>>26814114

I'm oh ok with both sides.

>>26814114
Your pic literally provides the answer, you stupid faggot.

They're legal, but not legit.

Look at the chart you posted you fuck.

"Legal" means it is a possible combination within the game.
"Legit" means you caught or hatched it in-game without any cheating.

If you hack in a 6iv shiny HA Greninja, it's legal, but not legit.
If you hatch a 6iv shiny HA Greninja, it's legal and legit.

If you hatch a 6iv shiny HA Greninja with two hacked parents, it's ""technically"" legit, but it's not as legit as it could have been.

Personally, I don't give a shit. It's a videogame, play it how you want. Get off your high horses.

>>26814114
>the parents are hacked

How legit (un-shortcut-y) would be to have two parents, of the required attributes, that can be passed to offspring adequately?

Therein lies your answer.

>>26814232
>>26814282
Actually using hacked parents would count as "taking a shortcut" and thus the parents and child would be definitely illegitimate. The non-lazy way would be to breed your starter (or WT'd although trades have questionable legitimacy) a few times to get 6IV parents and then breed the baby.

>>26814114
If I released the parents shortly after, would they even know?

I have a hacked 6IV BW Ditto lying around from six years ago if that's anything to speak of.

What if I use an injected 6-IV Ditto to breed quickly

Okay. If you get WT'd a legal Pokemon, but that Pokemon happens to be injected by the OT, then use that Pokemon to breed, is it legit?

Consider the following:
>You have not performed any of the shortcut functions yourself, nor intentionally benefited from them without this WT'd Pokemon
>The Pokemon is legal, meaning it could have been bred to be exactly the same, and it would be the same to you

What do you think, /vp/?