@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+==Untitled==
 The computer science term for "Floor" is, in fact, "int(", which simply truncates the number.  "round(" would make a value like 6.9 become 7; "int(" would make it 6.  I believe Zhen is correct in this case. ~Evan
 :What was that in reference to? - Jshadias
@@ Line 92: / Line 93: @@
 There's something I'd like to ask. In the [[Safari Zone]], you can throw bait and mud in [[Generation IV]]. These are said to make Pokémon easier to catch. However, does anybody know of how EXACTLY do they change the catch rate (Or make them easier to catch somehow)? Thank you. - [[User:JMS|JMS]] 21:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
-:Actually, I think they alter the percent chance that the Pokémon'll run for it/accuracy of the ball. <span style="background:#FF9030">'''[[User:TTEchidna|<span style="color:#FF0000">''TTE''</span>]][[User talk:TTEchidna|<span style="color:#000000">chidna</span>]]</span>{{ani|155|Fire echy}}<span style="background:#664444">[[User:TTEchidna/GSDS|<sup><span style="color:#FFD700">G</span></sup><sub><span style="color:#E0E0E0">S</span></sub><span style="color:#000000">DS!</span>]]'''</span> 22:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
+:Actually, I think they alter the percent chance that the Pokémon'll run for it/accuracy of the ball. <span style="background:#FF9030">'''[[User:TTEchidna|<span style="color:#FF0000">''TTE''</span>]][[User talk:TTEchidna|<span style="color:#000000">chidna</span>]]</span><span style="background:#664444">[[User:TTEchidna/GSDS|<sup><span style="color:#FFD700">G</span></sup><sub><span style="color:#E0E0E0">S</span></sub><span style="color:#000000">DS!</span>]]'''</span> 22:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 ::Actually, the equation is posted on the Japanese wikipage for Capture Rate:
@@ Line 389: / Line 390: @@
 == Blowing into the microphone ==
 In generation IV it was rumored that blowing into the microphone increased your chances of catching the Pokémon. I know to take rumors with a pinch of salt, but it appeared as an official tip in the Official Nintendo Magazine a few years ago. --[[User:Evacino|<span style="color:#A70000">'''evacino'''</span>]][[User talk:Evacino|<span style="color:#0000A7">''' (talk)'''</span>]] 19:51, 19 February 2014 (GMT)
+== This page confuses people horribly ==
+After browsing through a bunch of catch rate-related questions on PokémonDB, I have come to the conclusion that this page is frightfully confusing for the average fan. People scroll down to the later generations, see the single big formula graphic for the modified catch rate in generations III-IV, plug in the numbers, get something that looks vaguely like it could be a percentage and then assume that's it. This could probably be avoided or mitigated by rewriting or at least rearranging the page so that the shake probability calculation is at least closer to the modified catch rate, so people see that there is more to it than that one formula, but I'm open to suggestions. Any thoughts?{{unsigned|Dragonfree}}
+== Gen V Shake-Break Comment ==
+In BW2 the 1 shake-brake comment is exactly like it is execpt with "Aww" not "Aww" also the 2 shake-break comment isnt listed but I will find out what it is ( sry I havent been signing my comments I keep forgetting) [[User:Pokemonisawesome2|Pokemonisawesome2]] ([[User talk:Pokemonisawesome2|talk]]) 02:42, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
+:The 2 shake comment is not listed, because it doesn't exist. In Generation V, a Poké Ball will ''never'' shake two times. While speaking of this; since the game performs 3 checks instead of four, doesn't that make Pokémon more likely to be caught? [[User:Eridanus|Eridanus]] ([[User talk:Eridanus|talk]]) 10:13, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
+::thats exactly what i was getting at I have caught nearly every pokemon in white 2 and have never seen it shake twice however I am not sure that this means it only checks 3 time perhaps it checks twice before one of the other shakes? (Like it mabey theres a hidden check that it dosent show?) But if it is just the fact that it only shakes 3 time that would sigfigantly lower the catch rates [[User:Pokemonisawesome2|Pokemonisawesome2]] ([[User talk:Pokemonisawesome2|talk]]) 16:27, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
+:::Likely there are only 3 checks for some reason, since it's Generation V, and probably people have simply ripped out code from theame itself. Also, I am sure 3 checks would actually make Pokémon ''easier'' to catch. Checking for eg. a 3/255 four times gives a lower chance than checking for it three times. [[User:Eridanus|Eridanus]] ([[User talk:Eridanus|talk]]) 16:34, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
+== Is the Information for Generation VI Truly Missing? ==
+I may be mistaken with regard to most of this, but in my experience, the Generation VI games ''seem'' to use basically the same formula to calculate modified catch rate as Generation V, except for the following differences: there are no longer Pass Powers that increase catch rate, but instead an [[O-Power]] can increase catch rate using different coefficients applied in the same part of the formula; and there is no longer a dark grass factor (maybe a flower factor in X and Y?). I know that Pokémon are able to break out of Poké Balls after two shakes, suggesting that the game performs four shake checks, but is there evidence to suggest that the formula that calculates shake probability is different in Generation VI than it was in Generations III-V?
+Now, what I'm trying to figure out by posting this topic is what we suspect works in ways we do not understand in Generation VI. What is there to research, and how would we go about doing this research? I would happily help out with this research in any way I can. [[User:Superbreeder|Super]][[User talk:Superbreeder|breeder]] 23:53, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
+:The issue isn't that we suspect it works differently somehow; it's that nobody has analyzed the capture routine in the code for the sixth-generation games, so we can't actually know how it works the way we do for the previous games. It's quite likely that it works exactly as you suggest, with the same method as gen V except with four shake checks, but probabilistic formulas are essentially impossible to figure out reliably by experimentation. That said, it could be useful to gather a lot of data just to see if the probabilities seem to match up with what we'd expect if it's gen V with four shake checks. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 02:32, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
+::Thank you for your thorough reply, Dragonfree. Your suggestion to test if the probability is what it would be if Generation V performed a fourth shake check is probably the best path we can take, so I might try to do the experimentation on my own as I like to think I have a fair bit of skill when it comes to collecting, managing, and analyzing data. I think I may use a Pokémon which I may find easily and which has a fairly low catch rate to test so that it won't be guaranteed to be caught in a Quick Ball (i.e. I can attract {{p|Skarmory}} by leading with a Pokémon with {{a|Magnet Pull}}, and Skarmory's catch rate is low for a non-legendary Pokémon at 25). Also, I can record the number of shake checks the ball passes in each attempt just in case there was a change to how the games calculate that. I don't know exactly how many data points I'll collect, but probably between 1,000 and 5,000 to reduce error as much as possible. If I get conclusive data, I'll put my findings under this talk page topic. Perhaps there are other users who would like to help test this as well? [[User:Superbreeder|Super]][[User talk:Superbreeder|breeder]] 07:40, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
+== Critical catch shakes in Gen VI ==
+[http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/w/index.php?title=Catch_rate&diff=2212060&oldid=2209174 Recently] the critical capture section was edited to say that Gen VI has two shake checks on a critical capture. Either someone must have looked at the code/debugged the process, or someone saw two shakes on a critical capture. I doubt it was the former, though (and if it was, the source should be cited). Which leaves the latter...
+I can't see how it could be the latter, though. As far as I remember, critical capture in X/Y did one shake. Did ORAS perhaps change this? Can someone with ORAS confidently say how many times the ball shakes on a critical capture? [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 16:43, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
+:Critical captures in ORAS definitely only do one shake, like in Gen V. However, do note that when normally when a ball shakes once and then breaks, it means the ball failed the ''second'' shake check - the first happens before any shakes. This is unlike Gen V critical captures, where the ball always shakes once and only then does the single shake check. So it is possible that a) the editor is right and the sixth-generation games perform a shake check both before and after the shake on a critical capture (and thus a failed critical capture can either fail ''before'' or ''after'' the shake), or b) the one shake simply confused the editor into thinking two shake checks were involved based on their understanding of what shakes normally mean. Presumably it would be best to ask them. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 17:36, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
+::Since {{u|Pokémon}} visited my talk page to inform me of a comment [[User talk:Dragonfree#Critical Captures|on Dragonfree's talk page]] responding to this issue, I would like to "move" it here so that any of us (or anyone else) can freely respond without having to do so on a single user's talk page.
+<blockquote><code>
+''Well, my source is my own experience. I saw Pokémon several times breaking out after two shakes though critical capture. The first time I was surprised, because I read on this page before that with one shake the capture would be sure. But I definitely saw Pokémon breaking out while critical captures after both first and second shakes, so it's clear to me, that there must be two shake checks.<br>
+''(Furthermore I saw them breaking out within all four different shake steps, so there must be also four all in all.)<br>
+''But what [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] recently has done is muddle. He also changed the probability for the non-critical capture for different generations which should be wrong. Regardless of three or four shakes - the whole probability remains the same. (0.39% in the example)
+''--- Pokémon  [[User:Pokémon|<sub>Questions?</sub>]] -- 13:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+</code></blockquote>
+::First off: I cannot help but doubt what you think you saw. I can only think you are mistaken that it was a critical capture. I would like to hear from someone else that it is possible for two shakes to occur in a critical capture. (Also, can you say whether you saw it in XY or in ORAS?)
+::(FWIW: the 0.39% thing has reared its head again on a new comment from Pokémon [[User talk:Tiddlywinks#Critical Captures|on my talk page]]. I will attempt to address it there.) [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 15:38, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+The editor - me - has seen both situations while critical capture: breaking after one and after two shakes. It would also make sense, because there are totally four checks again. I saw that in X & Y. But I see, as I have no solid proof... <br>
+So and why should the formula of b in GenV contain 65536 (=2^16) instead of 65535 (=2^16-1) like it always does? 65536 also is inconsistent with the other generations.--- Pokémon  [[User:Pokémon|<sub>Questions?</sub>]] -- 15:56, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+:Alright, if you want to discuss 65536 vs 65535 here... I agree with you. Thank you for pointing out the "other generations" this time. The Gen III-IV formula is the same as the Gen V formula (after some transformation, and ignoring 65536 vs 65535), so I agree that it should probably be 65535. If you had pointed this out in your edit comment instead of just suggesting that there's hardly any difference (which, by itself, is not at all a good reason to make a change), I wouldn't have reverted your edit, so please try to take more care in the future. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 16:03, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+::Uhm, I just copied my statement, so indeed I already pointed the "other generations" out. And just for my understanding, where did I suggest "that there's hardly any difference"? --- Pokémon  [[User:Pokémon|<sub>Questions?</sub>]] -- 18:21, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+::No, it's definitely 6553'''6''' in the fifth generation, not 65535. The b formula also definitely does take a fourth root (actually two square roots), not a third root, despite that there are only three shake checks. This is information gleaned from reading the actual game code; [http://upokecenter.dreamhosters.com/articles/pokemon-video-games/pokemon-black-version-and-pokemon-white-version-in-depth-guides/pokemon-black-version-and-pokemon-white-version-catch-rate-formula/ Ultimate Pokémon Center] did the original analysis, and a_magical_me later independently did another full analysis and corrected a couple of mistakes. [http://www.dragonflycave.com/gen5capture.aspx My website's explanation] incorporates magical's corrections. Please don't make edits based on vague common-sense feelings about what seems right when there are known facts at hand.
+::Meanwhile, Pokémon, you do realize critical captures that ''succeed'' only show one shake? Are you suggesting it sometimes shows a whole extra shake only if you fail? That sounds quite unlikely, especially since if they ''did'' want to incorporate two shake checks into critical captures, the logical way to do it would be like with regular shake checks, where one happens before the first shake and the second happens just after it. I'm sorry, but unless you can provide something more solid than anecdotal experience, it's more likely that you just mistook a non-critical capture for a critical, one way or another. I've seen people swear they personally saw completely impossible things on their Pokémon games hundreds of times before, so I'm inclined to take "This happened to me once" stories with a grain of salt - nothing against you personally, but human perception and memory can be pretty flawed. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 18:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+:::Sorry, Dragonfree. It's not much of an excuse, but I didn't really know where I could find a reliable reference.
+:::@Pokémon: I meant that you didn't point out "other generations" in your edit summary; but in your comments afterwards, you have. Your edit summary said, ''"Seriously, the fraction is so tiny, nobody can read it without grand zooming..."'' The only sense I could make of that comment was that the difference between 65536 and 65535 was very small. But perhaps that's not what you meant. Regardless, it's not really important now. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 19:01, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+::::I meant the size of the fraction. :) Just the size. It's too tiny to read.
+::::@Dragonfree: Thank you for the pages, that's what I wanted to see. Although I do not understand why the catch rate calculator on your website needs the level of the Pokémon? The level is absent in the formula. --- Pokémon  [[User:Pokémon|<sub>Questions?</sub>]] -- 19:54, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+:::::The calculator uses the level to calculate the Pokémon's actual HP, mostly significant if you select the "Exactly 1 HP" option - it makes a bit of a difference whether the Pokémon has one out of 20 HP or one out of 200 HP. Not much of one (in the newer games, anyway; in the second-generation games there is some glorious wonkiness involving underflows where the exact HP can make a massive difference), but I like precision. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 20:58, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+::::::From the level alone you can't know the max HP, thats no precision. And percent is percent, neither it is needed to know the exactly HP nor the level. The whole formula has no level inside, so it can't make a difference. And if it makes a difference, it must be explained right here in this article. --- Pokémon  [[User:Pokémon|<sub>Questions?</sub>]] -- 23:40, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+:::::::It's not the level alone - we also know the species, and thus its base HP, and wild Pokémon's EVs are always zero. The only remaining variable needed to determine the max HP is the IV, and the calculator calculates the result for each of the 32 possible IVs. By default the calculator then averages the results, since each IV is generally equally likely, but if you check the "Show detailed report?" box, you'll see the exact results for each HP IV.
+:::::::Percent is percent, yes, but 1 out of 20 HP is 5%, while 1 out of 200 HP is 0.5%. Like I said, it's only actually significant at exactly 1 HP. Usually you don't actually know the Pokémon's exact current HP, so there's an unavoidable margin of error there either way, but by calculating the actual max HP we can get guaranteed exact results at full and 1 HP (this is why I have a special "exactly 1 HP" option, separate from "1%"). And while the results at full HP will be pretty much identical no matter what the actual max HP is, there are rounding errors that this allows for taking into account accurately, which I like to do because as I said, I like precision.
+:::::::Please consider that maybe I know what I'm talking about. I've spent a ''lot'' of time on these pages and calculators; I assure you I didn't just throw the level in there for no reason. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 00:18, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
+::::::::Of course I know what you mean. For 1 HP remaining the level is a factor. But as long as you don't know the IV exactly, it's not precise, right? ;) Yes, it's close enough.<br>
+::::::::But I wonder why the result is also influenced, when I set neither 100% nor 1 HP but e.g. 40%? A percentage is already most precise and independent from the level! I have seen there differences of over three percent between level 1 and 100 which is a large amount and no rounding errors. Just want to understand that phenomenon and why I can't calculate these results with the formulas on Bulbapedia... --- Pokémon  [[User:Pokémon|<sub>Questions?</sub>]] -- 11:29, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
+:::::::::Ah, that's just because when you set a percentage, the calculator uses it to come up with an actual integer current HP value to use in the calculation, and at very low max HPs that can introduce a slightly significant error. So, rounding errors, but not in the formula per se. (Actually, it was a bigger rounding error than it needed to be; I just made a small change that reduces it.) In general it's always going to be a bit fuzzy when you're not at 100% or exactly one HP, because both the HP bar itself and the player's approximation of how much of it is filled inevitably introduce a degree of error. I'd rather have it show the actual results for a reasonable guess at the exact HP than make up a general fuzzy result for that percentage of HP, though. The calculators simulate the calculations the game performs very exactly; having the HP part just rely on it being roughly such-and-such kind of defeats the point. (Besides, of course, that this way the result is exact at 100% or exactly 1 HP without having to special-case it.) [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 13:14, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
+== Just caught a Lugia in red health underwater after using Dive in a Dive Ball. ==
+I just caught Lugia in red health in ORAS so you have to use dive to catch it and it worked first time in a Dive Ball. Does anyone know the chances of this happening? --[[User:Hydreigonfan1|Hydreigonfan1]] ([[User talk:Hydreigonfan1|talk]]) 18:47, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+:Since it's in Gen VI, technically: No, not for sure. But it's very likely the same as Gen V. This might be a better question for the forums, though... [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 19:04, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
+::I'd say it's more likely to be the same or just about the same as in Gen IV, actually, since it does look like Gen VI does four shake checks on a regular capture like Gen IV. But yes, the exact mechanics of capture in the sixth-generation games are currently unknown. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 00:21, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
+== rounding of a ==
+Is the value for "a", the modified catch rate, rounded down/up before put into the equation for "b", the shake probability?
+For example, If a great ball is used on a Kyogre (catch rate=5) with full health, the equation becomes a=5*1.5/3=2.5
+would a=2.5, or be rounded down to 2, or up to 3 before put into the equation for b. [[User:Zombiedude347|Zombiedude347]] ([[User talk:Zombiedude347|talk]]) 22:12, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
+:Rounding in the games usually happens down. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 22:16, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
+:The final result of a is always rounded down to the nearest integer. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 22:28, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
+::Note, however, that if you're thinking of ORAS, they changed Groudon and Kyogre's catch rate to 3. And if you're thinking of R/S/E, the value is rounded down at every intermediate step in the calculation as well. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 22:33, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
+:::In OR/AS, <var>a</var> is rounded to the nearest multiple of 1/4096. --[[User:A magical me|a_magical_me]] ([[User talk:A magical me|talk]]) 00:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
+::::Right, yeah, I misremembered. Was probably thinking of the critical capture value. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 01:09, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
+::::So, in my example, for a would equal 2.5=(2+2048/4096), or if using the current catch rate, a=3*1.5/3=1.5=(1+2048/4096)[[User:Zombiedude347|Zombiedude347]] ([[User talk:Zombiedude347|talk]]) 15:46, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
+:::::Yes, that's the gist of it. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 19:06, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
+== Are we sure the shake probabilities for Gen III-VI are correct? ==
+And I don't mean just numerically correct--I ask because, the formula written down for Gen III-IV is:
+'''''b'' = 1048560 / sqrt(sqrt(16711680/''a''))''';
+which is weird, since it uses numbers that require 3-bytes to represent. It is made even weirder when you consider that the formula there is ''exactly'' equivalent to:
+'''''b'' = 65535 / sqrt(sqrt(255/''a''))''';
+which takes numbers of no more than 2-bytes, which makes a lot more sense, and unless the former was ripped straight from the code, seems closer to what the function actually would be (since it takes up less memory and uses numbers on a similar scale found elsewhere in the mechanics).
+This also makes me want to ask if the shake probabilities on Gen V and Gen VI don't have a small typo, since both have similar formulas to the above (though Gen VI has a denominator of (255/''a'')^0.1875), but instead of 65535, they have 65536, which is 1 off, but is 17-bit to 65535's 16-bits and that would be...inelegant. It would break the symmetry, since if it's 65535, then Gen III-V would all have the same shake probability function, and it seems a little silly to tweak it by 1 in a way that would require an extra byte of memory for the input, and right before a more substantial tweak in the very next gen.
+But I don't know--for all I know, that could be faithfully ripped straight from the source code.
+[[User:Xovvo|Xovvo]] ([[User talk:Xovvo|talk]]) 20:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
+:Yes, they are correct, and all of these numbers are indeed taken straight from the actual code.
+:Your Gen III/IV alternative formula is actually ''not'' exactly equivalent, because the square roots and divisions prior to Gen V are integer operations, i.e. they always round down: if they used the shorter version, then any ''a'' of 16 or above would actually give the same ''b'', which would be completely absurd. (255/16 gets rounded down to 15, the square root of which is rounded down to 3, the square root of which is rounded down to 1, and we end up with a ''b'' of 65535, exactly like if ''a'' were 255.) Effectively, Game Freak took the formula they wanted and multiplied by 16 both above and below the line, in order to have bigger numbers to work with in the calculation that would result in less drastic rounding errors. (There are still fairly major rounding errors, mind you; any ''a'' of 200 or above still results in a ''b'' of 65535.)
+:The reason Gen V-VI use 65536 and not 65535 is that there is a tiny chance for the Pokémon not to be caught if ''b'' is 65535; presumably they ''wanted'' ''b'' to be able to be 65536 all along but originally used 65535 exactly because 65536 can't be stored in a two-byte register. In Gen V onwards they're using bigger fixed-precision numbers where they can fit 65536 in just fine anyway. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 00:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
+== Trivia First Bullet Point is Vague and Needs Explaining ==
+I made an edit by adding <nowiki>{{incomplete}}</nowiki> to the trivia section that needs further explanation of how the button presses affect catch rate in [[Generation I]] games. [[User:Abcboy]] removed claiming he clarified it but I see no clarification. Needs specifics or citations if the article will state such a claim! Why does catch rate get affected by button combinations? Which button combinations work? How much does it affect catch rate? Which games does it work for if not all? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 01:45, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
+:There are no specific button combinations that affect catch rate in any specific way; it's simply that in the first-generation games, the random number generator is advanced when buttons are pressed, so if you want the random number generator to hit a particular number when it does the calculation ''and you know which numbers are coming up when'', such as when doing a tool-assisted speedrun, pressing buttons will advance the RNG further. It's not something that's ever relevant to normal gameplay in any fashion. [[User:Dragonfree|Dragonfree]] ([[User talk:Dragonfree|talk]]) 02:01, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
+::Also, FWIW, I kind of want to add that the Trivia section may be the ''last'' place that should have an "incomplete" template anyway. It's called Trivia for a reason. If it were me, the talk page here would have been my first resort. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 02:15, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
+:::Also, what ABCboy added was, pretty much, "as button input could slightly influence the random number generation in the catch rate formulas".  This was his attempt at clarification.  The entire trivia point is Greek to me, personally, as a casual player only, but I can see how it would be of interest to the right party.  I was also going to comment that we don't put "incomplete" in the trivia section, but all the edit conflicts (I got two) got Tiddlywinks' pointing it out in first.  [[User:CycloneGU|CycloneGU]] ([[User talk:CycloneGU|talk]]) 02:17, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
+== 'Status value' in Generation I ==
+In the Generation 1 algorithm, step four is
+: Otherwise, if N minus the '''status value''' is greater than the Pokémon's catch rate, the Pokémon breaks free.
+What is the status value? It isn't mentioned anywhere else in the page.
+The only thing I saw that I think it could be referring to is the numbers in step three:
+: The Pokémon is caught if...
+:: It is asleep or frozen and N is less than 25.
+:: It is paralyzed, burned, or poisoned and N is less than 12.
+If that is the case, step three can definitely be worded better. [[User:Meemo16|Meemo16]] ([[User talk:Meemo16|talk]]) 20:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
+:Problem should now be fixed. [[User:SirFinkleBottom|<span style="color:Blue">Sir</span>]][[Special:Contributions/SirFinkleBottom|<span style="color:Purple">Finkle</span>]][[User talk:SirFinkleBottom|<span style="color:Green">Bottom</span>]] 21:29, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
+== Number of shakes in Gen 1 ==
+In gen 1, I saw Pokémon who broke free when they were supposed to get caught. I don't get it. Does that mean they can break free at the fourth shake ? -- [[User:Braviapert|<span style="color:teal">Bravia</span>]][[User talk:Braviapert|<span style="color:#2F4F4F">per</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Braviapert|<span style="color:gray">t</span>]] 15:20, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
+:In Generation I, there are only two states as far as I know: the Pokemon is caught or it breaks after a fixed amount of shakes (or it outright avoids the Ball if it's really low). If it breaks, the amount of shakes is dependent on how likely you are to capture it. [[User:Eridanus|Eridanus]] ([[User talk:Eridanus|talk]]) 14:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
+== Catch rates for SM ==
+Does anyone have any info on the formula used for Sun or Moon? [[User:Prowlcorp|Prowlcorp]] ([[User talk:Prowlcorp|talk]]) 02:03, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
+== How it is calculated ==
+Looking at page I can't understand much so I ask a question. How do you calculate probablility for catching Pokemon with a Poke Ball and full health? Just give me a formula with catch rate written as x.--[[User:Dominikololo|Dominikololo]] ([[User talk:Dominikololo|talk]]) 18:25, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
+I can't belive it's so easy (x/765).--[[User:Dominikololo|Dominikololo]] ([[User talk:Dominikololo|talk]]) 17:16, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
+== Generation III-IV Shake Probability ==
+In the [https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Catch_rate#Shake_probability_3 Shake Probability] formula for Gen III-IV I see the ''sqrt'' used twice. Is this because the game actually does it like that or could it be written like a ''root 4'' of the given division?
+[[User:Fkbm|Fkbm]] ([[User talk:Fkbm|talk]]) 09:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
+fkbm
+: The game actually does it that way. It ''can'' be replaced by a fourth root, since the result is identical (the intermediate flooring to an integer never changes the final result), but the game only has a square root function. [[User:Aaaaaa123456789|Aaaaaa123456789]] ([[User talk:Aaaaaa123456789|talk]]) 09:21, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
+== Catch rate for Gen 8 ==
+So it's pretty obvious the catch rate is different in Gen 8. Does anyone know how it really works? The level of the Pokemon definitely matters to the point where it's sometimes impossible to catch a Pokemon even 1 level above you. And for that matter, how do Raid Battle catch rates work? Are they predetermined at some point or something?
+--[[User:Koetsu|Koetsu]] ([[User talk:Koetsu|talk]]) 21:04, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
+: This definitely requires more research -- after playing through the game I never once got any "obvious" impression of the catch rate being different from previous generations.  (Of course, I was usually about level-matched with the wild Pokemon in question.)  [[Max Raid Battle]] catch rates are (by now) documented on their own page, with the host having a higher catch rate than guests and the base rate being different for Gigantamax forms.  --''[[User:Stratelier|Stratelier]]'' 02:06, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
+: Okay, here is a "quick" experiment:
+::* Given: postgame (8 Gym badges & Champion status)
+::* Lead Pokemon: a Lv.100 Noctowl
+::* Area: [[Galar Route 1]]
+::* Target(s): any visible wild Pokemon ({{p|Rookidee}}, {{p|Skwovet}}, {{p|Wooloo}}, {{p|Nickit}})
+:::These Pokemon all have a catch rate = 255 (expected catch probability: 44% per throw)
+::* Throwing a standard Poke Ball on turn 1 until caught
+: After throwing 100 Poke Balls, my data:
+:: Normal throws (catch/miss ratio): 55:7 (88% success)
+:: Critical throws: 36:2, or 95%
+: This was approximately 2x the expected catch rate.  Hmm...
+: --''[[User:Stratelier|Stratelier]]'' 04:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
+Time for experiment #2.  This one involves a LOT more setup, but:
+:* Area: [[Wild Area]], [[Bridge Field]]
+:* Target: Lv.60 {{p|Zigzagoon}} (catch rate = 255)
+:* Lead Pokemon: any Lv.1 Pokemon (I have the Pokemon Nursery set up with a breeding pair for this purpose)
+:* Other party members (in case this is relevant): a Lv.45-50 {{p|Coalossal}}
+:* Throwing a Poke Ball on turn 1 until caught (or unless lead Pokemon faints)
+And my data as follows (using 100 standard Poke Balls)
+: Normal throws (catch/miss ratio) = 42:44 (49%)
+: Critical throws = 12:2 (85%)
+Which is close to the expected catch rate.  Also note a much lower incidence of critical throws this time (1:7 versus 2:5). Hmmm...
+(This also gives me a huge supply of Lv.60 Zigzagoons for performing a level-matched experiment later)
+--''[[User:Stratelier|Stratelier]]'' 20:29, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
+So if I'm understanding this correctly, the level is affecting the catch rate? Doesn't crit rate increase the more the Pokedex is filled? Would the results skew to more misses if you have a very incomplete Pokedex, or does it just affect the chance of a crit happening?
+--[[User:Koetsu|Koetsu]] ([[User talk:Koetsu|talk]]) 05:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
+== Dive Ball doesn't actually work while Surfing or Fishing in FRLG ==
+Looking at the pokefirered decompilation, the check is the same as in RSE: [[https://github.com/pret/pokefirered/blob/master/src/battle_script_commands.c#L9032 Source]] {{unsigned|AsparagusEduardo}}
+== Generation I "Great ball better than Ultra" ==
+Upon reading the Gen I article i got very confused by this:
+"Due to the nature of the algorithm, Ultra Balls will only perform better than Great Balls on Pokémon whose capture rates are above 55 and below 200 in Generation I. Ultra Balls increase the overall chance of capture by as much as 20% in comparison to Great Balls for Pokémon near the center of that range."
+This is not at all what the full algorithm description says, neither what the formula says. The only benefit of great ball is on step 6 when the pokémon has more than 1/3 hp. I would guess that the contributor forgot to say that his statement is only valid against 100% hp pokémons? Which is not a very useful info anyway. [[User:Grogir|Grogir]] ([[User talk:Grogir|talk]]) 14:37, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
+== Failed to parse ==
+Is it just something on my end or is this article littered with "failed to parse" error messages for displaying math? [[User:Landfish7|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;background:black"><font color="red">'''Land'''</font>]][[User talk:Landfish7|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;background:black"><small><font color="yellow">'''fish7'''</font></small></span></span>]]''' 02:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
+:I mean I don't see that. I'd say try again today, I know Bulbagarden overall was having website issues of some sort yesterday. [[User:Karasuhebi|Karasuhebi]] ([[User talk:Karasuhebi|talk]]) 18:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
+::You're probably right. Looks good now! [[User:Landfish7|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;background:black"><font color="red">'''Land'''</font>]][[User talk:Landfish7|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;background:black"><small><font color="yellow">'''fish7'''</font></small></span></span>]]''' 05:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
+== Gen 8 level modifier ==
+Gen 8 added a L modifier based on the level. The section should explain what it means, in addition to the formula. Does it mean that higher levels are harder to capture? Up to what level? By what rate? What's that 70 doin in the formula? [[User:Mateussf|Mateussf]] ([[User talk:Mateussf|talk]]) 14:56, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
+== Gen 8 formula errors ==
+There appears to be a couple of errors in the Gen 8 formula. Firstly, the value of 'a' seems to be too large, possibly by a factor of 4096. Secondly, the species based catch rate is referred to as 'ratemodified', yet there does not appear to be any modification. If I am not misunderstanding, it should simply be called 'rate'.
+[[User:Qwertyuiop13|Qwertyuiop13]] ([[User talk:Qwertyuiop13|talk]]) 23:30, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Talk:Catch rate: Difference between revisions

Talk:Catch rate (view source)

Revision as of 23:33, 14 December 2022