DP Tier Discussion - BL and UU (mark 2)

[Pneuma]

Well, I for one remain fully behind Obi's proposal and genuine effort to get some real definition to the competitive tier below OU (whatever we're calling it today).
We have a ladder, we have some willingness, there's no reason to be pedantic about UU when we have never formally tested it with all the non-OU pokemon.
Most people sound like they want some sort of NU. Well, UU has to come first.

 

[evolutia]

Well, I for one remain fully behind Obi's proposal and genuine effort to get some real definition to the competitive tier below OU (whatever we're calling it today).
We have a ladder, we have some willingness, there's no reason to be pedantic about UU when we have never formally tested it with all the non-OU pokemon.
Most people sound like they want some sort of NU. Well, UU has to come first.

Well, could you at least try to convince the people opposed to the movement to be on your side? (I don't want to call you out specifically anyone can answer).

• Why is Obi's proposal the "best" idea possible?
• Why is making an effort to test BL's independently to form their own playable tier the worst idea possible?
• Why are people for Obi's proposal not for extending the proposal to the OU metagame? That would be fair.

I feel that testing the BL's independently from UU is a better idea. Obi's proposal just seems like it's creating alot of work that does not need to be created.

This is how I see Obi's proposal

• Throw all BL pokemon into UU to create a metagame that would be exactly the same as an independent testing of them.
• Throw the UU's that cannot compete into the new UU into NU (Which is going to be a whole lot of them) to create a similar metagame to what has already been founded.

It's seems like the proposal is creating double the work for basicly the same results. I mean I'm willing to be convinced that Obi's proposal is the best but I haven't heard a very good argument for it.

I mean he's not even willing to compromise on the subject. Such as testing his proposal away from this uu; at least initially to see what happens without ripping this one apart. After the testing away from this UU I think a vote could be in order to see which metagame should be the new UU or if they'd rather them be apart.

What is so horrible with that proposal?

A full metagame test is not a must to create a balanced and viable tier.
​

 

[mien]

Well, could you at least try to convince the people opposed to the movement to be on your side? (I don't want to call you out specifically anyone can answer).

• Why is Obi's proposal the "best" idea possible?
• Why is making an effort to test BL's independently to form their own playable tier the worst idea possible?
• Why are people for Obi's proposal not for extending the proposal to the OU metagame? That would be fair.

I feel that testing the BL's independently from UU is a better idea. Obi's proposal just seems like it's creating alot of work that does not need to be created.

This is how I see Obi's proposal

• Throw all BL pokemon into UU to create a metagame that would be exactly the same as an independent testing of them.
• Throw the UU's that cannot compete into the new UU into NU (Which is going to be a whole lot of them) to create a similar metagame to what has already been founded.

It's seems like the proposal is creating double the work for basicly the same results. I mean I'm willing to be convinced that Obi's proposal is the best but I haven't heard a very good argument for it.

I mean he's not even willing to compromise on the subject. Such as testing his proposal away from this uu; at least initially to see what happens without ripping this one apart. After the testing away from this UU I think a vote could be in order to see which metagame should be the new UU or if they'd rather them be apart.

What is so horrible with that proposal?

A full metagame test is not a must to create a balanced and viable tier.
​

I agree with this although nobody cares >_>

 

[Buckles]

Evolutia, I agree entirely. As for those "many" pokemon that need to be moved up, I didn't say many, I said too many. 2 or 3(i.e. Kabutops, Clefable) is, in my opinion, too many. We move those few up, then worry about what should be brought down. One at a time saves time, hassle and makes a lot more sense to me.

 

[Lemmiwinks MkII]

Well, could you at least try to convince the people opposed to the movement to be on your side? (I don't want to call you out specifically anyone can answer).

• Why is Obi's proposal the "best" idea possible?
• Why is making an effort to test BL's independently to form their own playable tier the worst idea possible?
• Why are people for Obi's proposal not for extending the proposal to the OU metagame? That would be fair.

I feel that testing the BL's independently from UU is a better idea. Obi's proposal just seems like it's creating alot of work that does not need to be created.

This is how I see Obi's proposal

• Throw all BL pokemon into UU to create a metagame that would be exactly the same as an independent testing of them.
• Throw the UU's that cannot compete into the new UU into NU (Which is going to be a whole lot of them) to create a similar metagame to what has already been founded.

It's seems like the proposal is creating double the work for basicly the same results. I mean I'm willing to be convinced that Obi's proposal is the best but I haven't heard a very good argument for it.​

I mean he's not even willing to compromise on the subject. Such as testing his proposal away from this uu; at least initially to see what happens without ripping this one apart. After the testing away from this UU I think a vote could be in order to see which metagame should be the new UU or if they'd rather them be apart.​

What is so horrible with that proposal?​

A full metagame test is not a must to create a balanced and viable tier.​

First of all I want to reiterate again that I have no problem with the idea you're supporting. However this is purely because the only difference is that it preserves the current UU metagame, which many people like yourself have become heavily attached to. The important point I am making here is that when formulating an argument on this issue you must avoid any bias towards this particular metagame we have created. To do otherwise would mean that you are assigning a special status to this metagame when in fact there isn't any. The standard we have set for what qualifies as UU seems to have been completely arbitrarily defined, which can only be explained by some perceived notion of UU we have carried over from ADV to D/P.

Obi's proposal is the best idea currently suggested because it is an attempt to restructure the tier system based on the fundamental definition of UU, which is any Pokemon that is not commonly used in the standard metagame. We have already established a working cutoff point for OU, and anything that falls below that should technically be eligible for UU. Some will inevitably be unbalancing in this environment and subsequently be promoted to a faux tier that acts as a ban list for UU. The point here is that we start out with the maximum possible number of Pokemon and work from the top downwards, which guarantees that we have the smallest possible ban list which is surely a good thing.

As for extending the proposal to OU, that is in fact possible right now given that we've had an Uber ladder for over three months. The Uber ladder currently has 14 'OUs' I think, which is obviously too centralizing for the standard metagame, but technically there is no reason why you couldn't create a standard balanced metagame from Ubers downwards. However in most people's eyes this testing has already confirmed who the major culprits are, and have singled out four possible Ubers for testing in OU, so to some extent this extension is already underway.

Also, please explain why you think Obi's proposal is creating 'double the work', because the way I see it the two methods are completely identical. Once again the only difference is whether the current ladder is preserved or not, which is completely irrelevant to this issue for reasons I have already stated.

Evolutia, I agree entirely. As for those "many" pokemon that need to be moved up, I didn't say many, I said "too many". 2 or 3(i.e. Kabutops, Clefable) is, in my opinion, too many. We move those few up, than worry about what should be brought down. One at a time saves time, hassle and makes a lot more sense to me.

Strangely enough I agree mostly with evolutia too, but not with you. By introducing BLs one at a time into the current UU we are in fact not getting any useful information whatsoever. Doing this would mean that we are continuing to base UU entirely on what we currently have, which is wrong as there is no justification for UU being the way it is. Recall the hypothetical scenario I brought up a while back in which our UU forms the standard metagame. Trying to test hundreds of Uber Pokemon one at a time is likely to achieve nothing, but we know full well from our current metagame that a balanced tier involving much stronger Pokemon is very much possible.

 

[Aldaron]

I still have my same question regarding this hypothetical BL ladder...what are we going to do with it?

Is it going to create a "second" uu tier, with moving Pokemon determined to be strong for that ladder (determined however which way, I don't really care at this juncture) to the BL tier?

What this will do is keep the tier basis consistent among two ladders, but we'll have two different ladders =/ I don't think (and I might be off here so don't quote me) Smogon wants to start a precedent of splitting the ladders. Even the Garchomp-less ladder is only to test Garchomp, and whenever that test is done I assume there will be one OU ladder again.

What this option does is in effect create two different UU tiers. Is this acceptable?

The second option is to use this BL ladder to create two new tiers from the pool of Pokemon we have currently in UU and BL. Right now we have UU and our faux tier, BL. By using the BL ladder to essentially move Pokemon down, we can attempt to create two balanced tiers, with the lower tier being essentially what we know as UU right now, except with the 5-10 questionably "too powerful" being moved up. The ultimate goal of the this option is to integrate the current UU ladder with the new "lower" tier, so that we will have one official ladder again, but now with a balanced higher tier.

The issue with this option is that man, it's going to take a shitload of time lol. First of all, we're going to have to wait at least two months to get some decent information on UU statistics (I don't want to use just one month's statistics, so I went with two, though that is even arguable). Then we'll have to spend time banning, unbanning etc. etc. to create two philosophically balanced tiers...and then we'll have to spend time in them to test them individually. It's a headache. That's not even ignoring the fact that there might be some Pokemon in the higher tier that end up being considered too powerful, so we might have to create another faux tier. I mean, this isn't really a huge problem, and it would be nice to have some actual battle experience to determine the aux tier as opposed to the arbitrary theorymon of the individuals who determined the tiers in the first place, but still...it's fucking annoying lol.

So, option 1 or option 2? Note there are no other options, at least none that I can see. If someone knows about some other thing, please inform me.

 

[Buckles]

We already know, for the most part, what pokemon are going to fall into UU. We have a fairly good idea as to what D/P UU looks like, so why not gradually introduce these BLs into the UU environment.

there is no justification for UU being the way it is

For some UUs, perhaps, but for others, the justification is the same as it's always been, they are capable pokemon, rarely used in standard, that can compete in a tier of their peers. We know Lanturn isn't going to move up to BL, but it is very capable in UU. Ditto for Sharpedo, Gastrodon, Camerupt, Altaria, etc. Having BLs face these guys will inevitably give a good idea of how they'll fare in UU.

 

[phalanx]

2 months sounds reasonable, but some things need to leave UU sooner rather then later, 1 months statistics should be enough to see what is being abused ridiculously in the tier and to get answers as to why.
I think for BL, we need to change how OU is worked out as currently garchomps weighted usage is effecting the actual size of OU itself so if we say capped OU size to 50 pokes, things that are jumping between BL and OU regularly (porygon-z roserade abomasnow ninjask for example) will be in OU permanently more or less, and not disrupting the BL tier.
as for UU tier, it should still be seperate, it is more or less established and is stableish (bar few needed bans)

 

[Aldaron]

Following along with my previous post, I'd just like to state what I, as an individual who likes the UU metagame the most, would like to see.

I basically want the second option, except without emphasis on the lower tier. We create a balanced tier with the pool of BL and UU (and now NFE) Pokemon, and then create a faux tier that moves any Pokemon too powerful up to there.

Essentially, I want Obi's idea of unbanning all BL Pokemon to determine some tier to be implemented on a side ladder, and once the ban list is determined, for this to be moved onto the main ladder under whatever category. BL is fine for me. The faux tier can have a new name.

We'll have one ladder with Ubers, OU, BL, and UU, and people on both sides will be happy, as now there is a (hopefully) balanced tier including the majority of BL Pokemon, and there is the current UU metagame, which can continue to have little changes as they are currently going.

I don't really like this status quo with the UU metagame, and I definitely think this thread's way about making changes to the UU metagame is severely flawed, but "awww what the hell."

One choice isn't going to make everyone happy...so why not do both and make everyone happy?

If people are unhappy still because the other choice exists...well, kindly shove it ^_^

 

[gengod]

This is exactly what i've been saying we should do for the past few pages. It is a way of implementing Obi's proposal without it interfering with UU as it is now. As Aldaron said,

One choice isn't going to make everyone happy...so why not do both and make everyone happy?

If people are unhappy still because the other choice exists...well, kindly shove it ^_^

I don't see why we can't simply implement this now as it should please everyone, and with the amount of time something like this could take it would be best to start as soon as possible.

 

[Salem1]

Salem1: I'm getting rather tired of people thinking Steelix is too strong. For the love of god people, it doesn't even have recovery. It's weak to Fighting, Ground, Fire,and Water, all extremely common types. Okay yes, it takes hits like a champ and is very good at setting up SR, as well as roaring. But that's it. Just keep attacking the thing, it'll go down sooner or later.
I can see Ninetales and Clefable, personally I think they are fine, but opinions on these two differ a lot. But Persian/Purugly? What did they do wrong? A quick hypnosis and U-Turn is nothing game-breaking..The team you had suggested certainly does not make a joke out of UU

Oh, so that's why approximately every team has a Steelix in it, because it's not too strong. Let me quote Serebii.net's 4th gen PotW on Steelix: ''Steelix walks through the generation gap fairly unscathed. A few new threats cause it problems and a few new additions make it more attractive, but it's still an effective BL physical wall that can't make the jump to OU because of its common weaknesses. Does that tell you enough? This pokemon is seen in almost every, and by almost every I mean almost every team.

As for Clefable, I don't see why I'd have to tell anyone that plays UU why it's broken. You ask anyone that isn't exploiting it and/or can make an objective view of it, they'll tell you it's broken, just go into the main chat and ask what people think. The rest are acceptable, I admit, but these two need to be moved to BL. If Steelix is not possible to move to BL, then at least move Clefable because this pokemon is simply put broken in UU.

 

[Trust]

Steelix is counterable because it can be hit by special attacks with success. However Clefable needs some counters for each set. Hitmonlee counters every set except the Toxic Orb + Facade one, so with Hitmonlee and a Steel type like Steelix or Aggron you won't have problems.

Steelix is UU and help to balance the tier, however Clefable... I don't know what to say about it.

 

[Salem1]

So every single team should have a Hitmonlee and Steelix or Aggron. Plus, in my experience most Clefables use Seismic Toss. Not to mention that this is still all theorymon; if it hadn't been broken in practice then it wouldn't be used in almost every team. And what do you mean by ''help to balance the tier'' ? sorry, but this seems like a strawman to me.

 

[obi]

He gave one example of a set of Pokemon that will counter most Clefable. It wasn't an exhaustive list, so no, not every team must have those two Pokemon.

 

[Luphrous]

Salem1: I really don't care what Serebii says about Steelix <_< Perhaps you see him a lot, but in my experience he's not on as many teams as you claim. I'm not saying he isn't used, just that he's not used as much as you're saying. This is of course just in my observations. But the fact stands that he has those crippling weaknesses and lacks recovery, he's really not all that great :/

As for Clefable, tell me why you think it's broken. It very well might be, but I'm not convinced. You have to say more than "I don't see why I'd have to tell anyone that plays UU that it's broken." Obviously everyone can't see, because it's still in UU. It has 95/73/90 defences. It's not as sturdy as everyone makes it out to be.

 

[Salem1]

Salem1: I really don't care what Serebii says about Steelix <_< Perhaps you see him a lot, but in my experience he's not on as many teams as you claim. I'm not saying he isn't used, just that he's not used as much as you're saying. This is of course just in my observations. But the fact stands that he has those crippling weaknesses and lacks recovery, he's really not all that great :/

As for Clefable, tell me why you think it's broken. It very well might be, but I'm not convinced. You have to say more than "I don't see why I'd have to tell anyone that plays UU that it's broken." Obviously everyone can't see, because it's still in UU. It has 95/73/90 defences. It's not as sturdy as everyone makes it out to be.

''Crippling'' weaknesses? he has no 4x, I wouldn't call a 2x a ''crippling'' weakness. And yes, I guess it varies. I used to see him only occasionally, but the last week his useage has skyrocketed.

I can't prove that it is broken because you can't prove everything with theorymon. The easiest way is simply to pull up Shoddy and play 5-10 games of UU.

 

[obi]

But what are your reasons for thinking it should be banned? "Duh" isn't a reason.

 

[ODDish]

I honestly don't see the point of discussing Clefable any further ...

Both sides of the argument have been made so many times now, what else is there left to say?

Perhaps when we have some useage statistics there will be a new angle to consider

 

[Aldaron]

What else is there left to say? Plenty. Maniac and I have outlined it very well if you look up the page.

We need to implement this ASAP, meaning the only roadblocks I want to see are those presented by the programmers.

 

[ODDish]

I was talking specifically about Clefable, not the tier as a whole ...

 

[Slickee]

I'm against a "complete" drop-down but I'd like to see some of BL's most powerful threats held behind for the time being and have the rest tested out. BL's been played and it's essentially what Obi wants to happen, so we can still use that information to get to where we need to faster. After the metagame's fairly stabilized, we can easily retest all the top tier BL's back into UU one at a time, since there shouldn't be that many. And if we end up taking a majority of BL's out, we don't have to test them out anyway. I'm talking about things like Staraptor and Zam and Abomasnow.

I'm surprised no one uses Counter Clefable. After a Reflect/Cosmic Power (Cosmic needs absolute max defensive stats but w/e) Adamant CB Lee's CC is a 2HKO, and it should be able to survive any other unboosted physical attack.

 

[Cynthia]

I don't think any Pokemon can be moved up until we get 2-3 months of statistics, then we can discuss some of ther "big issues."

Also around that time we could add in some of the lower BL for testing, perhaps the NFEs as well. I don't really see the need for massive tier reconstruction when UU is already a pretty stable metagame.

 

[Drakhun]

We need to reset the tiers because it wasn't done when the game came out, and the BL tier has more pokemon in it than the UU tier. And trying to make BL a balanced tier would be completely backwards. BL is a ban tier, and while no one will tell you you can't play it, its kinda like ubers, in that balancing it would be an exercise in futility.

 

[gengod]

We need to reset the tiers because it wasn't done when the game came out,

What do you mean "it wasn't done when the game came out?

the BL tier has more pokemon in it than the UU tier.

UU has roughly 150 pokemon in it, how does BL have more pokemon than UU?

And trying to make BL a balanced tier would be completely backwards. BL is a ban tier, and while no one will tell you you can't play it, its kinda like ubers, in that balancing it would be an exercise in futility.

Why would it be an excercise in futility? I'm sure the method listed above is easy enough to go through with the only drawback being the amout of time it takes.

 

[phalanx]

BL can compete with OU in some extents, I don't think it will be unbalanced and even if it is we won't know until it is tested.

and i'm not facing obviously broken UU pokemon for a few months so people can abuse them for better ranking, if something is being used so much in the tier after the first set of statics it should be discussed there and then.