Talk:Stat

In the modifiers table, how about items such as Light Ball, Thick Club? Lahar 23:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Whats the maximum for the stats? K P F 01:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Stat modification in battle.

okay, this is probably the best place to raise the question.

the stat altering moves change stats in "levels" of up to six. how much does each "level" change the stats by? If this is already listed somewhere, i don't know where to find it.

As far as I can tell, it works like this: Unmodified, stats are multiplied by 2/2 (with the exception of evasion and accuracy, which use 3/3 instead). Raising a stat by one level adds 1 to the numerator, whereas lowering by one level adds 1 to the denominator. This means that if you use a move like Growl, the opponent's attack stat is multiplied by 2/3. Using it again changes 2/3 to 2/4, a.k.a. 1/2, and if you use it again it goes to 2/5, then 2/6, (or 1/3,) etc. --Legollama 02:09, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Do negative stat changes in battle stay even after you switch out?Summerscythe 20:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

No. Switching out resets all stat alterations, +ve or -ve. - Solarys 06:03, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Speed question

If two Pokémon have the same speed stat in battle, what determines which will attack first? Lucario12 16:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Good question. I'm sure that it will be chosen randomly. TESHIGIGAS 16:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

All Stats Referred to Collectively

It's just an idea but I've noticed something. I've had the idea of instead of just reffering to a Pokemon's indivisual Stats; HP, Attack, Defense, Special Atk, Special Def and Speed, one could refer to all values that effect a battle. Observe;

Special Attack

HP

Attack

Defense

Special Defense

Evasiveness

Accuracy

Speed

Reading the first letter of each Stat forms the word "SHADSEAS" (or an alteration on the order). What do you think? Could it be a new lingo? Bttsstewart 17:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe, but the order seems pretty messy to me, as I'm more comfortable with the order HP-Atk-Def-SPAtk-SPDef-Spd. And remember to sign your comments on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~), this was already mentioned in your welcome message (I hope you already read it through). UltimateSephiroth ^{(about me · chat · edits)} 17:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, signed it now Bttsstewart 17:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Evasion stages/modifiers?

What's the maximum % of evasion a PKMN can have? (I.e. 6 uses of Double Team, Bright Powder and Hail/Sandstorm ability bonus.)

Firstly, do the items/abilities stack with each other and stages linearly or diminishingly?

If linearly, it will be 96.67%: 6 stages (9/3 multiplier) = 66.67% evasion + 20% from ability boost + 10% from Bright Powder

If diminishingly with stages only, it's 76.67%: 66.67% + 6.67%* from ability boost + 3.33%* from Bright Powder

Or if diminishingly with each other AND stages, it's around 75~76%, depending on whether the item or ability is accounted for first.

- Solarys 06:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I've been wondering this same thing, every time one of my Pokémon will get hit by Smokescreen or Sand-Attack, they miss more then half the time. But additional uses don't seem to make a huge difference. [[Derian]] 19:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

They stack diminishingly. So the effects of bright powder/your ability get smaller the more you double team or minimize. However, they remain the same if you sand attack because accuray is a diffrent stat.

-Kin-Kyukon

Incorrect formulas

Hey, sorry to revert the awesome-looking formula images in the #Formula section to text, but they're incorrect.

Generations III and IV have Nature × at first, when #Nature says this:

After all other calculations are finished, the stat that the nature enhances will be 110% of what it would be without the nature, and the stat hindered will be 90% of its normal value.

Generations I and II have EV / 2048, when Effort values#Generation I says the formula is File:Statexp.png.

And since I don't know how to make those awesome-looking formula images or even update them, I'll leave it to the uploader to modify them. The relevant files are StatFormulaHPGenI.png, StatFormulaGenI.png, StatFormulaHPGen3.png and StatFormulaGen3.png. Looce 17:09, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

If you can explicitly point out the corrections to be made, I can get on that for you. When I created the images I was going on the information I was provided with. If it is incorrect, I'm happy to provide a fix given that you tell me what to change it to. —darklordtrom 23:51, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

To the current revision of #Formula's text. Namely,

In Gen I and II, both formulas, update EV/2048 to be squareroot(EV + 3) / 4. Even better would be to say STAT EXP in Gen I and II's formulas instead of EV, because that's what they were known as back then.

So, like this, then?

File:HP calc.png

Except that formula is wrong, because it has to be divided by 8, not 4 (the denominator on the bottom is 50, not 100.) My mistake.Ztobor 03:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

In Gen III and IV, other status formula, move Nature × to the end as × Nature

Though it may be that the (... + 50 + ...) / 50 thing for Gen I and II's HP was correct, even if it's in Gen III and IV as + Level + 10, so you don't really need to update that. Thanks in advance :) Looce 03:15, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with changing the terms to the obsolete ones. It is confusing. I have been having problems with the term “effort points” in the last two generations, which I suspect are being used interchangeably for “effort values”. Note that the terms have been changed, but stick to one or the other from then on. Of course it would have been better to have not changed the terms at all, but what’s done is done. White Phoenix 11:22, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Just a little thing for Looce, um... Nature's first because of the transitive property. Notice the parentheticals? Plus, the correct answer is not gotten... TTEchidna 10:06, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

In the first paragraph under Effort Values, before the formulas, shouldn’t that be “For every 4 effort points gained, a level 100 Pokémon will have 1 extra point in its stats”? And where did the 50 and 2048 come from? It isn’t mentioned anywhere on this page or in the Effort Values article. So which formula for determining the stat points is correct? 50+(EV/2048) or squareroot(EV+3)/4? White Phoenix 13:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Whoever wrote the current Gen III-IV "Other Stats" formula left Level out of the calculations. Smogon's formula is Stat = (((2 * BaseStat + IV + (EV / 4)) * Level / 100 + 5) * Nature) The Professor 15:44, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

It's been fixed, BTW. My bad. Ztobor 04:19, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Now wait a minute!

Your stat calcs are wrong! Arceus with a 31 IV and 252 EV in HP will have 444 HP. Your calculation gives it a maximum of 394. TTEchidna 10:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Do the math again. It gives exactly 444. --Miliko 18:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Off by one?

I implemented this formula in Lua: http://pastie.org/7732032

but, sometimes I'm getting results that are one more than the game's result (in Soul Silver). Maybe the rounding is wrong? This happens with neutral natures too (e.g. Hardy), so that shouldn't be it. HyperHacker (talk) 07:17, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

e.g. Eevee, base special attack is 45, level 18, EV 6, IV 3, the result should be 21, but I get 22.01 (truncated to 22). The other stats are fine. For EVs of 0-2 I get 21 as expected. HyperHacker (talk) 07:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Found it: EV / 4 needs to be floor(EV / 4). So the article needs to be corrected; unfortunately I don't know how to go about generating those nice images. HyperHacker (talk) 08:00, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I found this to be also inaccurate to Gens I and II. The game rounds UP, not DOWN. I was making a mockup calculator in MS Excel to know the amount of EVs to give to my Pokémon using Pikasav (for testing reasons) and found out that sometimes the value was off by one, since I was using the ROUNDDOWN function. Using ROUNDDUP actually gave me the exact values the game used. hfc 2X 22:51, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Nature Factor

After some tests using the formula on Lv5 Pokémon on my Emerald Rom, I think the Nature factor on it is placed on the wrong place. It should not affect the final "5" on it. I specifically tested it on an Adamant Magikarp with perfect Atk IV, the formula gives me a stat of 8, and in the game it is 7 (I tested the IV with the IV Man). And in other Pokémon (Breloom IIRC), I had the same problem. Could someone test it? --Miliko 18:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You need to truncate (drop the decimals) before applying the nature boost. --sp unit 262 03:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

What happens with Speed?

When two Pokémon's speeds are equal, they attack first with 50% probability each. If the speeds are a bit off, the probability does not jump to 100%. What actually happens? Ztobor 21:24, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

I noticed this too, especially in the older generations; I think the higher level one with a slightly lower speed may have a chance to go first. I don't remember seeing this happening in the battle tower/frontier, or link battles, though, even when there's a level difference. ~ Solarys 12:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Btw, you can easily test this on an emulator. Make sure you have a spare slot in your party, and an active Pokémon with non-damaging moves (optional, but preferred). First take note of your active Pokémon's speed, then go fight something with a similar level and base speed. Save a state when you enter the fight, then catch the enemy to see its speed. If it's off from yours by more than, say, 3 points, load your saved state and run; otherwise load your saved state, keep choosing different moves to see whether the faster one always goes first. ~ Solarys 12:45, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

I can confirm this with a non-emulator device - the slower one can also sometimes go first. But the greater the speed difference, the less likely it happens. Ztobor 04:41, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

In the anime

A while back ago I made an edit about how Speed worked in the anime. Is it possible that we could make a seperate section or page that's about how stats work in the anime, because I can definitely see a bit of a difference. For example, Double Team normally raises evasion but it also seems to raise attack power in the anime because all of the clones can attack. --Landfish7 00:04, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Well? --Landfish7 21:48, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Can we please

Make a clear definition of stages? I only get the gist of it. --☯ *Ɣℯ№ӎօṫհ* ☯ 00:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Stages are incredibly simple. Let's say my Pokémon has 420 Attack and it gets hit with FeatherDance (which lowers the Attack stat by two stages). The second stage of decrease is 1/2. 420 * .5 = 210, meaning that whenever damage calculations have to take my Attack stat into consideration, it will use 210 instead of 420.- unsigned comment from Hexagon Theory (talk • contribs)

Thanks, I found some extra info on it. —Ve№moth ♦ 09:33, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Regarding calculation of successful hit in battle

"If P is greater than 1, the move will surely hit." But what if P isn't greater than 1? Surely it won't always miss... does anybody know anything about the formula that determines successful move hits? Hexagon Theory 21:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

P is just the probability that the move will hit. Probabilities greater than 1 don't make any sense, so it's explicitly stated that they're the same as 1 (i.e., always hit). Once the probability is calculated, the game (in effect) generates a random number between 0 and 1; if P is greater than or equal to this number, the attack hits. --Minimiscience 16:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

D'you know for certain that the random number is uniformly distributed?- unsigned comment from Hexagon Theory (talk • contribs)

Technically, no, I don't know that, though I would expect it to be (or, at least, as close to uniform as pseudo-randomness can get you). --Minimiscience 19:49, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

The games use a single source of randomness, which really is uniformly distributed (or close), but only when taking individual random numbers — it isn't a particularly high quality pseudorandom number generator (even more so for the older generations), meaning that consecutive random numbers do correlate to each other (comes to mind the Gen III PRNG, where each number is a linear function of the previous one modulo 2³²). Aaaaaa123456789 (talk) 08:35, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Trading and level up

If you have a level 100 Scyther, with a speed of 300, and trade with metal coat, than wouldn't it have a higher speed than a scizor level 100 can have?(its highest according to the sat calculation is 251, and I only used this as an example.) Also, what if you had a level 100 Eevee(with a speed of 229, it's highest possible speed), and for example, you evolve it into a Jolteon, it will still have less than the minimum speed a level 100 Jolteon can have, so how does this work? Do the stats get reset? - unsigned comment from Phoenixon (talk • contribs)

Stats are always recalculated upon evolution. Werdnae (talk) 22:49, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Contrary

Why is Contrary listed as an ability that lowers Attack and Defense? That's not what it does... Enos Shay rem ^Talk 04:31, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Wrong example

For the example showing how to work out a Pokémon's Sp.Att it shows:
File:StatExampleSpAtkGen4 1.png File:StatExampleSpAtkGen4 2.png
When the game calculates a stat it rounds down before applying the nature. The example applies the nature first and then rounds down, that Pokémon would actually have a Sp. Att of 135. It's not that important but it should still be fixed. Pikiwyn ^talk 19:34, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Garchomp total?

The base stat total + the EV total + the IV total of the lv. 78 Garchomp = 1220 but its stat total is 1240. Can someone explain this? Nickvang 19:13 10 june 2011

The stat total and the totals you see there are not equal. It takes 4 EV's to raise the stat total by 1, and each base stat raises the total by 2. Ztobor 02:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Wrong information on the color of the HP bar

"If a Pokémon has less than 1/4 of their HP remaining, the color will turn red" 165/4=41.25, so what? It has less than 1/4, and its HP bar isn't red. Shepeedy 20:10, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps it's 1/5? Try lowering the HP to less than 33. Ztobor 14:13, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll try the next time I'll be able to. Shepeedy 20:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I can confirm 1/5. I don't have any screenshot proof, but I'll run through the numbers. My Vaporeon has 314 HP. 314*1/5=62.8. Lo and behold, at 63 HP the bar is yellow, and at 62 HP the bar is red. 1/5 it is. Phizzle 07:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, feel free to edit it. Shepeedy 08:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Stuff

If Paralyzed Pokémon has -6 in Speed, how much it will be slowed?

Also...

+1 - <Pokémon>'s <Stat> rose!
+2 - <Pokémon>'s <Stat> rose sharply!
+3 - <Pokémon>'s <Stat> rose drastically!
+6 - While no move (save for Belly Drum) can raise stat so much, the Wonder Launch item says immensely.
-1 - <Pokémon>'s <Stat> fell!
-2 - <Pokémon>'s <Stat> harshly fell!

Marked +-+-+ 13:12, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I know I'm responding to an old post but I added the in-game message information because it informs the player how many stages the stats have been changed (sort of.) I'm pretty sure it says "sharply rose" instead of the other way around, and there's "severely fell" for -3. For the record, a paralyzed Pokémon will be slowed by a fourth.HADAA 16:45, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Stat colors

It should be pointed out somewhere in the article something about the distinctive colors of stat modifiers. You know, the colors that were used in Gen III, but later dropped in Gen IV. The colors in Gen III are:

Red/Yellow: Attack
Light/Dark Green: Defense
Orange/White: Sp.Atk
Dark Green/White: Sp.Def
Light Blue: Speed
Purple: Accuracy
Teal: Evasion
Gray: Two or more stats

Whereas in Gen IV the colours are:

Orange/Yellow: Positive modifier
Blue: Negative modifier

hfc 2X 01:57, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Moxie?

I was scanning the items that are supposed to raise stats, and I did not see Moxie under the 'Attack' heading when it should be there.

--Drakkon 15:58, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Stat modifiers vs. EVs

The section on "Stat modifiers" largely discusses in-battle stat modifers (i.e. the six stages of increase/decrease for Attack/Defense/Specials/Accuracy/Evasion). Vitamins, wings, and EV berries are not part of this (they act on EVs directly). Should they be moved to the Effort Values section instead? --Stratelier 18:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Stats about the stats

I think it may be a great idea to include an overall summary of all Pokémon stats in this article, like what already exists on the articles of individual types. An average may be a good feature, as well as upper and lower quartiles. This data could be sampled separately to incorporate all Pokémon in one table and all fully evolved Pokémon in another. I'd be happy to know what you all think. Super breeder 12:38, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Health Bar Color

Recently I was playing HeartGold and noticed that my Girafarig (level 15 and caught in HG, near Lake of Rage) had a max health of 50 with a current amount of 26 but a yellow health bar. Why was this so? MethodicMockingbird (talk) 22:58, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Why is Contrary only listed as affecting a few stats on this page?--Chris Broach (talk) 04:47, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Should the Generation 5 formula for determining non-HP stats at level 50 be listed here?

I wasn't sure whether to add it, so I'll ask it here. Since some may be training their Pokémon for battling on the Battle Subway, Wi-Fi, or situations where a Pokémon's level is rounded down to level 50, should the formula listed here be somehow implemented into the article? Or instead of implementing the formula, should it just be mentioned that the formula for stat calculation is halved when determining stats? NOBODY (talk) 03:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Stat equation layout

Is there any particular reason they're laid out as they are? For instance, File:OtherStatCalcGen34.png is equivilant to File:AltGen3PlusStatFormula.png and the latter is MUCH easier to read. --Keiya (talk) 10:17, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

They are both mathematically correct so it's just a matter of choice. I probably won't fix it because if it ain't broke...

HADAA 16:49, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Because rounding. Level/100 will round down to 0 (except at level 100 which would be 1) before the multiplier whereas if you divide by 100 after all the multiplications it won't round until after the division (which is the way it works in-game). As an example, the part that is EV/4 is rounded before it is multiplied by level (which is why we want our EVs to be in multiples of 4 otherwise they are wasted.) Shivafang (talk) 22:06, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Stat modifiers chart

I think the stat modifiers chart needs modifying to decrease clutter. If we can separate them by stat and use {{movedesc}} or a table similar to that, I think we can make things easier to sort through. - Chosen of Mana 19:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Mega Evolutions as Pokémon with the highest stat

As of now, the article mentions:

- Mega Mewtwo X as the Pokémon with the highest Attack stat;

- Mega Aggron as one of the Pokémon with the highest Defense stat;

- Mega Mewtwo Y as the Pokémon with the highest Special Attack stat.

I'm wondering, is this an objective evaluation? Mega Evolutions (unlike most other alternate Formes) require an item, they aren't a Pokémon's "natural" stats. If we take items into accounts, then a Choice Banded Deoxys-A has a higher Attack than Mega Mewtwo X (which can't hold a Choice Band since it's already holding another item). If neither Mewtwo nor Deoxys are allowed to hold items, Deoxys is the one with the highest Attack. If both Mewtwo and Deoxys are allowed to hold a item, it's still Deoxys that has the highest Attack. So what is the criterion that the article is using? Loudo (talk) 17:33, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

The stat increases with Choice items doesn't affect the stats on the Pokémon's summary, do they? Mega Evolution stat increases do, suggesting that they're intrinsic to the Pokémon. Also, Giratina's Origin Forme also requires an item in almost every situation, yet it's included. In any case, leaving the Mega Evolutions' stats off the page would only make the page less complete, and less useful as reference. --Andy^P_K^M_N (talk) 23:20, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Oops. Forgot which page I was editing the talk page to. Those last two sentences don't really apply for this page. Nonetheless, I do think the base stats of Mega Evolutions are more valid than the item-adjusted stats of other Pokémon. --Andy^P_K^M_N (talk) 23:23, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

"Intrinsic to the Pokémon" when a Pokémon cannot attain them without using a specific item in battle sounds like a contradiction to me.

Anyway, what I think you're saying is that Mega Evolution affects base stats, while an item like Choice Band only affect the stat itself (however, if that's the point the article is trying to make, it should use a more precise terminology). While that is true, I still have two issues with this statement. First, that is not the Pokémon's natural base stat. That base stat is being boosted. Second, this information, even if it were true, is pretty much irrelevant to the actual game. Mega Mewtwo X's "boosted" base Attack stat doesn't work the same as a natural base Attack stat, since it is incompatible with other items that increase Attack. Saying "Mega Mewtwo X forme currently has the highest Attack stat among all the Pokémon," is misleading, because it gives you the impression that Mega Mewtwo X... really has the highest Attack. Which isn't true, because any Pokémon with an high natural Attack using a different boosting item (ex. Choice Band, Life Orb) is going to do more physical damage than Mega Mewtwo X.

It's like the article is giving two different weights to items. Mega Stones are just that: items.Loudo (talk) 15:03, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Mega Stones are items, true, but Mega Pokémon are at least different forms, if not different Pokémon altogether. Mega Pokémon are thus just as valid as Deoxys Attack Forme. Just because a Mega Evolution can't exist without an item being held does not mean that their base stats are less "natural". Mega Mewtwo X REALLY DOES have the highest natural Attack stat, and the fact that you can boost Deoxys' effective Attack with an item is no more relevant than that you can make Shuckle have a higher effective Attack than both of them with Power Trick. --Andy^P_K^M_N (talk) 19:52, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

It is more relevant because the method is exactly the same: you give them an item. In Mewtwo's case it's a Mega Stone, in Deoxys's case a Choice Band. Power Trick would be relevant if we included moves into the discussion, but we don't.

If this were an article about Pokémon in general (i.e. all kinds of games, manga, anime, etc.) than I might agree with you that Mega Evolutions are a special case. But this is not the case, this is an article about the main games and should give the reader useful and not misleading information about the main games. From this point of view, Mega Evolutions are just an effect of items, they're not a Pokémon's "natural" anything. Mega Mewtwo X's Special Attack is not its natural stat, it's a "boosted" stat, so to speak. Loudo (talk) 15:24, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

By Loudo: that is not the Pokémon's natural base stat. That base stat is being boosted. Wrong. You cannot "boost" base stats. You can only boost the invisible in-battle value of stats. A Pokemon's base stats are always reflected in the stats on its stat screen, so as long as those don't change, its base stats (or possibly EVs) haven't changed. And boosts such as Choice Band and Power Trick and Swords Dance never change the numbers on the stat screen. If* a Mega Evolution changes what's shown on the stat screen, then the base stats have changed. It may indeed be a temporary change, but it is absolutely unlike Choice Band or anything else.

So really, rather than saying Mewtwo in its Mega Mewtwo X forme currently has the highest Attack stat, the article should say it...has the highest base Attack stat. I don't know why anyone ever wanted to say just "stat" instead of "base stat", really...

Personally, though, I would kind of like to know who has the highest base stat(s) both when you include Mega Evolutions and when you don't. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:57, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you can boost base stats. The difference is that a Mega Stone boosts base stats, while a Choice Band boosts a stat. But it's a boost in both case, you're just boosting a different value. (Note: I use "boost" loosely. Technically neither the improvements of a Choice Band nor those of a Mega Stone are treated as boosts by moves like Punishment or Tupsy-Turvy. They are boosts in the sense that they improve a Pokémon's natural values.)

That said, how is the boost provided by a Mega Stone more relevant than the one provided by any other item (like a Choice Band)? It isn't. Base stats are just values that contribute to calculate "stats." Stats are the values the game uses in any other relevant formula. Those are the values that matter.

On the same note, I would like to point out that these rankings on who has the better stats are not placed in the section about base stats. They are placed in the section about stats. Ranking the Pokémon's stats taking into account only some things (Mega Stones) but not others of the same kind (other items) is not objective. Either we leave out everything and we consider only "naked" Pokémon, or we take into account everything (including all items and abilities like Huge Power). In neither case Mega Mewtwo X comes out as the Pokémon with the highest Attack.Loudo (talk) 21:00, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Because you seem to have missed it earlier, let me reiterate AndyPKMN's point that Mega Pokemon have their increased stats visible on the Summary screen, whereas Choice items and other items do not boost the Summary screen stats. Thus, there is a fundamental canonical difference between Mega Evolution base stat increases and held item stat boosts. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

The plain fact is, Loudo, what's being ranked is the stats that can appear on a Pokemon's Summary screen. Since Mega Evolutions change those stats, it's entirely "objective" to mention it if they have the highest of a given stat. Perhaps it could be worded more clearly, but it's simply not something you're going to argue completely away. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:38, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Why? Why are we ranking that? It's not even something you can give a name to. We're ranking "what's on the summary screen." What is that? It's not the base stat, because it's not. It's not the stat, because items like Choice Band and abilities like Huge Ability are already active at the start of the battle. It's not enough you give me a criterion, you have to give me a reason why that criterion is used. What useful information does it give to the reader? None, because "what appears on the screen" is not something (s)he can actually put to use in the game. The "screen value" is not something that has any real meaning in the actual game mechanics.

May I also remind you that Mega Evolutions don't exist outside battles? That's right, if you check the summary screen outside battle, you see the Pokémon's natural stats, because Mega Evolution is an ingame battle effect. Kinda like Choice Band... Loudo (talk) 23:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

"It's not the base stat, because it's not." If you can't give a better reason than that, you've already admitted defeat. It's as close to the base stats as the game will show visibly, and until we can hack into the 3DS and potentially prove otherwise, the only reasonable assumption is that the increases shown in the Summary screen do actually represent base stat changes. In other words, Mega Evolved Pokemon have different base stats from regular Pokemon, whereas giving a Pokemon a Choice item does not alter their base stats. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 23:42, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

That value is not the base stat because it isn't. If you check the summary screen for Mega Mewtwo X you won't see 190 (which is the base stat).

Also, I don't get why you are trying to convince me that the value is close to the base stat. I already said that Mega Stones affect base stats, while a Choice Band affects the stat itself. My point is: ranking Pokémon by "base stat" is not an objective criterion to give the reader a useful non-misleading impression of the Pokémon's actual power level, unless by ranking "base stats" you only rank the Pokémon "natural" base stats. Why that? Because the base stat boosts provided by a Mega Stone is incompatible with other boosts the Pokémon could receive from other items. In other words Deoxys-A's 180 base Attack and Mega Mewtwo X's 190 base Attack are not the same thing. The first is compatible with further boosts, the second is not. In other words, you are comparing two things that are not alike.

In the actual game, many Mega Evolutions are worse than the standard Pokémon because their attacks are weaker than they could be by providing the same Pokémon with a different item. This is why I say that sentences like "This Mega Evolution has the highest stat," are misleading to the reader. Loudo (talk) 23:54, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see what (I think) your real concern is, and I completely disagree. We are not a strategy guide and avoid dealing with the metagame as much as possible, so separating your categories of "natural" and non-"natural" base stats is introducing a non-canon attempt at metagame analysis to our encyclopedia. Misleading or not, "such-and-such has the highest whatever base stat" is factually accurate, and that is more important than telling people whether a Pokemon is "better" or "worse". Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 00:05, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I also only just noticed what probably caused your confusion. All of the notes in the article's text should (and used to, I think) specify "highest base stat" rather than "highest stat". I've fixed this. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 00:09, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm relieved by the fact that at least we are on the same page now, even if we disagree. =)

However, my concern is not "strategic," it's purely technical. I'll try to make myself clear with an example, using the damage calculator:

-154+ SpA Choice Specs (custom) Psychic vs. 0 HP / 0 SpD (custom): 92-109 (26.97 - 31.96%) -- guaranteed 4HKO This is normal Mewtwo's strongest possible Psychic (with no set up).

-194+ SpA (custom) Psychic vs. 0 HP / 0 SpD (custom): 65-77 (19.06 - 22.58%) -- possible 5HKO This is Mega Mewtwo Y's strongest possible Psychic (with no set up).

This is Mega Mewtwo Y's strongest Psychic (with no set up). As you can see, a normal Mewtwo with the highest possible Special Attack deals more damage with its special attacks than a Mega Mewtwo Y with the highest possible Special Attack. This is what I mean by "stronger/weaker." I don't mean that a Pokémon is better than another from a competitive point of view, I mean it deals more damage using the exact same move.

Don't you think there is something wrong with the criterion the article is currently using if it ranks Mega Mewtwo Y higher than normal Mewtwo, and yet Mewtwo can deal more special damage using the exact same move? This issue has nothing to do with competitive battling or turning Bulbapedia into a strategy guide. Loudo (talk) 00:26, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I think if you're going so far as to calculate damage outputs, you've pretty heavily crossed into looking at it "from a competitive point of view". We're just reporting the highest base stat, not "ranking" anything higher than another or claiming that having higher base stats makes a Pokemon "stronger". Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 00:34, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Now that you bring it up, though, I'm starting to question whether it's even necessary for us to report the highest base stat at all, given that a person could just look at List of Pokémon by base stats... Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 00:37, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

To answer your first message: I'm simply following the definitions the article gives me. By the article's own words: "The Special Attack stat determines how much damage a Pokémon can deal using a special move." This is what Special Attack is according to the article. I'm a dumb reader who knows nothing about Pokémon and I trust the page to inform me. I just learned that SpA = more damage with special moves. Then the article proceeds to rank Pokémon by SpA. I expect at this point that the Pokémon proclaimed as the one with the highest SpA is the one who does more damage with special moves. Otherwise, why would that information be relevant with the definition the article just taught me?

To answer your second message: Personally I believe that if you guys really want so much compare base stats and say who has the highest (which I find rather unnecessary, especially with these criteria being used), you should do that in the actual section which deals with the base stats. Not in the section where the article talks about the stats themselves. You can't blame me dumb reader for getting confused if I keep confusing "stats" and "base stats" otherwise. =P Loudo (talk) 00:44, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, so you're just being a devil's advocate. Point taken. Those sentences have been removed. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 00:52, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Max and Min

I think that it should say which Pokémon has the highest Base Stat for each Stat and which Pokémon has the lowest of each Stat.Mangaman13 (talk) 23:08, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

It used to, but as you can see above, people fought over which criteria should be used to determine it, so it was removed entirely to stop the arguing. Personally, I don't think it's all that relevant here; if you want to see, you can just go to the List of Pokémon by base stats and use the sortable columns there. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 23:15, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

New Formula

i was trying to calculate the IVs of a squirtle i just breeded in pokemon xusing the formulas presented here (inversing them so IV is the result) and found something weird.... at a certain level the max was 26 but at another lvl the min was 29.... so i tried testing diferent values of IVs for him at diferent levels and cant manage to make the numbers fit... think there might be a new formula for Gen VI (other reason for this is because at certain levels the stat will raise by 2 while in others it wont rise... wich mathematically makes no sense to me)... so... does anyone know anything about this? (Cabasho (talk) 10:21, 15 February 2014 (UTC))

Maybe you just did the math wrong. Do it again and make sure there wasn't a mistake. Mangaman13 (talk) 22:45, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't think the formula has changed at all. If you're having any trouble with the math yourself, you could always use the Psypokes calculator, which seems to be very accurate for even Gen VI. Schiffy (瀬藤健二) (Talk Contribs) 22:47,2/15/2014 (UTC)

found my mistake, sorry about this, i was forgetting i had to round down both before and after applying the nature modifier Cabasho (talk) 00:47, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

How are the modifiers applied?

I've been up and down this article, and I am more confused than a hippie at Woodstock.

There is no example or step by step of the results of a modifier. Like what happens when a Lax Nature Aegislash in shield forme with 252 EVs (438) on its Def stat uses Iron Defense; does that make its in battle Def be 876?

I do not have a head for math, and all this talk of fractions and stages with no real example has me all kinds of confused. Yamitora1 (talk) 04:18, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Changing the wording did not do much to relieve me of my confusion. Again, I am not good with math.

All I see is a table with numbers, but nothing illustrated beyond that. I am still in the dark as to how, and to what the modifiers are applied to. What is being multiplied by 1.5, what is being multiplied by 2.0 ect...the article is still leaving out this part. Yamitora1 (talk) 05:30, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

The stat itself is multiplied — the thing you see on the Summary screen when you view your Pokemon in-game. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok thank you. So if for example a Adament Absol with 252 EVs on its Atk Stat (394) used Sword Dance 3 times, its Attack stat would be 1576 if I am understanding this all correctly?Yamitora1 (talk) 05:49, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Stat formula and rounding

The current gen 1 stat formula sometimes gives incorrect results (off by one) due to rounding. I believe the correct formula is to calculate (2*base + 2*IV + sqrt(EV)/4) before rounding, and then multiply by level/100. I updated the text to reflect this, but I'm not sure how to fix the images. Anyone know? Gorypon (talk) 20:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

You'll have to upload a new image over the old ones on the Archives. glik^glak 21:01, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

RBY stat modifying.

There's some stuff here we could use. Eridanus (talk) 13:12, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Pokémon with highest stats

Should the section on each stat show the non-legendary Pokémon with the highest base stat for that stat? --Brought to you by player 3.25 21:46, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Garchomp stat Example

In the Garchomp example, the Attack, Defense, Sp. Atk and Speed stats are off by one. The cause of this error is due to the rounding down the quatity EV/4. I don't know how to properly edit the images used in the example and would not like to edit the table with the correct stats without editing the formulas first. Zombiedude347 (talk) 14:49, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Need confirmation before I upload something

Are the Pokémon status screens between Pokémon X and Y the same? Like, my status screen features an orange bar at the top of the first page, and a green one at the top of the second page. I only have Pokémon X, so I don't want to make any assumptions. I have a screenshot created with my capture board prepared. --Chickasaurus (talk) 20:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit: These are my screenshots for X, so that people who only have Y may help. http://i.minus.com/jbneKllRFOnm7d.png, http://i.minus.com/jTbdCDUbAJDdc.png --Chickasaurus (talk) 21:04, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the screens are indeed the same between X and Y. --SFAfreak (talk) 01:18, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Incomplete sections header missing.

This page does not have a "Some sections are incomplete" header at the top of the article. Someone who knows how to do this please do so. --SFAfreak (talk) 01:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Base HP mechanic

When a Pokemon evolves into a new form, it will either increase in HP, or like Shedinja, will be set to 1 HP max. When a Pokemon changes Forme or Mega Evolves, Base HP is never modified. This leads to my question that my friends keep insisting could happen; if any situation presents itself where either Forme Change or Mega Evolution alters the Base HP stat with either an increase or decrease in Base HP, what'll happen to the current HP amount (Not Maximum HP) when this happens in-battle or out? Shiramu Kuromu (talk) 21:52, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

I believe the ambiguity behind this very question is the exact reason why Game Freak will never make a Mega Evolution or form change that changes base HP. If current HP is kept intact, then a full HP Pokemon transforming into a form with more HP would look like it took damage from nowhere. If the difference between current and maximum HP is kept intact, like with leveling up, then you get the Pomeg glitch problem where lowering yourself to 1 HP and transforming from the higher-HP form into the lower-HP form would make your HP negative. There's ways around that of course, but why go through the coding trouble? Blueapple128 (talk) 22:28, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

The Speed Stat is not as the Descriptions Said

And they're not only spread all round the place, some of them are disappointing.

Raikou with a Speed base stat of 115, can reach Mach ~300. But Talonflame with a base stat of 126, can only reach 310 mph (138.5824 m/s). Not even faster than sound.

It gets better. Tornadus, in its Incarnate Form can only reach 200 mph (89.408 m/s) with a base stat of 111, but Latios & Latias with a BS of 110, and Garchomp with 102, are faster than jet fighter planes (Mach 6.72).

Also, Archeops with a BS of 110, same as Latios & Latias, can only reach 25 mph (11.176 m/s) Huh.

Here's another kicker. Rapidash (BS: 105) can only reach 150 mph. Yet it's faster than Garchomp and Pidgeot (BS: 101) who can fly at Mach 2. Even Skarmory's faster (BS: 70) as it can reach 180 mph (80.4672 m/s). But it is Electrike (BS: 65) who is the shining star as it can run at 250 m/s, outrunning both Rapidash & Skarmory.

Another is Dragonite, who can fly at Mach 2 (Earth's Circumference = 40,075 km. Therefore 40,075 km / 16 Hours = 695.747 m/s) only has a BS of 80.

Now for the Disappointments: Arcanine can only run at 115.4853 m/s (6,200 miles in 24 hours) Frogadier can only run at 10.16 m/s (2,000 feet in a minute)

But the kicker is Linoone and Dodrio with a BS of 100, can only run at 60 mph (26.8224 m/s) & 40 mph (17.8616 m/s) respectively.

They should really be looking out for these sorts of things. Also I think I just realised what the BS stands for; It's certainly not Base Stat.

Also:

Speeds faster than the eye can see: 250 m/s

Speed of sound: 343.2 m/s

Speed of lightning: 100,137 m/s

Speed of light: 299,792,458 m/s

Note: m/s is metres per second - unsigned comment from Geode7 (talk • contribs)

Pokedex entries (or whatever) are not tied to stats in any (reliable) way. You shouldn't expect them to be. Practically (mechanically), it's just flavor text. Tiddlywinks (talk) 08:46, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Yet the flavour texts should at least have the courtesy to correspond to the Speed in the mechanics. - unsigned comment from Geode7 (talk • contribs)

It might be nice, but all you're doing is dreaming. If you want to change it, this is hardly the place to plead your case... Tiddlywinks (talk) 09:06, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Technically from the descriptions, Lugia should be the second fastest. Seriously, one flap of its wings causes a 40-Day storm? Pidgeot can only hold up a gust for what? 5 minutes or something? If Pidgeot can fly at Mach 2, then Lugia is an easy Mach 80, even 100. Also Raikou should be the fastest. Mach ~300?

It's just, well, I want the day when the games become like the anime, a sort of mishmash between Nintendogs & Pokemon that makes those flavour texts real. Seriously, train a Pidgey to get a jet fighter plane. Coolest idea ever.--Geode7 (talk) 09:11, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

A tip (and no offense, but...): if all you've got is "I wish" and "coolest idea ever", that really belongs on the forums. Talk pages should be about improving the wiki (or clearing up confusion). Tiddlywinks (talk) 09:15, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Also, oh dear patronising person, if this is what you thought it was all about, then I must disappoint you. You see, one day I had the idea of reverse engineering the speeds of the base stats and corresponding them to the flavour texts. You know, so we could see that a Lugia could fly at speeds of whatever. I thought it was a cool idea and I thought it would be a nice thing for Bulbapedia to have. But alas, flavour texts are flavour texts and I just found myself slightly pissed off from irregularities between the two (as seen above).

Another of my pet hates:

Why all Fire-types are so exaggerated. (Seriously, 1,600 degrees Celsius is the hottest magma can reach Game Freak). I just now cut a zero in all flavour texts regarding Fire-Types.

Absolute Zero. now this is a more widespread nitpick that is basically, if you remove all energy, aren't you also destroying energy? Isn't that impossible? (Yes, yes I know, imagination, fantasy and all that pizzazz)

Now, my pet likes:

Electrike. Uses. Adiabatic Friction. To Its Advantage. So if this train of thought continues and Manectric has essentially mastered that, how fast is Manectric? Because as it goes faster and faster, it creates more friction, creating more energy, making Manectric even faster, and so on and so on. Essentially a perpetual energy generator. Can it get as fast as Raikou since its another interpretation of the Raijuu? Well, technically its faster than Raikou, so yes? Oh wait, I can't tell because the bloody stats and flavour texts are all over the place!--Geode7 (talk) 09:35, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

I actually wanted to go a bit further, and you know, analyse all the pokemon's strengths in comparison to one another and see if such claims were actually true. Like if Machamp could actually throw you over the horizon? How fast is a Crobat? Why is Alakazam so fast for such a frail body? How much force is in Hitmontop's spin? How much speed Ponyta has to jump over Ayer's Rock (which, when I think about it, is faster than Rapidash). Stuff like that.--Geode7 (talk) 09:47, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Also, Game Freak were the ones that created the game mechanics as well as the flavour texts but never thought to combine them? Really it's rather simple. Hell, I can even do it. Just let me get the rest of my data and I should be done.--Geode7 (talk) 10:02, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

ORAS HP Bar?

While I was editing the HP in-battle appearance section, I saw a file that isn't existing yet. The missing file: a:File:ORAS HP bar.png Please feel free to upload that file. P.S. I put an incomplete section template on the section. PKMNTrainerRed2 (talk) 07:54, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I think I disagree to move this article to Statistics.

It is because it sounded like business, or something. So, I disagree. Does anyone have other opinions? Pokéfan95 (talk) 10:09, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Deal Zero Damage

This is an easy method to do zero damage. Was anyone looking for this? In a Double Battle, a level 1 Burned Shuckle with minumum Attack uses Constrict, a Normal-type physical attack, against another, maximum Defense, level 100 Shuckle with Reflect up. It does not get a critical hit. The Shuckle’s Attack is 4 since its base Attack is 10, it has 0 IVs and EVs, and it has a hindering Nature. Shuckle’s Defense: Its base is 230 and it has an IV of 31 and EVs of 252. It is level 100 and has a helpful Nature. 614 is its stat. The burn cuts Attack in half. Constrict is not very effective against Shuckle and Reflect cuts power to 1/3 in a Double Battle. Constrict has a power of 10 and plugging into the damage formula: Damage Dealt: Rand(0.07023464169, 0.08262899022) or rounded to 0, by far. Does this work? MMMMMMMMMMMMM (talk) 22:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Turn order decisions

Consider the following situation:

In a double battle, the four participants have speed stats of 100, 99, 97, and 96.
The pokemon with the speed stat of 100 knocks out the one with the speed stat of 99.
The experience from this causes the speed-96 pokemon to level up, and it now has a speed stat of 98.

Which pokemon attacks next? The one with the speed stat of 98, which had a speed stat of 96 when the turn began, or the one with the speed stat of 97, which had the higher speed when the turn began? Is this the same as if the pokemon gets a speed boost during the battle from e.g. its partner using Tailwind?

--Xolroc (talk) 12:21, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Contradiction

The example given for stat calculations, here, contradicts itself. It is stated at the beginning that "The stat is also rounded down before the Nature multiplier, if any, is applied.", but this rounding is not performed in the calculations shown, and the special attack example is actually off by one if that rounding is applied. I am asking here rather than just editing the page because it is not clear which piece of information is incorrect; does the rounding occur before or after the nature modifier? Xolroc (talk) 17:39, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

According to this (and to all I know), the example is off, not the formula/rounding; there's a rounding before the Nature modifier is multiplied. That's not only what the prose says, but also what our general formula says. The offending example formula pictures would need to be recreated (e.g. with this) and then reuploaded. Nescientist (talk) 18:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

I can generate the new image, then. Would just want to make sure it ends up matching the other ones on the page... This wiki ought to have a TeX extension installed for things like this, I think. Xolroc (talk) 20:53, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, the LaTeX for the attack one (others are trivially modified from it) is `Attack=\left \lfloor \left ( \left \lfloor \frac{\left [12 + 2 \times 130 + \tfrac{190}{4} \right ] \times 78}{100} \right \rfloor + 5 \right ) \times 1.1 \right \rfloor = \left \lfloor \left ( \left \lfloor \frac{320.75 \times 78}{100} \right \rfloor + 5 \right ) \times 1.1 \right \rfloor = \left \lfloor 255 \times 1.1 \right \rfloor = \left \lfloor 280.5 \right \rfloor = 280` but I can't seem to find any renderer to use that gives anything that matches the other equations. The codecogs one you linked above puts it on two lines, and every other renderer I've tried doesn't size things properly. If anyone can figure out how to get that rendered to match the others, please replace the images for accuracy.

We really ought to get some kind of built-in math renderer like wikipedia has on here. Xolroc (talk) 21:28, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

I noticed that the images I need to replace for the formula are split in two, so I've been able to generate files that look perfectly fine since the shorter LaTeX means each half will render in codecogs on one line. But now I'm facing a different problem: it won't let me upload the files! I've asked about this on the editor's hub talk page, which seems to be the closest thing I can find to a help page, so when I figure out how I will get the files uploaded. Xolroc (talk) 21:49, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Xolroc. I noticed that you apparently calculated with an Attack EV of 190 instead of 195, so I just changed our Garchomp's EVs (which I think is easier to do) and also recalculated everything with proper rounding. If you want to, you could also try to reupload that HP calculation; it's not exactly wrong, but it doesn't match the HP formula given above, so it might not be as easy to understand to some. Nescientist (talk) 12:05, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Actually, it looks like it is wrong. There's a +level term I seem to have missed! --Felthry (F.K.A. Xolroc) (talk) 13:18, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

And then there's an additional +100 in the numerator (that's subsequently multiplied by level and divided by 100), which means it's basically rearranged. Anyway, apparently, not as easy to understand. :P Nescientist (talk) 16:16, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

(resetting indent)All images have been updated. Turns out some of them had incorrect LaTeX in the description too--one was missing the =, for example. --Felthry (F.K.A. Xolroc) (talk) 16:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Shiny! :) Nescientist (talk) 19:33, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Z-Move Boosts

In the Section where moves, abilities, and items that affect stats are listed, status Z-moves have yet to added to it. They need to be. - unsigned comment from ‎Yater31 (talk • contribs)