I'm just going to address a few of the anti-ban posts for Sableye.
Yeah about sableye "fucking teambuilding". Who cares if it stops mindless centralizing shit like spikes stacking offense that resemble cancer deosharp?
Alright, well I can only assume that you are talking about Klefki, because that is the most common spike stacker used on very offensive teams. Klefki doesn't let you start off the game with 2 layers of hazards guaranteed in the same way that DeoD did, so in case it wasn't already obvious, one isn't nearly as effective as the other. In the event of spike stacking being broken, then one mega which only particularly bulky teams can make use of isn't exactly an effective way of keeping them in check. Provided that Sableye is uncompetitive, which is what I have been trying to prove, then spikes Klefki being broken if it is gone isn't a good argument for it to stay, because the sensible thing to do is to suspect both of them. Besides all that, if spikes offence was that effective, we'd see it dominating games which don't involve Sableye, and while it is an effective playstyle that will get more effective after the ban, it is nowhere near broken.
Who cares if it stops bullshit like Taunt+ Wisp or Toxic + recovery sets as a lazy blanket check against stall/semistall?
Ok, well my issue with accusing players of lazy teambuilding for using these pokemon is that I could equally accuse the stallplayer of lazy teambuilding for relying on Sableye to check all of these pokemon, so it doesn't really accomplish much. Pokemon such as Stone Edge Heatran can easily beat Talonflame and stop it from doing anything. Again, you're pointing at pokemon which won't be broken or shred stall in the way that you're making out if Sableye is banned, saying that they will be incredibly effective, then trying to use this to justify keeping Sableye. Stall has other ways of dealing with taunt + Toxic Gliscor, and Taunt + Wisp Talonflame, and I can really just quote your own post back to you in answer to this point.
If your team cant take wisps/status you deserve to lose
whilst being a team that can actually break stall by using lures, breakers etc? You know, by thinking and using skill like we had to do in the past before rocks even existed? If you have to solely rely on getting rocks up for your team to function, there is your problem, with teambuilding and your strat and not msable.
Most players do use breakers to combat stall, but saying that because rocks weren't around in the past it should be totally ok for them not to be up ever now ignores how the game has developed since then. We didn't have Unaware or Regenerator either, both of which are pretty effective tools stall has at its disposal to help them take heavy attacks, often the chip damage from hazards is needed to pressure down a check for a breaker, and it generally helps to increase the level of interaction between the stall player and the opposing player, rather than just switching around between different counters. Most players who want Sableye banned actually do so because it clearly doesn't promote skill at all, and as I outlined in my first post here, makes the games it is in very matchup based rather than skill based, because either you pack the breakers the Sableye stall team is particularly weak to or you don't, and in the event of the latter, the Sableye player only has to not make any extremely stupid plays to turn a good matchup into a win.
I think the fact that you have to actually WORK to get hazards up against msable stall is a very positive thing for the metagame, stop being self entitled and adapt to it and use rockers that can actually beat sable and there are plenty of them and again they are useful outside of just rocking on sable.
There are rockers than can beat Sableye, but you have to bear in mind it is usually backed up with a hazard removal pokemon such as Skarmory that can take the vast majority of the rest on, it's pretty difficult for the stall player to let rocks be up for more than 1 turn if they run the correct support pokemon for Sableye. In any case, I can just flip this statement round, and say "I think the fact that you have to actually WORK to keep hazards off the field is a very positive thing for the metagame", this only expresses an opinion rather than a factual point.
Stall has had to adapt to things like MMedicham, MHera, MGardy etc and it has done in ridiculous ways so i really dont think that is too much to ask anyone.
Yes, threats to playstyles do and should cause adaptation to those threats, and the listed breakers are ones that are very effective against stall. However, there is a difference between a healthy amount of adaptation and having to run shed shell Togekiss + pursuit in order to not lose to something, which is what the two suspect pokemon necessitate.
Honestly alot of the "ban sableye" arguments just seem very self entitled to me and just seem like "i hate stall and sable is really annoying to me i wish neither were a thing cos they annoy me" and stop using fallacies and double standards. Why should you be able to spam hazards from turn one without working for them
Ok, well stall now has plenty of other options to deal with hazards, and so stuff like spikes isn't nearly as effective as it was last gen due to defog now working the way it does. It's due to this abundance of choices other than Sableye to stop hazards that you won't see hazards dominating the metagame. DeoD and DeoS were exceptions in how effective they were at setting up hazards, but those were the users, not the move that centralised the metagame. Hazards now play a pretty important part in every game of being able to punish obvious switches with small but significant damage, and thus they promote skill, not detract from it.
Why should you be able to use Taunt+Toxic/Wisp and recovery sets to blanket check all stall with no risk because you are too lazy to prepare for stall properly?
Why should we care if your team cant take status or wisps and gets bodied because of that fact?
You're doing it again.
Even more questionable are the arguments "the rest of msables team beats my counter to it though". Grats, welcome to pokemon, its been this way since gen 1. If they have counters to your team and you arent competent to take into account common cores, you deserve to lose sorry.
Yes, but what didn't happen in gen 1 was that a player could turn a matchup advantage into a win just by making very simple a b a b switches, which is what Sableye now does by completely removing the best way offence has of punishing obvious switches in hazards. Sableye teams can indeed be beaten by certain pokemon, this much is true, but what I'm really looking to bring about is a metagame in which skill is promoted as much as possible, and that isn't one in which you lose because you don't carry the specific breakers needed.
Next the argument "this disrupts my offensive synergy having to include for things for sable" and frankly refusing to adapt to something that doesnt really need to be adapted to because sets and pokemon exist to beat it and even set up hazards on it, like are you actually being serious? You mean how stall has to prep for all those bullshit offensive megas? How it has to prep for Taunt? How it has to prep for breakers like Manaphy and Togekiss and Hoopa-U, lures, D/SDers, taking care of wincons and god knows what else that shreds stall? Im sorry if i come of as being an ass, im really not trying to but if stall players turned around and said stuff with these arguments and wanted MGardy/MHera/MMedi, Hoopa-U, Manaphy, Scald, Knock Off, 90% of offensive megas, Togekiss, Gliscor, Clef, Taunt etc erc banned because "it disrupts our teams defensive synergy and we cant fit counters on" or whatever we'd be told to well, fuck off, by most of the community, im sure and rightfully so lol. x)
It's not just beating and adapting to Sableye, it's beating and adapting to Sableye teams as a whole, and stuff that rocks up on Sableye probably won't be able to on its hazard removing team member. Some of those breakers are very effective against stall, but Taunt, D/SDers, Scald, Knock Off, Gliscor, Clef are all dealt with pretty easily, and effective breakers are an important part of the metagame. Some stall players have actually suggested bans for Hoopa-U and Manaphy, because of how powerful they are against stall, but both have significant drawbacks against other styles. This also ignores the fact that there is no imperative to preserve stall as a viable playstyle in the metagame, as blunt as it sounds. I'm just going to take this quote from another post as well because my response to both is very similar.
Yet people hate on stall as per protocol.
An issue with stall has always been that it has little room to outplay things it is weak to, with the advantage to offset this being that it doesn't have to make much in the way of plays in the case of a favourable matchup. What Sableye does is goes and pushes this to the extreme, because in the event of the opponent not packing something you are weak to, hazard management was a key part of the game, and Sableye just goes ahead and removes this almost entirely. In response to Norne, while I don't really mind being painted as somebody who is anti stall, due to my posts here, the majority of the community doesn't have some stigma against one playstyle. What they are concerned about is the lack of skill in a game involving Sableye, which is the reason why it would be banned because it is "uncompetitive" rather than "broken", and I don't actually hate the idea of playing a 100 turn game once in a while provided that it actually took thought to play the game out. To return to the point Sir Azelf made about breakers, due to how matchup based stall is, removing everything it is particularly weak to is never going to be a good idea from an unbiased perspective. As for just a general enjoyment of the game aspect, and to repeat what I acknowledged before, that stall generally loses in the face of a bad matchup from team preview, many people including myself specifically avoid stall for just that purpose, and to say that it is ok for every other style to just accept a loss in the face of a bad matchup is to force the disadvantages of your playstyle onto every other playstyle. Granted, a few games are just lost, but nothing snookers somebody from team preview quite like a well-built Sableye stall team is capable of, and we should generally try to take away or minimise elements in the game that take away from skill in the way that Sableye does.
To conclude, people are quite correct when they say that removing Gothitelle reduces the number of teams heavily dependent on matchup and not on skill floating about, but there are also teams which are very matchup dependent and just use Sableye, wonder trio aka Dug/Sab/Shed teams being a very good example of this. If you're fine with facing these teams, just at a reduced frequency, then go ahead and don't ban both, but there's a clear path to getting uncompetitiveness pretty much as close to zero as we can reasonably get it in this tier, and I really think we should take it.