Beta: the pokécheck legality checker for generation 5

[Kaphotics]

Remember, the point is to provide a possible scenario where it could be legal, not discern the exact method that you achieved the end product.

It's likely referring to a possible chain of breeding, rather than a direct set of parents.

[Localhorst]

Not quite sure if this is a bug or not, but i thought i mention it since i think it might be one. It's about this one: http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3575763 , it is recognized as a hatched pokemon, but actually it was caught, according to legal.exe its PID is the rare A-B-D-F Type.

Why I'm not sure if this is a bug: It wasn't caught on a normal FR game, it was caught on the FR Hack Liquid Crystal. That Hack might be different in PID generation (though i don't really think so), but as legal.exe indicates that Type and Pokecheck just finds an egg PID for that spread i thought it might be a bug.

[Hozu]

ABDF isn't possible for any legal Pokémon from a retail game I believe. Since Pokécheck supports retail games, any modified behaviour caused by ROM hacks are not supported.

[Localhorst]

Sure, I'm not complaining about it not appearing legal. In case A-B-D-F is not possible at all, it is just because of the Romhack.

[Agonist]

Reposted from Musicmeister of Smogon:

Some of the pokemon I RNG'd had a problem with the "trainer name" when I transferred it to 5th gen via que for transfer to 5th gen using pokecheck.

Here's the pokemon I uploaded earlier https://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3590970

The trainer name has dot symbols (·MUSIC·) but when I transfer it to 5th gen, via que for transfer to 5th gen, the trainer name becomes messed up. The trainer name ·MUSIC· becomes UMUSICD.

I reuploaded the pokemon which shows a trainer name with UMUSICD on my White 2 game right here https://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3591174

The trainer name became *Shiro when I uploaded it on Pokecheck. Is this a bug?

The Shiro* is because of the censoring something in the name is censored, but I don't about the first issue.

[Agonist]

Reposting this issue:

https://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=2225541

for some reason Pokecheck thinks that it was an event egg traded to hatch shiny.

[PokemonBN2]

"×" not recognized as legal

Pokemon Nicknamed "×××!!" https://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=3641988

The same pokemon Nicknamed "Tes!!" https://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=3642086

Image

Edited February 21, 2013 by PokemonBN2
Iage added

[dcrispell7]

Dream Radar Giratina-O (uploaded via GTS) shows the ability as hacked: http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=3702100

For comparison, the same Giratina uploaded without the orb shows up just fine: http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=2864702

[KingCarini]

Transfered Masquerain to HeartGold, then to White 2. Check assumes it was hatched, but I caught it with an Ultra Ball as a Surskit:

https://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=3758882

[Kaphotics]

Not telling you why Pokecheck responds as such. It's still obviously hacked.

Your account has multiple other uploads with the same PID, but different IVs. Indicative of an action replay/gameshark code for shiny Pokemon...

ID: 10447 =0x28CF

SID: 35513 =0x8AB9

PID: 0x8AB928CF

Please do not report Pokemon that are not legitimate.

[thernn]

I was a bit confused if I should post this here as I am new but I want to help.

Keldeo and Meloetta both are reporting what I am entirely sure are false positives.

Examples

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3753707 <--- Keldeo has perfect IVs which is basically impossible for any poke even more so for an event.

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3704309 <---- Perfect IVs and was met before the actual release date on March 4.

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3762599 <-- Meloetta has 4 31's IVs and 2 30's

[Kaphotics]

I was a bit confused if I should post this here as I am new but I want to help.

Keldeo and Meloetta both are reporting what I am entirely sure are false positives.

Examples

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3753707 <--- Keldeo has perfect IVs which is basically impossible for any poke even more so for an event.

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3704309 <---- Perfect IVs and was met before the actual release date on March 4.

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3762599 <-- Meloetta has 4 31's IVs and 2 30's

Abusing the Random Number Generator (legitimate) can allow people to receive Pokemon with flawless IVs. It just involves a lot of prediction and number crunching.

Certain locations had the Meloetta available for download earlier than March 4th.

[randomspot555]

Also the date is 100% legal as long as the DS can be set to it. The date is reflective of the DS internal clock, not what the actual day or time it is in the world.

[Guest]

randomspot555 edit: Because it apparently hasn't been clear enough, this thread is strictly for reporting ERRORS in PokeCheck's Legality Analyses. Anything beyond that is off-topic and may get you an an infraction.

Hi everyone I have a quick question. Is it considered an error if a legit Pokemon that I hatched from an egg, who's parents were also legit (neither were edited or RNG abused) but the child comes up saying, " IVs This Pokémon is likely edited or RNG abused."

Should I be reporting here things like that? Or is this thread strictly for things that come up in red?

Thanks for the clarification.

[Kaphotics]

Or is this thread strictly for things that come up in red?

^

orange -> caution, not indicative of a hack

[mirkosp]

Not a false positive, but a small mistake nonetheless.

http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=3783422

It reports it as Method K, but extremespeed dratini from the dragon's den is Method 1: http://www.smogon.com/ingame/rng/dpphgss_rng_part2

[Hozu]

Not a false positive, but a small mistake nonetheless.

http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=3783422

It reports it as Method K, but extremespeed dratini from the dragon's den is Method 1: http://www.smogon.com/ingame/rng/dpphgss_rng_part2

That has been an issue for quite some time now. Roamers are in the same boat.

A user had uploaded a level 21 Lucario with moves ExtremeSpeed and Close Combat. This is illegal because Riolu cannot inherit them as level-up egg moves, nor can Lucario have learned them at such a low level. However, the LA flags them as level-up egg moves.

[Hozu]

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3788377

Apparently the LA doesn't like eggs hatched at Pledge Grove.

[Thepenguinking2]

http://i48.tinypic.com/2vxioig.png

It says that this shiny genesect's shine is legitimate, but according to bulbapedia, Shiny genesects are impossible to obtain.

[RainThunder]

Pokemon Emerald was never released in Korea:

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3815597

[Agonist]

Legality analysis doesn't seem to like Primo's eggs when they're traded (HGSS).

Here's one hatched on the receiving game (and doesn't have any issues with the legality analysis). http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=3814083

And the two that were traded (http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3814203 and http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3818733 (from Mandrew's game to another of his, and from his game to my HG)).

[SmashingEmeraldz]

A while ago I uploaded Jolteon, Flareon, and Vaporeon. The Legality Analysis says that their PID is hacked and they have no encounter. I got them as an Eevee from Bill in Goldenrod City in HeartGold and SoulSilver. You can tell that they aren't cloned from one Eevee because they all have different PIDs, Natures, and Base Stats.

Jolteon

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=2934958

Flareon

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=2934944

Vaporeon

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=2934942

[Kaphotics]

Eevee @ Bill is Method 1 Gift, not whatever you got. Something interfered (AR,edited) for those.

Example of an actual legitimate one:

http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=3442546

[Hozu]

http://www.pokecheck.org/?pk=3793126

The Ninjask evolution glitch does not exist in 5th gen. As such, any 5th gen Shedinja cannot have moves exclusive to that glitch.

[SmashingEmeraldz]

Eevee @ Bill is Method 1 Gift, not whatever you got. Something interfered (AR,edited) for those.

Example of an actual legitimate one:

http://www.pokecheck.org/?p=detail&uid=3442546

All I used the action replay for was leveling them up to level 75 though. Does that effect the legitimately of a Pokemon's info?