Alright, since I've only ever been mid ladder at best, I'm going to refrain from using my own experiences in my discussion here. In fact I think I'm going to abstain from actually posting my opinion on what is the best course of action at all. Rather, I'm going to try to analyze the basic arguments for each side of each of the major potential courses of action to the best of my abilities. Think of this as a mostly objective analysis of the arguments being made, rather than an argument in and of itself. A tool for understanding all the arguments being made, and understanding the key points of contention in deciding this issue.
Note: A lot of the arguments will include references to avoiding complex bans. I'm not going to get into detail with why complex bans are controversial here, but suffice to say that a lot of people will go to very great lengths to avoid even simpler complex bans, so any time when complex bans are brought up as an option, people will be opposed to ideas involving them.
Options:
1. Do nothing: This option revolves around the idea that we've always dealt with baton pass chains without resorting to bans and that this generation it isn't so different from last. While new toys have been given to Baton Pass teams, new threats to them have also cropped up. The idea is, eventually the metagame will adapt to Baton pass chains without having to compromise team creativity to a extent greater than other accepted strategies. In short, Baton Pass is a fad that will soon fade as the metagame develops and it won't be worse for the wear. As for the fact that Baton pass team battles tend to be much more formulaic than ordinary battles and tend to be more team matchup based and less skill based, this option says that that's fine; the play-style has such a stigma attached to it few people would dare to use it in a serious context, and those who would will get shunned out anyway. Unwritten rules will be effective enough here to keep it from becoming a plague. Alternatively there are those that don't understand why Baton Pass chains are supposedly uncompetitive at all. Some of them think that any strategy should be allowed regardless of how much skill is involved in pulling it off, or that Baton pass chains actually do require a lot of skill *cough*bullshit*cough* (sorry, only time I'll do something like that in this :P).
Counter-arguments to this tend to focus on two points. The first is that it is wrong to think that the metagame will adapt in a healthy way to Baton Pass, especially on the high ladder where solid BP teams end up. The argument goes that there are no healthy ways for the metagame to adapt this; Baton Pass can only be stopped reliably by counters that are not feasible for every team to run, and that team matchup and hax become the only real deciding factors when playing against a Baton Pass player that has any decent idea of what they're doing. The other point is that it's not ok for such a strategy that requires so little skill to master to be legal in higher levels of play, as it undermines the competitive nature of the metagame. Even if it is stigmatized, there will be people who use it and will get honors they do not really deserve because of it, and this should not be allowed. There are slight variations on these points of course, but the basic jist of it is the same; Baton Pass chains are not going to go away without action and are unhealthy for a competitive metagame, so they need to be addressed.
2. Ban Baton Pass entirely: Ok, so very few people hold this opinion, but it deserves to be analysed as the opposite extreme to "do nothing". This argument tends to focus on a few key points as well; complex bans are bad, banning Pokemon that aren't broken on their own is bad, and the easiest, cleanest way to remove baton pass chains (which are also bad) is to just remove baton pass. This argument feels that nothing of value is being lost by losing baton pass, or that at least the value of baton pass is outweighed by the value of keeping more Pokemon in the game without using complex bans.
The counter-argument to this is, of course, that Baton Pass is totally usable outside of Baton pass chains and that a lot of competitive variety is being lost by banning it entirely. Lots of Pokemon can run Baton Pass outside of chains in both competitively useful and interesting ways, and banning Baton Pass entirely is like cutting your arm off to cure a paper cut. Sure it works, but you lose a lot more than you would if you took a more elegant approach. The argument is there are better ways to limit Baton Pass chains that don't cause so much potential competitive creativity to be lost.
3. Ban key Baton Pass chain members: The most common ones mentioned being Scolipede and Espeon, banning either or both of them. The idea is that without these Pokemon, Baton Pass chains become far harder to pull off successfully and many new, viable ways of dealing with them open up. They also argue that neither of these Pokemon are used for much other than Baton Pass chains (at least by competent players), so by banning them not much competitive variety is lost. Also, this avoids complex bans, which are considered by many to be hazardous. By banning these members Baton Pass chains can continue to exist as well, but as a strategy that requires more thought and has more counter-play options available to those battling against them.
The counter-argument to this is that it's banning Pokemon that aren't actually broken, which should be avoided at all costs. It's also argued that this is a worse case than just banning a Pokemon that's completely non-viable outside of Baton Pass chains because they believe that these Pokemon have viable niches outside of it that will be lost if they're banned. Those that still believe Baton Pass needs to be dealt with argue there are other methods available that cause less harm to the metagame and are more directed at the actual cause of the problem. There's no need to ban non-broken Pokemon when there are other methods available.
4. Ban Baton Pass + Magic Bounce on the same Pokemon: This argues that what pushes Baton Pass chains over the edge are magic bounce users like Espeon and Mega-Absol that can single-handedly shut down the vast majority of the traditional methods of dealing with Baton Pass chains. They argue that by removing Magic Bounce from baton pass chains, you allow enough counter-play into the strategy that it becomes just another strategy to prepare for and deal reasonably during the course of building a team. Extreme measures will no longer need to be taken to guarantee that you don't auto-lose to baton pass. This ban also has minimal effect on anything outside of Baton pass chains, since there are very few instances where both are used on the same Pokemon that isn't related to chaining. The worst thing that would happen would be that Espeon would lose the ability to escape being pursuit trapped through the move.
The argument against this position usually boils down to one of two things; complex bans are bad and should be avoided at all costs, and that it won't do enough to prevent baton pass from being broken. They argue that Baton Pass chains are still too uncompetitive even without Magic Bounce. They point to other strategies that have a similar effect to Magic Bounce, like Soundproof Pokemon and Ingrain passing, and claim that these will just rise up to fill Magic Bounce's void. Others will simply say that leaving Baton Pass chains to exist at all shouldn't be done.
5. Ban Magic Bounce: Same reasoning as in #4 for the most part, but avoiding a complex ban.
This raises additional counter-arguments to the ones above for #4, around how Magic Bounce itself is not broken and that a lot of legitimate strategies are hurt or removed with its complete ban.
6. Ban multiple Baton Pass users on the same team: This approach eliminates Baton Pass Chains altogether while still allowing non-chained uses for Baton pass to be used. The argument here is that Baton Pass chains should be eliminated entirely, either because it's simpler and safer than trying to just nerf them or because they are inherently uncompetitive and should not be allowed. They argue this approach has minimal impact on strategy outside of Baton Pass Chains, so there's very little collateral damage, unlike some of the options that only nerf Baton Pass chains like banning key members directly.
The primary argument against this is that Baton pass chains should not be removed entirely. They argue that it is a playstyle that at least has potential to be legitimate, and that we shouldn't completely eradicate it. Most people arguing against this feel that either Baton pass is not a problem that needs to be addressed or that it can be nerfed to the point where it isn't a problem without eradicating it completely and without harming competitive variety.
_____________
There are other arguments beyond these, but unless I'm missing something major most of them are being made by a minority small enough that it doesn't really matter much.
The key issues in these discussions come down to a few key contentions:
- Will Baton Pass Chains adversely affect the development and enjoyment of the metagame in the long run, or will it balance itself out over time?
- Are Baton pass chains, at their core, uncompetitive, or are they a valid strategy that can be salvaged/doesn't need salvaging?
- How much are we willing to restrict competitive creativity in order to bring Baton pass chains under control?
- Are complex bans acceptable if they limit the amount of competitive creativity lost, or are they too risky to have?
- Exactly what will nerf Baton Pass chains to the point where they become competitive?
All of these questions either have a lot of unknowns attached to them (we can't see into the future after all), or are based on subjective opinion and experience. I have opinions on a few of them, but I don't really have the experience to make a really informed judgement on most of them.
Anyway, I hope that this can be useful to people who want to jump into this and want to know what the basic arguments are, and why people think what they think. If nothing else, it helped me organize my own mind on the matter :P
Note: A lot of the arguments will include references to avoiding complex bans. I'm not going to get into detail with why complex bans are controversial here, but suffice to say that a lot of people will go to very great lengths to avoid even simpler complex bans, so any time when complex bans are brought up as an option, people will be opposed to ideas involving them.
Options:
1. Do nothing: This option revolves around the idea that we've always dealt with baton pass chains without resorting to bans and that this generation it isn't so different from last. While new toys have been given to Baton Pass teams, new threats to them have also cropped up. The idea is, eventually the metagame will adapt to Baton pass chains without having to compromise team creativity to a extent greater than other accepted strategies. In short, Baton Pass is a fad that will soon fade as the metagame develops and it won't be worse for the wear. As for the fact that Baton pass team battles tend to be much more formulaic than ordinary battles and tend to be more team matchup based and less skill based, this option says that that's fine; the play-style has such a stigma attached to it few people would dare to use it in a serious context, and those who would will get shunned out anyway. Unwritten rules will be effective enough here to keep it from becoming a plague. Alternatively there are those that don't understand why Baton Pass chains are supposedly uncompetitive at all. Some of them think that any strategy should be allowed regardless of how much skill is involved in pulling it off, or that Baton pass chains actually do require a lot of skill *cough*bullshit*cough* (sorry, only time I'll do something like that in this :P).
Counter-arguments to this tend to focus on two points. The first is that it is wrong to think that the metagame will adapt in a healthy way to Baton Pass, especially on the high ladder where solid BP teams end up. The argument goes that there are no healthy ways for the metagame to adapt this; Baton Pass can only be stopped reliably by counters that are not feasible for every team to run, and that team matchup and hax become the only real deciding factors when playing against a Baton Pass player that has any decent idea of what they're doing. The other point is that it's not ok for such a strategy that requires so little skill to master to be legal in higher levels of play, as it undermines the competitive nature of the metagame. Even if it is stigmatized, there will be people who use it and will get honors they do not really deserve because of it, and this should not be allowed. There are slight variations on these points of course, but the basic jist of it is the same; Baton Pass chains are not going to go away without action and are unhealthy for a competitive metagame, so they need to be addressed.
2. Ban Baton Pass entirely: Ok, so very few people hold this opinion, but it deserves to be analysed as the opposite extreme to "do nothing". This argument tends to focus on a few key points as well; complex bans are bad, banning Pokemon that aren't broken on their own is bad, and the easiest, cleanest way to remove baton pass chains (which are also bad) is to just remove baton pass. This argument feels that nothing of value is being lost by losing baton pass, or that at least the value of baton pass is outweighed by the value of keeping more Pokemon in the game without using complex bans.
The counter-argument to this is, of course, that Baton Pass is totally usable outside of Baton pass chains and that a lot of competitive variety is being lost by banning it entirely. Lots of Pokemon can run Baton Pass outside of chains in both competitively useful and interesting ways, and banning Baton Pass entirely is like cutting your arm off to cure a paper cut. Sure it works, but you lose a lot more than you would if you took a more elegant approach. The argument is there are better ways to limit Baton Pass chains that don't cause so much potential competitive creativity to be lost.
3. Ban key Baton Pass chain members: The most common ones mentioned being Scolipede and Espeon, banning either or both of them. The idea is that without these Pokemon, Baton Pass chains become far harder to pull off successfully and many new, viable ways of dealing with them open up. They also argue that neither of these Pokemon are used for much other than Baton Pass chains (at least by competent players), so by banning them not much competitive variety is lost. Also, this avoids complex bans, which are considered by many to be hazardous. By banning these members Baton Pass chains can continue to exist as well, but as a strategy that requires more thought and has more counter-play options available to those battling against them.
The counter-argument to this is that it's banning Pokemon that aren't actually broken, which should be avoided at all costs. It's also argued that this is a worse case than just banning a Pokemon that's completely non-viable outside of Baton Pass chains because they believe that these Pokemon have viable niches outside of it that will be lost if they're banned. Those that still believe Baton Pass needs to be dealt with argue there are other methods available that cause less harm to the metagame and are more directed at the actual cause of the problem. There's no need to ban non-broken Pokemon when there are other methods available.
4. Ban Baton Pass + Magic Bounce on the same Pokemon: This argues that what pushes Baton Pass chains over the edge are magic bounce users like Espeon and Mega-Absol that can single-handedly shut down the vast majority of the traditional methods of dealing with Baton Pass chains. They argue that by removing Magic Bounce from baton pass chains, you allow enough counter-play into the strategy that it becomes just another strategy to prepare for and deal reasonably during the course of building a team. Extreme measures will no longer need to be taken to guarantee that you don't auto-lose to baton pass. This ban also has minimal effect on anything outside of Baton pass chains, since there are very few instances where both are used on the same Pokemon that isn't related to chaining. The worst thing that would happen would be that Espeon would lose the ability to escape being pursuit trapped through the move.
The argument against this position usually boils down to one of two things; complex bans are bad and should be avoided at all costs, and that it won't do enough to prevent baton pass from being broken. They argue that Baton Pass chains are still too uncompetitive even without Magic Bounce. They point to other strategies that have a similar effect to Magic Bounce, like Soundproof Pokemon and Ingrain passing, and claim that these will just rise up to fill Magic Bounce's void. Others will simply say that leaving Baton Pass chains to exist at all shouldn't be done.
5. Ban Magic Bounce: Same reasoning as in #4 for the most part, but avoiding a complex ban.
This raises additional counter-arguments to the ones above for #4, around how Magic Bounce itself is not broken and that a lot of legitimate strategies are hurt or removed with its complete ban.
6. Ban multiple Baton Pass users on the same team: This approach eliminates Baton Pass Chains altogether while still allowing non-chained uses for Baton pass to be used. The argument here is that Baton Pass chains should be eliminated entirely, either because it's simpler and safer than trying to just nerf them or because they are inherently uncompetitive and should not be allowed. They argue this approach has minimal impact on strategy outside of Baton Pass Chains, so there's very little collateral damage, unlike some of the options that only nerf Baton Pass chains like banning key members directly.
The primary argument against this is that Baton pass chains should not be removed entirely. They argue that it is a playstyle that at least has potential to be legitimate, and that we shouldn't completely eradicate it. Most people arguing against this feel that either Baton pass is not a problem that needs to be addressed or that it can be nerfed to the point where it isn't a problem without eradicating it completely and without harming competitive variety.
_____________
There are other arguments beyond these, but unless I'm missing something major most of them are being made by a minority small enough that it doesn't really matter much.
The key issues in these discussions come down to a few key contentions:
- Will Baton Pass Chains adversely affect the development and enjoyment of the metagame in the long run, or will it balance itself out over time?
- Are Baton pass chains, at their core, uncompetitive, or are they a valid strategy that can be salvaged/doesn't need salvaging?
- How much are we willing to restrict competitive creativity in order to bring Baton pass chains under control?
- Are complex bans acceptable if they limit the amount of competitive creativity lost, or are they too risky to have?
- Exactly what will nerf Baton Pass chains to the point where they become competitive?
All of these questions either have a lot of unknowns attached to them (we can't see into the future after all), or are based on subjective opinion and experience. I have opinions on a few of them, but I don't really have the experience to make a really informed judgement on most of them.
Anyway, I hope that this can be useful to people who want to jump into this and want to know what the basic arguments are, and why people think what they think. If nothing else, it helped me organize my own mind on the matter :P
