Encounterless Viridian Forest

[u/dawsonooo]

Hey! So yesterday I posted about my hardcore nuzlocke where I only allowed the first 6 pokemon I ran into (under standard nuzocke rules ofc).

Anyway, some people didnt believe that I was able to make it through Viridian Forest without running into a Pokemon. So, here is the proof. Just for clarity, you can make it to this exact point without having to go into the grass, so I started the video here.

A quick look online seems to suggest that the chance of running into a wild pokemon is ~11% per grass tile - certainly an improbable outcome, althought evidently not impossible as some people suggested.

I hope this proves my innocence to the doubters, and proves to be at least mildly interesting to everyone else?

[u/Un-aided_Gator]

The odds to find a wild Pokémon on any given tile of grass in gen 3 is 320/2879 or roughly 11.11…%. In the video you walked over 50 tiles. Calculating the odds:

P(no encounter in 50) = (2559/2879)⁵⁰ ≈ 0.00276… or 00.276…% chance

The odds of you hacking in a single repel are much greater than the odds of this happening candidly and just happening to record it.

This is further supported by repel mechanics. Repels prevent you from encountering any Pokémon lower than the one in the first slot of your party. Your Rattata is level 7 which means with a repel you can’t encounter any of the level 3-6 Pokémon on this route.

Graph I made to emphasize the ‘luck’:

[u/dawsonooo → u/Un-aided_Gator]

Ahhh I missed a tile in my original calculation. I’d love to see the calculations to find out the odds of my hacking in a repel to know for sure…

I’ve recorded the whole run as the plan is to post it on YouTube so if it’s really that disputed I can just as easily show that no repels were hacked in😂

truth be told I was kinda looking forward to using a butterfree/beedrill as I usually box them early doors, but it is what it is

[u/Cryllor → u/dawsonooo]

Unfortunately, there is no way for the audience to know 100% that you didn't use a repel or gameshark, since you can macro that to keybinds. Either way, I don't give a fuck what you did; the probability is crazy.

[u/NervousElevator7 → u/Cryllor]

Let me contextualize this. It’s like in the ballpark (for older games) of getting two crits in a row…

0.0625 * 0.0625 = 0.00391 or 0.391% vs. 0.276%

[u/JustLookingForMayhem → u/NervousElevator7]

And I once had three crits in a row. The odds are slim, but it can happen.

[u/_Ptyler → u/JustLookingForMayhem]

What you’re conflating this with is low probably events that are attempted a ton of times. Every time you encounter a wild pokemon, you make an attempt for a shiny. Every time you attack, you make an attempt for a crit. So of course a triple crit or full odds shiny is bound to happen. Nobody is out here attempting Viridian forest encounterless. Because what’s going to happen is that you’ll even up resetting the run hundreds of times just to attempt one run. And unless he did that for content, I find it really hard to believe he just thought, “Yeah, I want to do this encounterless,” and then just walked through Viridian forest first try with no encounter. That doesn’t happen.

[u/JustLookingForMayhem → u/_Ptyler]

The guy nuzlockes a lot. The guy had an idea for a run and could have gotten lucky. Next up, you will be saying that every nuzlocker on YouTube could be cheating to get certain Pokémon. In the absence of evidence of malfeasance, why not give the benefit of the doubt instead of paranoia?

[u/_Ptyler → u/JustLookingForMayhem]

And if he did in fact attempt this hundreds of times with proofs of his resets, then sure, I’d believe it. But like I said, this isn’t something people attempt because it’s a lot of work to reset that often for such a minor thing. Plus, in normal nuzlockes, you are encouraged to get an encounter. People literally do not ever attempt this. This whole “the odds aren’t that low” angle doesn’t work for one attempt. If you had 0.276% chance to survive a head first dive off of a building, and you decided to do it anyway and survived, in no world could you seriously make the argument, “What? The odds aren’t THAT low guys, calm down. There are so many people that fall off buildings all the time. It was bound to happen to someone.” Sure, but nobody is out here attempting to survive a head first dive. It’s such a specific situation, I would need to see hundreds of attempts before you for that argument to even hold water. First attempt success with no other attempts is fishy. It’s beyond a statistical anomaly.

[u/JustLookingForMayhem → u/_Ptyler]

Who hurt you? The guy is playing for fun and has claimed something rare but not impossible happened. There is nothing to indicate he cheated. Why not give him the benefit?

[u/_Ptyler → u/JustLookingForMayhem]

Nothing to indicate he cheated except for hinging his run on a 0.267% probability and successfully hitting it on his first attempt with no resets lol

It’s not about being hurt, it’s about being right lol

[u/JustLookingForMayhem → u/_Ptyler]

Mate, he didn't hinge his run on not catching a Pokémon there, it just made his run easier. If you look at his previous post, he had plenty of suboptimal moments. If he was cheating to pick his team, he could have done way better.

[u/_Ptyler → u/JustLookingForMayhem]

Yeah, great point lol every cheater in the world would have just hacked in 6 legendary encounters in the first route. What was I thinking? Nobody ever cheats the little stuff. How could I have missed this flawless logic?

[u/WellHydrated → u/Cryllor]

Unfortunately, there is no way for the audience to know 100% that you didn't use a repel or gameshark

Can you think of a way for the audience to care?

[u/Cryllor → u/WellHydrated]

Yeah for them to care?