Beta: the pokécheck legality checker for generation 5

[Kaphotics]

You aren't giving an example, but you probably did the wrong PID type.

[Vecte]

You aren't giving an example, but you probably did the wrong PID type.

As far as I know, the correct PID type is Uncommon GBA, however, I've tried Uncommon GBA, Common GBA, and all Unrestricted GBA Events(She is not a restricted type). What I think is happening is, being that she is not listed as an event pokemon when she hatches, pokecheck is being thrown off.

Here is the current one I've listed: http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=345858

Also, I've looked at every Wish Chansey/Blissey I could find, and all show as hacked in Gen 5.

[Myzou]

From what I've seen, the orange font is meant to show a problem with the section it is referring to.

However, this image is confusing me. I uploaded my Shiny Sawsbuck I hatched a while back, to see what I should expect to see when I get pokemon from trades, to see what a good one looks like, so I know if the Pokemon I get from trades are hacked/etc.

And all came out well... except one:

http://i52.tinypic.com/11ttvno.png

Is this really a "Problem"? It's flagging as there's a problem simply because I EV trained without Pokerus. I don't have Pokerus on my Generation 5 game yet, so I EV train without it for now. Just wondering if people actually consider that a "legality" issue, even with completely legitimate pokemon?

[Hozu]

^ No that pokemon is fine.

http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=236833 - Pokecheck should take into consideration that that Blissey should not have Seismic Toss because it's from Sinnoh but it doesn't. It does pick up on the rest of the problems though.

[linksage]

Mr. Nido is not public, so we can't see what the error is.

Please report any pokémon either incorrectly reported as hacked or new ideas to detect currently undetected hacks.

Always include a link to the incriminated pokémon if you can. You don't have to make it public.

I knew the pokemon was legit, so I wasn't really looking for outside opinions on the matter. I was just pointing out the discrepancy for the coder; it's since been fixed.

[Ju-da-su]

I don't know if this is acceptable or not, but I'd really like someone to fix this up, since this actually makes me no longer want to trust the legality check of PokeCheck.

Firstly, I'm an event collector, especially of DW events. I obtained 4 serial code DW events myself (Bulbasaur, Treeko, Mamoswine and Porygon) using legit serial code numbers in my Japanese BW. I at first believe PokeCheck can at least screen the hacked DW events, as in, Pokesav'd DW events, for me at least, since I can understand if it can't pick up PokeStock Editted ones, though I did a little testing myself and was disappointed with what I found.

Basically, what I did, was I took this female DW Pidgey, legitly from DW, and was trying to Pokesav'd it into Flawless Adamant male DW (Solar Power) Lv.10 UT Charmander with Charmander's Japanese name (not nicknamed) and everything that will make it looks like a good RNG'd DW Charmander. The result I got, was this, which, yeah, no difference from legit DW pokemon at all even while it's actually Pokesav'd.

Just want to point this out. I'm aware that PID and IV determinants changed in this generation, but seriously, if the legality checker can't even pick up that the pokemon just completely got Pokesav'd into another new whole species, then I don't think this checker is at all trustworthy, for me at least. The fact that it kinda show that all amateur hacker needs to sav'd one completely undetectable DW event are a little knowledge of what legit DW event looks like and one rubbish DW pokemon (and for more advanced hacker, probably just any fodder and some knowledge of what to change in the PID to make it DW) kinda gets on the nerve of someone who wants to collect legit pokemons like me. As I said, if it's Pokestock Editted, then it's completely understandable that the checker won't going to catch that, but if even the Pokesav'd pokes can get pass the legality check, then I don't think this checker is that reliable after all. Hope someone can work something out to fix that.

[Kaphotics]

There's nothing needing to be fixed, you hacked something that is undetectable because it is exactly like one you can get from the game.

Hence why this is a Legality checker.

It's not mine, it's Tsanth's! It was made in the DPPt era so it's not really accurate for 5th gen originated mons. Just less restrictive than the pic.

[Horus16]

Deoxys in Emerald have Pursuit and is legal but in Legality Analysis is Hacked / Event only (228)

http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=379540

[Casty]

The Legality Checker doesn't seem to detect DW Pokemon that are available only in Japan, marking Pokemon like this as completely legit...

[Kaphotics]

Adding in DW exclusives is tedious to update. It shouldn't be hard to look up if DW Squirtle has been released in the US

[Casty]

I see, thanks for the feedback.

I have another question, I checked the legality of my old Pearl Gengar just for kicks and this popped out:

I was like what the hell, the Gengar I hatched all those years ago (way before I even touched RNG abuse) is marked as hacked? What are DPPt hatch trash bytes anyway? I know that some of my Pokemon have them removed by a name rater. Could a combination of name rater + B/W cuss filter cause this?

[Kaphotics]

Name rater, that's what it is. Pokemon would hatch with trash bytes, if you nicknamed them they would be removed.

There's no problem!

[YoshiOG1]

About DW abilities:

I made a Dream World Raikou with the ability Volt Absorb using Pokesav AND Pokegen (i used Pokegen so i could put it in a Dream Ball).

But, the legality analysis says that the ability is 100% hacked, as if it doesn't recognize it as a DW ability. (Trust me, I've seen legit DW Pokemon, and it said, that their DW abilities were Valid.)

Is this a glitch? Or is it because Raikou's Dream World ability hasn't been defined on the legality analysis?

P.S. Pokegen seems to force Pokemon to be "Nicknamed". D:<

[Guested]

I made a Dream World Raikou with the ability Volt Absorb using Pokesav AND Pokegen (i used Pokegen so i could put it in a Dream Ball).

But, the legality analysis says that the ability is 100% hacked

Seems it's working just fine to me. Your Pokemon IS 100% hacked.

Raikou with its hidden ability has never been released, so there's no reason for that pokemon+ability combo to be in the checker.

P.S. Pokegen seems to force Pokemon to be "Nicknamed". D:<

Are you using the latest version of Pokegen? That issue was fixed some time ago.

using Pokesav AND Pokegen

You probably shouldn't be using Pokesav at all. And by "probably," I mean "definitely."

[YoshiOG1]

Well, maybe I prefer Pokesav because to me, Pokegen is only good for putting Pokemon in Dream Balls.

And why is everybody against Pokesav?

[Guested]

Well, especiall if you are using one of the translated versions, Pokesav is extremely buggy and even incorrect sometimes.

Pokegen is vastly superior and can handle more things in the pkm editing anyway. And all of the translations are correct, which isn't really something you can say for Pokesav, cause I think they're still using crappy translations instead of data from the Eng game in some of them.

[codemonkey85]

I did quite a bit of research back in my hacking heyday and found Pokesav's methods for determining certain properties of the .SAV files to be inaccurate. Furthermore, I have reason to believe COM outsourced all of his information without doing any fact-checking. And honestly, Pokesav's GUI is atrocious.

It was a good start to a new generation of Pokémon hacking, but... I mean, does anyone use AOL anymore? How about Windows ME?

EDIT: Better stay on topic. I just want to say I am very, very impressed with this web service. I tried it out the other day and the Pokémon transfers were easy and painless. Keep up the good work!

[Finner]

Today i found an interesting Pokecheck glitch. I downloaded an obviously hacked Bulbasaur, take a look at it - here Although relic crowns are supposed to be taken away during download, this one stayed.

EDIT: If that link doesn't work try this one: http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=218214

Edited September 5, 2011 by Finner

[xxSkedz24xx]

I think that event exclusive moves shouldn't be grouped with hacked moves. The legality checker should take into account the other circumstances involved with event-exclusive moves, eg. Wish on Chansey/Blissey: http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=400345

[Kaphotics]

I think that event exclusive moves shouldn't be grouped with hacked moves. The legality checker should take into account the other circumstances involved with event-exclusive moves, eg. Wish on Chansey/Blissey: http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=400345

Wrong PID type, so it's not even legal.

[xxSkedz24xx]

Girafarig's Dream World ability, Sap Sipper, has been released, yet Pokecheck shows it as hacked. http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=416438 Link for proof of release: http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Pleasant_Forest_%28Dream_World_area%29

I have another mistake, this time with some Egg Moves: http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=416899

Smeargle can Sketch both and breed to Delibird.

Edited September 8, 2011 by xxSkedz24xx

[Cuber]

http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=137792

So today I was looking at my VGC Pokémon I used in the UK qualifiers to use them in this Japan cup (Mostly so I have some reference to remember which move is which when playing with them on a Japanese game lol).. but I noticed this now has an invalid PID, when it didn't before... o-o; So I was wondering what's changed in the past few months in terms of PID discoverys?

Edit: Oops.. I just deleted the Pokémon forgetting I put that link here last night. x-x;

Edited September 9, 2011 by Cuber

[Bond697]

i showed pokecheck how to check a lot of pids, but i don't think he realizes that the roamers aren't generated like wild pokemon. i should probably tell him...

or if someone else could tell him since i'm lazy? that would be cool.

[EXEC_HARMONIOUS/.]

I've noticed that being nicknamed with any species name is considered hacked by Pokecheck, not just the species name of the Pokemon being checked. Case in point:

http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=430812

[xxSkedz24xx]

On this Wormadam I RNG'd on my HeartGold (because I'm a boss like that and RNG on HeartGold, not Diamond), 3, that's right, 3, of its moves are coming up as hacked. I posted the link in the shoutbox and received multiple affirmations that it is legit. Please fix this problem ASAP: http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=435979 Also, proof that the moves in question are legal: http://www.psypokes.com/dex/psydex/413_trash/learnsets/bw