Other Tiers Would an Item Clause make GSC more popular?

[Dre89]

Isa- I've never been against arbitrary rules, I've just been against changing the mechanics so theyre no longer legitimate. That's why I've never really had a peroblem with things like evasion or OHKO clauses, even though I don't like them. Again, the rules weren't just used in PS2, they were used in official Nintendo tourneys where people used level 100s.

It's not just about arbitrarily changing the game to make it more popular, it's also the 'official' GSC meta, the way it was meant to be played. An item clause would make the meta more appealing in a non-arbitrary way. GSC wouldn't suddenly become insanely popular, but it would probably improve. It's lack of popularity isn't just because it is old, it's also because of it's pace. That's why it is less popular than RBY, a meta which predates it, is much less balanced and has less viable pokemon.

To the other posters, the historic significance of lefties GSC means nothing to new players. Also it's not as if GSC would suddenly become a 20 turn meta with no tactical play at all. If anything, the tactical ceiling would rise due to more diversity and a new sub meta with thief. Saying 'well lax will just switch out whenever a common thief switches in' if anything is an argument in my favour because that means that the most centralising figure in GSC OU just got slightly nerfed.

 

[Isa]

I can't find any Nintendo tournaments with my google-fu supporting or rejecting your statement, so mind linking some? (Also "official" being appealing is subjective, ergo, arbitrary)

Even though...I don't think it matters. You go from "very stally" to "decently stally", people still see "stally".

Also, it'd alienate older players. I wouldn't play with Item Clause if given the option not to, and even if that's due to tradition, it still stands, I would choose to play something or somewhere else.

 

[Royal Flush]

I honestly can't see the game getting better with this, but hey I could be wrong. Idk we could test a couple of matches with it then take some real conclusions instead of just pure theorymon.

I'm still very skeptic though

 

[Borat]

idk, this sounds like a waste of time if you're looking for a permanent change. at least compared to something like... more snorlax testing.

 

[Dre89]

Isa- To be fair, only 1 of the two official tourneys was played with level 100s. That one being the Mobile Cup in 2001.

Apart from it being a change from what people are used to, what other objections do people have? That the items aren't very useful?

 

[magic9mushroom]

This is what I don't like about Smogon to be honest. It would be all well and good if the old-timers constituted the majority of the playerbase, but the reality is probably 90% of people who currently play RBY and GSC weren't around in the old days. I just don't see why 90% of the playerbase should have to play by rules governed by like the 3-4 old timers who still pay GSC.

You are entirely free to leave Smogon and play elsewhere.

 

[Jorgen]

Oh wow I missed that 90% thing. Do you think that it's somehow tyrannical geezers like gene forcing everyone to play GSC the "way it ought to be"? People play without item clause because that's just what the ruleset is. Sure it was determined a long time ago, but the reason we don't go back and review every rule change for the benefit of every single new player to see if they agree with it is so that the game can move on and maintain ruleset stability (which is a good thing and WAY more prized in older generations, as Longfellow touched on).

 

[Royal Flush]

Borat
Eh just for the sake of curiosity I guess. But Snorlaxless test is way more interesting indeed. Even Ho-oh lol



Dre89
I don't see really see the current playerbase being ruled by old tradition: granted, if we're talking about competitive history, policy bans were very basic back there on the blue heaven/tafop era (ie Ho-oh is something that could be OU if we used the current Smogon's philosophy), but huhhh we play without item clause because we acknowledge the game is better without it.
It's the same reason we still play RBY with no tradebacks and with the bugged cartridge mechanics instead of the Stadium ones.

All in all, I can recognize the way Nintendo wanted GSC to be played, but it doesn't mean it's necessarily the best one.

 

[Isa]

Agreed with Royal Flush. The Mobile tournaments had Mewtwo, Ho-Oh and Lugia legal according to Bulbapedia (and a ten minute timer), frankly that sounds like a metagame I'd dislike to play in. If we were to follow everything Nintendo did, we'd only play with the VGC rules, use level 50's etc. for future generations, thankfully we do not.

 

[magic9mushroom]

It's the same reason we still play RBY with no tradebacks and with the bugged cartridge mechanics instead of the Stadium ones.

Meh, the Stadium mechanics are probably actually better (sleep not lasting forever is a plus, and Focus Energy's kinda cool), they're just not "standard" because Pokemon's always been mainly about handheld titles.

 

[Dre89]

Borat
Eh just for the sake of curiosity I guess. But Snorlaxless test is way more interesting indeed. Even Ho-oh lol



Dre89
I don't see really see the current playerbase being ruled by old tradition: granted, if we're talking about competitive history, policy bans were very basic back there on the blue heaven/tafop era (ie Ho-oh is something that could be OU if we used the current Smogon's philosophy), but huhhh we play without item clause because we acknowledge the game is better without it.
It's the same reason we still play RBY with no tradebacks and with the bugged cartridge mechanics instead of the Stadium ones.

All in all, I can recognize the way Nintendo wanted GSC to be played, but it doesn't mean it's necessarily the best one.

We play RBY and GSC with the mechanical sleep clauses from Stadium (PO also has a mechanical freeze clause), so what we play are technically mods rather than legit metas that existed in the actual games, so what you said isn't entirely correct.

To be fair to Nintendo, they did ban Ubers in certain tourneys. I know they were banned in the RBY ones and I think they banned them in the first GSC tourney.

As for Ho-oh, the reason that it's in Uber was because back then Ubers was just a tier for the legendaries that were designed to be Uber, if that makes sense.

I don't think item clause is something that absolutely must be changed, I just think it'd make the game more popular.

As for enjoying lefties more, I honestly think that's just a case of familiarity. I think if item clause was standard and I was arguing for lefties I'd get similar responses. What is considered 'better' is really a subjective thing, whereas what's more official or popular is a bit more clear, and it's pretty clear GSC is unpopular.

 

[noobcubed]

What is considered 'better' is really a subjective thing.

It really isn't. See this post: http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/characteristics-of-a-desirable-pokemon-metagame.66515/

 

[AraShaun]

The lack of viable items in GSC make the item clause completly less of interest. It's not leftovers who makes the metagame stalliest but players. Look at the ADV tier. It was stalliest as fuck before it was popularized by the smogon tour. Peoples discovored that it was possible to play offensive because it was possible to play at this tier more frequently. And this is what GSC doesn't have actually: an interest to play. If we create a tour with old gens, I'm pretty sure people will start to play in a more offensive way.

Yeah, the main reason imo that it is so defensive, whilst partly due to the nature of the battle mechanics, is that defensive teams are generally easier to play than offensive teams, due to being largely reactive you can just have some common counters and try to not die.

 

[Dre89]

I feel that GSC on merit should at least be more popular than RBY because it is a much more polished meta, which I say as a huge RBY fanboy. I just think the stally nature is the reason that GSC is behind RBY, and I feel that that is due to the stallier nature, which I believe is somewhat remedies by item clause.

Another option would be to use minimum PP, but that would just make battles last less turns rather than change the way the meta is played.

 

[magic9mushroom]

I feel that GSC on merit should at least be more popular than RBY because it is a much more polished meta, which I say as a huge RBY fanboy. I just think the stally nature is the reason that GSC is behind RBY, and I feel that that is due to the stallier nature, which I believe is somewhat remedies by item clause.

Another option would be to use minimum PP, but that would just make battles last less turns rather than change the way the meta is played.

No, the reason GSC's behind RBY is because RBY's the original and therefore the one that people who want to "start at the start" go for. Like me - I played RBY through for the first time last year, and only got involved in the competitive scene after that.

Same reason more people have played the original Legend Of Zelda than have played Link's Awakening - people who are going for nostalgia will go for maximum nostalgia.

 

[Dre89]

But RSE is more popular than GSC, which is neither nostalgia nor the most current meta.

Are you saying that if GSC was fast-paced, offensive meta, with a similar speed to RBY that it would still be the least popular meta?

Edit- You played RBY for the first time last year?

 

[magic9mushroom]

But RSE is more popular than GSC, which is neither nostalgia nor the most current meta.

RSE is more recent, thus more current players played it, and it's more accessible to people coming from later gens thanks to the common mechanics since then (IV/EV system, Choice items, natures, etc.).

Are you saying that if GSC was fast-paced, offensive meta, with a similar speed to RBY that it would still be the least popular meta?

Yes.

Edit- You played RBY for the first time last year?

Yes. I played through Pokemon Red and Pokemon Blue on an emulator. When I was a kid and Pokemon was still an actual craze, my frugal mother didn't want me playing on handheld consoles.

 

[Mr.E]

To be fair, RSE fights with GSC as the best (OU) metagames throughout the series at large so it deserves to be more popular. Fourth gen took a nosedive with 120 power Outrage, the creation of Draco Meteor and addition of Specs/Scarf.

 

[Bedschibaer]

I was bored, so i made a GSC item viability ranking.

S Rank: Generally considered as universally usable and the best choice for using your item slot (spoiler: it's leftovers)
A Rank: Items that either are of high value for specific pokemon or are situationally very useful
B Rank: Items that can't be used universally and don't even give specific pokemon a significant advantage
C Rank: Why do these even exist?
D Rank: No competitive use

S Rank:
-Leftovers

A Rank:
-Berserk Gene
-Bright Powder
-Focus Band
-King's Rock
-Light Ball
-Quick Claw
-Scope Lens
-Thick Club
-Miracle Berry
-Mint Berry

B Rank:
-Blackbelt / Blackglasses / Charcoal / Dragon Fang / Hard Stone / Magnet / Metal Coat / Miracle Seed / Mystic Water / NevermeltIce / Pink Bow / Poison Barb / Polkadot Bow / Sharp Beak / Silver Powder / Soft Sand / Spell Tag / Twisted Spoon
-MetalPowder
-Bitter Berry
-Burnt Berry
-Mystery Berry
-Ice Berry
-PrzCureBerry
-PsnCureBerry

C Rank:
-Lucky Punch
-Stick
-Berry
-Gold Berry

D Rank:
-Amulet Coin
-Cleanse Tag
-Lucky Egg
-Smoke Ball


I hope i didn't forget anything. Also yea, feel free to test out some GSC with item clause, but i honestly don't want to play a meta where half of the usable & used items are luck based.

 

[Xeze]

Berry and Gold Berry are extremely viable in GSC LC (when someone decides to play it).
Also I think that Miracleberry, Thick Club and Light Ball are above the rest of the A-tier, but not as high as Leftovers.

 

[Bedschibaer]

i was really thinking of putting miracle berry into S tier. Thick Club and Light ball aren't higher up because they are literally only usable on one pokemon respectively. And i didn't want to do an A+ thing.

 

[Dre89]

I think the type-boosting items probably deserve to be up in A tier. In some cases the extra damage could be the difference between a 2HKO and a 3HKO

 

[magic9mushroom]

I think the type-boosting items probably deserve to be up in A tier. In some cases the extra damage could be the difference between a 2HKO and a 3HKO

The boost is less than the inherent variability of attack damage, so they can only guarantee a 2HKO if a 2HKO was reasonably common before.

EDIT:

i was really thinking of putting miracle berry into S tier. Thick Club and Light ball aren't higher up because they are literally only usable on one pokemon respectively. And i didn't want to do an A+ thing.

Thick Club is usable on two Pokemon.

 

[Bedschibaer]

I think the type-boosting items probably deserve to be up in A tier. In some cases the extra damage could be the difference between a 2HKO and a 3HKO

I didn't put them in A tier because they are not universally usable, unlike stuff like Scope Lens. And they only boost one move, which could make a differecne in some scenarios, but then again your opponent can just switch out into something where it doesn't make a difference anyways and then you have a "wasted" item slot.
And i also agree with magic9mushroom, how often does the boost really make a crucial or at least significant difference? I haven't done any calculations yet, but i probably will later this evening. But yea, if the boost does not even as much as a high damage roll would do you would be better off using an item from the A tier list (or leftovers).

Also, i did forget about Cubone, but the list is based on OU anyways (is gsc UU or LC even a thing atm?), where you don't see Cubone at all.

 

[noobcubed]

Good work, Bedschibaer, that list looks pretty comprehensive and I had even forgotten some of the random items that were around back then like Metal Powder, which I even had to Google. For me, this list highlights another problem with gen II Item Clause that I hadn't previously realised: many of the A-rank items are luck-dependant. Gen II with Item Clause would presumably have a lot more matches decided by clutch Quick Claw activations, crucial Brightpowder-induced misses and the like. Sure, some people might like the distinctly haxy nature of such a metagame, but they can play gen I with its huge critical hit probabilities, regular speed ties and Chansey versus Chansey freeze wars. Whereas at the moment, gen II, although an acquired taste, is unique. Why not keep it that way?