to me too, but I've never tried this glitch before, so I don't know. [[User:Pokedex493|Pokedex493]] 23:04, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
::'Cause it's not a glitch. It's with all Pokémon that battle the player (barring {{a|Run Away}} when HP is low). [[User:Ht14|'''''ht''''']][[User talk:Ht14|''14'']] 00:35, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
:::There's a difference. Those will still attack, not just follow the player. Not to mention that the Kecleon are faster than the team, and can easily be able to defeat it. Never activated it before either though. [[User:Turtwig A|Turtwig's]] [[Turtwig (Pokémon)|A-B-Cs]] ([[User talk:Turtwig A|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Turtwig A|contribs]]) 00:37, 11 September 2010
:It {{tt|may be a|Think of it, Kecleon acting weird and all}} glitch.---[[User:Pokemaniac2000|Pokemaniac2000]] 02:36, 29 September 2010(UTC)

====Discussion regarding potential deletion====
This article has been marked for deletion. I'm not really in a position to give my opinion here... it seems just as notable as plenty of other glitches we have/have had articles on, but at the same time, it is sort of walkthrough-ish. Personally, I think all glitches with the exception of a select few should be merged into one article for all the glitches in each game, with subsections for each glitch. That's just me, though. Discuss. The article will likely be deleted within the next week or two if no convinving arguments are presented. --[[User:Politoed666|''P'' ''o'']] [[User talk:Politoed666|''L'' ''i'']] 19:35, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
:Well, that is kinda what [[list of minor glitches]] is for, and what is really wanted is that it remains there but doesn't get its own page. However, having specific glitch sections on the articles of the games themselves is a good idea. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 00:43, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
::To me, this seems better suited to the list of glitches as opposed to just deleting it or giving it its own article. --[[User:Zesty Cactus|'''Zesty''']][[User talk:Zesty Cactus|'''Cactus''']] 00:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

:::I suppose it's decided then. Anyone want to volunteer to condense and move it? --[[User:Politoed666|''P'' ''o'']] [[User talk:Politoed666|''L'' ''i'']] 19:08, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
::::[[List of minor glitches#Kecleon glitch|Did that a while ago]]. Since there seems to be consensus, I'll just redirect this page there. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 03:06, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

===Similar to the cut glitch===

Giovanni drops a Silph Scope at the Game Corner in Generation 1, and it's possible to appear on top of it. Looking back, I wonder if that's normal.

Also, certain Pokemon cries will sound glitchy every couple replays in Generation 1. Pikachu's cry sounds different every six plays, for example [[User:Zouje|Zouje]] 17:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
#So you can just walk on top of it without a collision? How do you appear on top of it?
#Can you link to a video of this please? I'm interested. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 10:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
:#Basically if you fight him from the left hand side the Silph Scope item ball appears in that same spot but remains invisible because of the priority of the player's sprite until you walk away. You can also stand on a boulder in Gold/Silver via the same stand on a tree method from Red/Blue and jump from a ledge and land on a person in Vermilion City.
:#Interrupting certain sound effects can cause minor 'oddities' such as these (try playing Electabuzz's cry immediately after Jynx's for instance). There is a related 'music doubling trick' where a 'sound effect is playing' flag doesn't activate the first time but I haven't been able to replicate it. --[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 16:37, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

===Raimon Gym Trainer glitch===

Could the glitch occur with Rich Boy Roland? Seeing as both him and Lady Colette are the only trainers are in the roller coaster cars, Roland could possibly be able to trigger this glitch. Also, can you still talk to Colette while she is on the track or does the game act like she is not there after the battle? {{unsigned|Super goku}} 21:18, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

===Grass next to stairs glitch===

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTe-BTQbw-s

Should it be added to the list? If it does, can someone do? My english sucks. :/ [[User:Metang|•●'''MΣƬΛПG'''●•]] 21:21, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

===Marowak Ghost Glitch===

Is there any proof that the Marowak Ghost-Pokedoll event is actually a glitch? Considering you can use a Pokedoll on pre-Scoped Ghastly to end battles, it doesn't seem likely that it is really a glitch. After all, the Marowak Ghost is still coded as a Pokemon, just an uncatch-able one. [[User:Scorponis|Scorponis]] 19:23, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
:For me it is a glitch. First for bypassing a major event, second because it doesn't occur in Firered/Leafgreen versions. [[User:Metang|•●'''MΣƬΛПG'''●•]] 20:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

===Poké Radar===

I noticed that when I have a chain of Pikachu on my Poké Radar in the Trophy Garden on my Pearl version, and I go into a spot on the edge of the grass, even if a Pikachu turns up from it, my chain ends. I am using a Max Repel to block all other Pokémon, and have a high enough level in my first slot for the Repel to work. Should this glitch be on here? [[User:EnosShayrem|EnosShayrem]] 15:37, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
:If you walk 7 or more steps to find a pokemon with radar the chain can break. Not a glitch. [[User:OwnageMuch|OwnageMuch]] 03:31, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

===R/S/E Walk on water glitch===

There is a glitch in R/S/E where if you press B at the right time while entering the Seafloor Cave, you'll be asked to resurface while you're over its entrance. If you choose to do so, the game will put you on a rock in the water (not technically a water tile), so you'll be on your feet and able to walk on the water. Video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YB4qqYYy7nc
I have tried it and I can verify that it works. Good for adding? [[User:Silverlucario|Frezgle]] 21:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
:Yes. (Oh hi Frezparce, I think I've seen you before from HoO forums) --[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 21:48, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
::Yeah, I was there for a bit a while ago d: And, it's added. [[User:Silverlucario|Frezgle]] 00:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

===Potential additions===

I'm passing on some of the things I've been looking at to you people.

* Mail Trick glitch: If an enemy Pokémon tricks away your Mail you still keep it (JPN Ruby/Sapphire)
* After 1792 Battle Tower fights in Platinum/HG/SS (possibly D/P too) the Tower resets, but Tower Tycoon Palmer starts appearing again, as a normal, 'wannabe trainer' (see Tower Tycoon event skip).
* <s>Pressing B to resurface from underwater entrances (see [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YB4qqYYy7nc] (first uploaded here I believe: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqdLWm7rVf0]) + looked into a little here: [http://profglitch.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=gcltempboard&action=display&thread=233&page=2] ) </s>
* <s>Selfdestruct/Explosion audio glitch: Winning via a sacrificial move in Generation I plays the victory theme even though you black out (fixed in Gen II)</s>
* <s>Substitute glitch: Using Selfdestruct/Explosion on a Substitute will break it but not faint the user, the picture of the user disappears (Gen I)</s>
* Breaking through Paralysis/Burn: Increasing or decreasing the appropriate stat breaks through the drop (e.g. Agility when Paralysed breaks through hindering effect of Paralysis) (Gen I)
* Its possible to combine moves like Reflect and Barrier/Light Screen and Amnesia to roll-over 1023 Defense/Special Defense and consequently end up which much lower defences due to the larger number modulo 1024. (Gen I)
* A few glitches from PRAMA initative, like this walking Pikachu one [http://www.prama-initiative.com/index.php?page=glitches-mineurs-rbj-8#Pikachu]
* If a user's regular Ditto transforms and the player switches the transformation away to a shiny Pokémon the transformation momentarily appears shiny. (G/S) (need to verify)
* A shiny Ditto transforming into another Shiny Pokémon makes the transformation a normal Pokémon until DPPt (need to verify)
* A miss from Rage reduces its accuracy the next turn to 0.4%
* Focus Energy in Gen I is completely broken. [http://hax.iimarck.us/files/rbymoveinfo.txt]
* Other Red/Green select bugs like 'fossil conversion' except dokokashira if they're notable.
* Other Gen I battle mechanics related glitches e.g. [http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/openpkmn/index.php?title=Differences_in_Mechanics#Move_Mechanics_of_Note]
* Ledge glitch needs expanding to apply to a Gentleman west of Lilycove and [http://profglitch.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=gcltempboard&action=display&thread=265 a trainer in the Abandoned Ship]
* B/W AI oversight forcing trainer to send out fainted Pokémon (needs verifying) [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPoQ6QRi3to]
* Pokémon Yellow critical save glitch [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yXTpnUCh5Q]
* Pal Park ability change
* If you Pal Park a Pokémon with an accented name (from in-game trade from another localization) there's no support for the character when it reaches Gen IV (turns into a Japanese character instead) (thanks Blaziken257)
* Sketch glitch (G/S), Mimic glitch (JP D/P)
* A little problem where Shiny shadow Pokémon may change back to normal coloured Shadow Pokémon and vice versa (Colosseum) (needs verifying) [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9dM0UDD7c4]
* Disappearing over-world Pokémon (a derivative of Trainer-Fly/Mew-Trick when your Start Button is disabled (Red/Blue)
* Life Orb glitch (Pokémon Battle Revolution)
* Magic Coated Dark Void glitch (Pokémon Battle Revolution)
* Japanese D/P Ace Trainer oversight [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaNIKkRSYiQ]

* Also Smogon reported on Slow Start (JP D/P), Choiced U-Turn (D/P), Choiced Pursuit (JP D/P) + Hitting through Protect without Shadow Force (D/P) glitches here [http://www.smogon.com/ingame/misc/gen4_glitches#choiced_pursuit] though RE: Choiced U-Turn there have been reports of it not working outside of battle simulators.
* The rumour that there is a chance a Master Ball will fail in Generation I, any video verification?

--[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 22:37, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't have a video, but it says [[Poké Ball|here]] that any ball can miss in Gen. I. [[User:Pokabu82|Pokabu]][[user talk:Pokabu82|82]] 22:58, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

===Route 9 Biker Glitch (Gen V)===

This is probably a glitch, but it might be something done on purpose for whatever reason. I've only noticed this on Route 9, where two bikers are riding back and forth, but when you hold down B, ''they'' speed up. I'm in the process of checking whether this applies to other moving trainers or just them. --[[User:JRBockus|JRBockus]] 06:06, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

===False Thief Glitch===

Is this actually a glitch? If kelcon calls a price, I don't think so. It's like if someone drops an apple core on your lawn, it's yours, right? But if you just pick it up, forget what I said. [[User:Focus58|Focus]][[User talk:Focus58|58]] 22:19, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
:Well, it is, because you don't get a choice whether or not to buy it, you just pick it up. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 14:32, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

===Trapped in Solaceon Town===

In Platinum version, I was trapped in Solaceon town for some odd reason. I just started from the last save, and as I was riding my bike up through Solaceon town, I hit an invisible barrier right where the border is to route 210. I rode back and then tried again to get to route 210, and it let me through. I noticed this glitch wasn't listed, so I wanted to know if this has happened to anybody else. --[[User:Fimbulwinter2012|☆'''FiMbUlWiNtEr2O|2'''☆]] 14:26, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

You probably [[tweaking|tweaked]] without realising. :) [[User:OwnageMuch|OwnageMuch]] 04:00, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

===Black Belt Glitch===

What I don't understand is the whole reasoning behind it. First of all, how can consecutive spaces result in something like
D n i
o e n...
unless the program was something like
Opponent1::Say("D n i\n o e n...");
which would have made it intentional. Secondly, the letters are aligned correctly, something rare in glitches. If it was caused by spaces (the ASCII 0x20 variety) wrapping around like the HP bar in the Pomeg Glitch, ZZAZZ, Super Glitch (?), etc., even if it is a restricted text window (which is unlikely given the device type), the ' ' and '...' would have also alternated the line, resulting in
D n n
o e i ...
Thirdly, it could be a sort of joke among the programmers. What other 'phrase' do we know that follows this pattern?
P M
K N
So, once and for all, is it actually a glitch? I can't wrap my head around how it could (although there are some other glitches far more confusing). Or is it just an error in the coding, not related to consecutive spaces? (Driftveil's... Old... Lady... comes... to... mind...) In any case, the "glitch" either needs more detail or the detail present is incorrect. [[User:TruePikachu|--TruePikachu]] 05:46, 24 June 2011 (UTC) (and yes, I am aware the game uses a variable-width font, not monospaced)
:I think the glitch is that he can sometimes also say really random text? Or do I understand it wrong? [[User:OwnageMuch|OwnageMuch]] 10:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
::I don't personally own Platinum; I quoted the phrase from the supplied video. [[User:TruePikachu|--TruePikachu]] 20:13, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
:::Yeah, he said Done in like in the video when I battled him. I don't think he ever says anything random—people just didn't see Done in. I think there was something on this on a GCL wiki page. Unfortunately, it's not archived. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 16:22, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

===TM67 Retaliate not a glitch????===

Are you sure that's a Dark-type TM sprite? It looks an awful lot like a normal-type TM.
:Nope, it's black, so it's dark. And please sign with four tildes <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. :--[[User:SuperAipom7|SuperAipom7]] ''([[User talk:SuperAipom7|Questions?]])'' 16:32, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
[[File:TM67_Retaliate_glitch.png|thumb]]
::But only in the Japanese games, which is probably what confused you. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 16:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
:::Ah, yes, I forgot about that. :--[[User:SuperAipom7|SuperAipom7]] ''([[User talk:SuperAipom7|Questions?]])'' 16:35, 26 June 2011 (UTC) 

===Defining 'minor'===

This page is probably starting to get too large again, like what happened to [[glitch]] a long time ago. Why are things like the Pewter Gym skip, experience underflow glitch, 0 PP underflow glitch and no stone evolving glitch to be considered minor, and where should we draw the line between minor and 'normal'? --[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 19:39, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
:...as in not minor, but not major either. --[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 19:57, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
::My plan is to split this up into "List of glitches in Generation I" etc., with even glitches like the [[mew glitch]] listed, but with main article links. Since you brought this up, I'll probably do it today (I've been planning to do this for months now). --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 01:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

===Pokémon Center terrain===
I was playing Blue version in a Gameboy Advance and the cartridge shifted a little bit, and when I walked inside of the Pokémon Center it was all jagged and I could only walk in certain areas. Is this notable or is it just some random thing?[[User:SONICバリヤ|SONICバリヤ]] 04:04, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Pretrty much anything can happen if you shift the cartridge. [[User:OwnageMuch|OwnageMuch]] 05:27, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

== Oak Lab glitch? ==

I remember a few years ago (and I recently began to try it again) that when you are first at Oak's lab he will always ask you to choose what Pokemon you want. I found a neat but weird glitch where if you try to leave the lab he will call you back (nothing unusual). However like the Bike Glitch if you keep pressing B then after awhile the game glitches and you are unable to do anything. Don't know if this has been mentioned though... [[User:Frozen Fennec|Frozen Fennec]]
: OK so I just tried this again a moment ago. Apparently pressing B while trying to leave will make you and Prof. Oak disappear and the game unplayable. [[User:Frozen Fennec|Frozen Fennec]]
::That sounds interesting. Any chance you could upload a video? --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 14:15, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Where am I going to upload it to? But yea, used to do this glitch a lot when I was younger because I thought I could skip out on getting a starter. Not sure if this glitch can be done on an emulator. Found a video of it, pressing start afterward brings you right back, lol. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iAF20EdMiU [[User:Frozen Fennec|Frozen Fennec]]
:It's true, and its a legitimate glitch from long ago. It works on a real Game Boy, on {{2v2|Red|Blue}}. Though despite what [http://www.prama-initiative.com/index.php?page=glitches-mineurs-rbj#Labo PRAMA Initiative] say it doesn't seem to work on {{game|Yellow}}. You don't have to spam B, just keep closing the menu and holding down and it'll eventually glitch out. I read last year about a similar trick within the [[S.S. Anne]] itself, but I can't remember it unfortunately.

:You can also 'read' while pointing away from a bookshelf or scroll. The moment you press A, simply turn away. This can also be used with NPCs, to make them turn away but not talk to you.

{{youtubevid|xrpYso3KMiw|PramaTheTrust|Blue}} -[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 15:40, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
::Well, if either of you could write a section about it, I'd appreciate it. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'''Snorlax''']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'''Monster''']] 11:04, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

==Expanding upon the Shiny Ditto glitch==
Perhaps there should be mention that it works on any Pokémon who uses Transform, not just Ditto? I haven't tested any of this out, but I heard you can get a Shiny Mew this way (as long as during the Mew glitch, you make sure that the Pokémon with the Special stat of 21 know Swords Dance and you let the encountered Ditto use Swords Dance at least twice, which will make the Mew that appears be over level 10 and able to use Transform). I've also heard that Shiny Pupitar, Tyranitar, and Lugia can be obtained this way (the Ghost forme, Kabutops fossil forme, and the Aerodactyl fossil forme MissingNo.s inherit attacks of the last Pokémon viewed, so view the Pokédex entry or stats page of a Ditto before the encounter and each of those MissingNo.s will be able to Transform... so get them to Transform into your Shiny Pokémon and catch them). When these three MissingNo. formes are traded over to Generation II they will become Pupitar, Tyranitar, and Lugia (if the game allows the trade... sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't). [[User:Dannyjenn|Dannyjenn]] 00:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
:In [[Generation I]] and [[Generation II|II]] all Pokémon that use Transform turn into {{p|Ditto}}. This normally isn't a problem, because Mew (normally) can't be found in the wild, but if you get a Pokémon like {{p|Spearow}} to {{m|Mirror Move}} Transform, it will also turn into {{p|Ditto}}. --[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 00:25, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
::So you're saying that Shiny Mew and Shiny MissingNo.s would be impossible this way? Just wondering because I heard that someone has done it before... however, like I said, I never tested it so I have no idea if that person was lieing. [[User:Dannyjenn|Dannyjenn]] 00:33, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
:::Unfortunately not, I don't think so. I haven't tested this particular glitch either, but I know out of experience that all Pokémon in Generation I and II which use {{m|Transform}} turn into {{p|Ditto}} upon capture. Presumably, it copies both species values (i.e. it becomes a stable Ditto all the time) but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. The shiny Ditto glitch works because transforming copies a Pokémon's DVs, therefore the opponent "transforming into your transformation" copies the [[Effort values|DV]]s of the shiny Pokémon you used from Generation II. In Generation II, shiny Pokémon are determined by their DVs.

:::You might be interested in the [[Bug-Catching Contest data copy glitch]], but the shiny Pokémon you can get from it are unfortunately [[unstable hybrid Pokémon]]. There is another method of obtaining shiny Mew via an altered version of the [[remaining HP glitch]], [http://profglitch.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=gcltempboard&thread=368&page=1 discovered by Paco81], but it's complicated and I don't really understand it. The idea is to manipulate the Pokémon's [[Effort values|DV]]s manually to create a shiny Pokémon. --[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 01:04, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

==Change Magikarp into Mew (Pokémon Green)==
I recently added a glitch that turns a Magikarp into a Mew. Someone deleted it. Why is that? Is it because I never posted a discussion about it before editing the page? Sorry, I'm new... I don't exactly know the protocol of adding content to pages. If that's the reason, could someone let me know? Are we supposed to discuss everything before making major edits to the page? I just figured since it was a glitch with no mention then it'd be fine to add. [[User:Dannyjenn|Dannyjenn]] 00:38, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
:It was me, but I added an article about it under [[second type glitch]], because it isn't specific to {{p|Magikarp}} or {{type|Water}} Pokémon. Don't worry about it. BTW, I replied to your discussion under [[Talk:Magikarp (Pokémon)]] --[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] 00:45, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

==Team rocket teleporting member glitch==
So in Pokemon Blue I'm at Safforon city and I got into the Pokemone center then exit. I make Red walk left and then up when the path turns and then right when the path branches off. I walk right and then talk to the team rocket member that says "Being evil makes me feel so alive!" I then walk past him and go forward till I'm in front of Silph Co. The team rocket member that is supposed to be sleeping next to the door is a few paces from his position. Going up to talk to him will make him warp back to the place at the door and likewise waiting a bit will also make him warp to the door. It is possible to stand on the place where the team rocket member was and then have the player standing on top of him. I don't know if this occurs just in Blue and Red versions so I was wondering if someone could possibly find out and then add it. [[User:Minor Notes|Minor Notes]] ([[User talk:Minor Notes|talk]]) 22:01, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

==Invisible Oak Glitch==
It's listed twice on the page and even the description is exactly the same in both. [[User: Ariano|Արիանո]] 07:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

== Combine Save Surf glitch with S.S. Anne Reboard glitch ==

From my experience, the S.S. Anne Reboard glitch is just an application of the Save Surf glitch and should really be under the former glitch's section in the article. pikalax 05:42, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

== Gate Glitch Video ==

I noticed that there wasn't a Bulbapedia video for the Gate Glitch, so I have a video of the glitch at:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BA_bo-c0wuA]

I hope you will use it! :)

[[User:Iamchazzi|Iamchazzi]] ([[User talk:Iamchazzi|talk]]) 17:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)iamchazzi
:Added. --[[User:NOBODY|NOBODY]] ([[User talk:NOBODY|talk]]) 22:02, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

== Prevented progress ==

"Prevented progress:

If the player's starter Pokémon evolves before they obtain their Pokédex from Prof. Oak, the game will assume, since they have two Pokémon registered as caught, that they already have a Pokédex, and will not allow them to proceed.
This glitch was fixed in the Japanese Blue but it reappears in the Japanese Yellow."

Ok, I understand how in Pokémon Red and Green this can work, but this is impossible in Yellow, since in Yellow Pikachu can't evolve. So it's impossible to use this glitch. Anybody? --'''''[[User:Dr. James|Dr. James]]''''' ([[User talk:Dr. James|tell me]]) 00:47, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
:You can use this glitch by cheating to obtain a second Pokémon of another species. You don't even have to cheat to obtain the Pokémon itself since all that is required is the "walk through walls" cheat code to bypass the overworld collision data so that you can reach a Poké Mart and buy Poké Balls to catch another Pokémon. [[User:SatoMew2|Sato]][[User talk:SatoMew2|Mew]] 18:03, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

== Any Shiny ==

On YouTube, MissingnoXpert describes how to make any Pokemon shiny(trade from gen 2, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0QDZQhjxzY .) Should I add this?--[[User:SamurottMaster4747|SamurottMaster4747]] ([[User talk:SamurottMaster4747|talk]]) 23:13, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
: That glitch is currently on Gen II's article. I don't think there's any point in mentioning it here, as it has no effect in the Gen I games. [[User:Yamiidenryuu|Yamiidenryuu]] ([[User talk:Yamiidenryuu|talk]]) 03:16, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
==Game breaking canoe glitch?==
Canoe (0x07) or ????? is an item that you can get through item manipulation. If you attempt the surf glitch with the canoe using the pond in Viridian, and get off of it, the game will lock up. Any help? {{unsigned|Katakanaglitch}}
:That sounds interesting regarding the lock up, but I tried the Surf glitch on both Red/Blue and Yellow on the Viridian City pond and it worked correctly, making me surf down on to a ground tile and letting me walk away afterwards. I used the ?????, too. Where exactly did you perform the Surf glitch? Can you send a screenshot?
:By the way, I don't know if you're aware, but canoe is misleading because it implies the name of the item is known, while it isn't. The number of question marks is likely irrelevant because there's another item with the same name (hex: 2C) that was probably a cut key item. --[[User:Chickasaurus|Chickasaurus]] ([[User talk:Chickasaurus|talk]]) 23:11, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

== Bind glitch ==

Ok so I just found a glitch in Pokémon Blue regarding the move Bind. When using Bind against a Ghost type Pokémon, it will not affect it, as Ghost is inmune to Normal type. But in subsequent turns, the game will act as if the move connected, and will trap the Pokémon, preventing it from moving, but without doing damage.
Should it be added? [[User:LinkNinjaMaster|LinkNinjaMaster]] ([[User talk:LinkNinjaMaster|talk]]) 05:13, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Revenge (move)

2012-04-24T16:46:25Z

LinkNinjaMaster: /* Revenge's GenIII priority */

==Fly==
Should it be noted that Revenge can hit opponents using fly? [[User:Turtwig A|Turt]][[wig]] [[Turtwig (Pokémon)|A]] '''''[[Special:Contributions/Turtwig_A|Contributions]]''''' '''''[[User talk:Turtwig A|Talk]]''''' 20:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

If the one who used Revenge was of the [[Machop_(Pokémon)|Machop]] line, it was probably their [[No Guard]] ability that hit the Flyer. [[User:Tsum|Tsum]] 19:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

== Revenge's GenIII priority ==

I got my level 50 Machoke to use Revenge on a Route 1, level 2 Rattata, and it still went last. I don't know what priority it has on GenIII, but it clearly isn't the standard one. At least not in FireRed. Someone, please check this. [[User:LinkNinjaMaster|LinkNinjaMaster]] 09:29, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
:Mind if I ask what move the Rattata used? It'll help narrow down the actual priority. [[User:Werdnae|Werdnae]] [[User talk:Werdnae|(talk)]] 10:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
::Well, it was Tail Whip. Being a Lv.2 Rattata, it just know that, and Tackle.[[User:LinkNinjaMaster|LinkNinjaMaster]] 16:09, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Now I attacked a Lv3 Rattata with Seismic Toss and went first. Then I encountered an Lv2 Rattata, used Revenge (the Rattata used Tackle), and went last again. I'll try to use Revenge with other Pokémon that know some Low Priority moves, to figure out which it may be. [[User:LinkNinjaMaster|LinkNinjaMaster]] 16:46, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Revenge (move)

2012-04-24T16:09:49Z

LinkNinjaMaster: /* Revenge's GenIII priority */

Talk:Revenge (move)

2012-04-24T09:29:29Z

LinkNinjaMaster: /* Revenge's GenIII priority */ new section

Talk:Reckless (Ability)

2011-12-21T06:51:30Z

LinkNinjaMaster: /* Mimic Hitmonlee and Reckless Hitmonlee */

Only the Opponent? Isn't it both Pokémon? [[Image:Ani137MS.gif]][[User:Tesh|TESH]][[Image:Ani233MS.gif]][[User Talk:Tesh|TALK]][[Image:Ani474MS.gif]][[User:Tesh/Sandbox|SAND]] 19:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

This information differs from other stuff on the internet.

<ab>Legendary Pokedex: "The power of moves that have recoil damage is doubled, but so is the recoil."
Smogon: "Whenever this Pokémon uses a move with recoil, including Hi Jump Kick and Jump Kick, the base power is increased by 20%."
Eevee's: "Opposing Pokémon take 30% more damage from recoil."
Serebii.net: " Thepower of moves that have recoil damage is doubled, but so is the recoil."
UPC: "[Base damage] of moves by bearer that cause recoil damage, as well as Jump Kick and Hi Jump Kick is multiplied by 1.2. (Struggle is excluded.)"

There seems to be three theories:
1) +20% damage.
2) +100% damage, +100% recoil.
3) opponent has +30% recoil damage.</ab>

Also, related is if Hi Jump Kick is a recoil move, despite not causing recoil.
[[User:Zazq|Zazq]] 22:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

:Hi Jump Kick causes recoil when it misses. I'll try and test out this ability some tomorrow. — [[User:Laoris|Laoris]] ([[User_Talk:Laoris|Blah]]) 06:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

So how about Wild Bolt, isn't it increased too?

==Chart==
I noticed how cool the chart on {{a|Skill Link}}'s page was, and was wondering if the information on which Pokémon with Reckless can learn each modified move could be integrated into the chart on this page. --[[User:AndyPKMN|AndyPKMN]] [[User talk:AndyPKMN|(talk)]] 12:01, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
:C'mon, anybody? I don't have the coding smarts to do this myself. --[[User:AndyPKMN|AndyPKMN]] [[User talk:AndyPKMN|(talk)]] 12:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

==Take Down==
I thought [[Staraptor]] could learn [[Take Down]].--[[User:K4kirin|K4kirin]] 04:54, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

== Mimic Hitmonlee and Reckless Hitmonlee ==

I was thinking about the section that says that a [[Hitmonlee]] with [[Mimic]] cannot legally have the [[Reckless]] ability, so [[Submission]], [[Volt Tackle]], and [[Wood Hammer]] can't have Reckless boost legitimately, and then remembered this section from the page "[[Ability]]":

"''In Generation IV, several Pokémon obtainable in Generation III gained new Abilities, becoming dual-Ability Pokémon. These Pokémon will keep the Ability they had in Generation III unless they evolve, when their Ability will be recalculated.''"

So I thought: isn't it possible to teach a [[Tyrogue]] the [[move]] Mimic, transfer it to a GenIV Game, evolve it to Hitmonlee and then, by mere chance, obtain a Reckless Hitmonlee with Mimic?
If that's true, then, in theory, it IS possible to legitimately have a Reckless Hitmonlee that knows Mimic and, therefore, Submission, Volt Tackle, and Wood Hammer could legitimately use Reckless power boost (in the right circumstances). I just wanted to point that out, since it intrigued me.
I may test it someday, as I'm replaying my FireRed cartridge, but I'm still far from finishing it, so, it would be nice if someone else can test it to find out if it is possible. If it has been tested already, and proved false, I would appreciate if someone corrected me.
Thanks. [[User:LinkNinjaMaster|LinkNinjaMaster]] 06:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Reckless (Ability)

2011-12-21T06:42:11Z

LinkNinjaMaster: /* Mimic Hitmonlee and Reckless Hitmonlee */ new section

Only the Opponent? Isn't it both Pokémon? [[Image:Ani137MS.gif]][[User:Tesh|TESH]][[Image:Ani233MS.gif]][[User Talk:Tesh|TALK]][[Image:Ani474MS.gif]][[User:Tesh/Sandbox|SAND]] 19:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

This information differs from other stuff on the internet.

<ab>Legendary Pokedex: "The power of moves that have recoil damage is doubled, but so is the recoil."
Smogon: "Whenever this Pokémon uses a move with recoil, including Hi Jump Kick and Jump Kick, the base power is increased by 20%."
Eevee's: "Opposing Pokémon take 30% more damage from recoil."
Serebii.net: " Thepower of moves that have recoil damage is doubled, but so is the recoil."
UPC: "[Base damage] of moves by bearer that cause recoil damage, as well as Jump Kick and Hi Jump Kick is multiplied by 1.2. (Struggle is excluded.)"

There seems to be three theories:
1) +20% damage.
2) +100% damage, +100% recoil.
3) opponent has +30% recoil damage.</ab>

Also, related is if Hi Jump Kick is a recoil move, despite not causing recoil.
[[User:Zazq|Zazq]] 22:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

:Hi Jump Kick causes recoil when it misses. I'll try and test out this ability some tomorrow. — [[User:Laoris|Laoris]] ([[User_Talk:Laoris|Blah]]) 06:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

So how about Wild Bolt, isn't it increased too?

==Chart==
I noticed how cool the chart on {{a|Skill Link}}'s page was, and was wondering if the information on which Pokémon with Reckless can learn each modified move could be integrated into the chart on this page. --[[User:AndyPKMN|AndyPKMN]] [[User talk:AndyPKMN|(talk)]] 12:01, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
:C'mon, anybody? I don't have the coding smarts to do this myself. --[[User:AndyPKMN|AndyPKMN]] [[User talk:AndyPKMN|(talk)]] 12:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

==Take Down==
I thought [[Staraptor]] could learn [[Take Down]].--[[User:K4kirin|K4kirin]] 04:54, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

== Mimic Hitmonlee and Reckless Hitmonlee ==

I was thinking about the section that says that a Hitmonlee with Mimic cannot legally have the Reckless ability, so Submission, Volt Tackle, and Wood Hammer can't have Reckless boost legitimately, and then remembered this section from the page "Ability":

"''In Generation IV, several Pokémon obtainable in Generation III gained new Abilities, becoming dual-Ability Pokémon. These Pokémon will keep the Ability they had in Generation III unless they evolve, when their Ability will be recalculated.''"

So I thought: isn't it possible to teach a Tyrogue Mimic, transfer it to a GenIV Game, evolve it to Hitmonlee and then, by mere chance, obtain a Reckless Hitmonlee with Mimic?
If that's true, then, in theory, it IS possible to legitimately have a Reckless Hitmonlee that knows Mimic, and, therefore, Submission, Volt Tackle, and Wood Hammer could legitimately use Reckless power boost. I just wanted to point that out, since it intrigued me.
I may test it someday, as I'm replaying my FireRed cartridge, but I'm still far from finishing it, so, it would be nice if someone else can test it to find out if it is possible. If it has been tested already, and proved false, I would appreciate if someone corrected me.
Thanks. [[User:LinkNinjaMaster|LinkNinjaMaster]] 06:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC)