np: XY OU Suspect Testing Round 5 - Ghost of Perdition

[ginganinja]

Who talked about banning more stuff? I only said that offense will get better, not that offensive threats will become broken. So this new metagame can be balanced, but it will be bad, at least imo, because the metagame doesn't need to get more offensive. The argument is that Aegislash prevents the metagame from becoming more offensive, not that Aegislash keeps in check broken threats.

O.k, so why is this relevant. Who really cares if offense will get better, you can make such a claim about most pokemon in existence that if X leaves Y style will become better. Like, I have seen some good anti ban arguments, Starfall11 has a few of them, but seriously, your personal reason for keeping something OU would have to be one of the stupidest reasoning I have seen within this thread. I don't even see how your argument is even relevant to the suspect test process as a whole. If offence becomes "unhealthy" if Aegislash leaves, then obviously its due to a few pokemon pushing the envelope which promptly get banned. But by your own argument, offensive threats won't become broken...so there should be no problems, as according to you, offence will be more common and still be healthy (not broken), and I suspect stall will continue to be as good as it always is.

Remember alex, the metagame will ALWAYS adapt if something goes (heck, it adapts if something stays as well), shifting between being offensive and more defensive. Its a fact of the meta, but its NOT a reason to keep something OU, something I just confirmed with Haunter.

 

[Shirou Saberfox]

Lol so the fact that Aegislash has a hard time being OKHOed is the basis that he should be banned?

Isn't this the reason for the Uber tier? Once some pokemon come in, they annihilate entire teams on end with little to no checks. Xerneas, Mewtwo, the list goes on. Aegislash is similar as it is hard to deal with, has an annoying amount of sets to predict, Kings Shield, the list goes on. Like many of the pokemon in the Uber tier, they can destroy entire teams, or by the time they are dealt with, its far too late to take back the battle. And like many of the pokemon in Uber, it takes little to no skill to make it work that way.

And unlike hazards, which you can come prepared for, there are plenty of times you can't deal with Aegislash even prepared. I thought OU was the highest level of competitive game play while maintaining balance. Using a powerful pokemon like Aegislash, which can easily deal with its own few counters with little skill, is neither competitive nor balanced.

I don't even see how your argument is even relevant to the suspect test process as a whole. If offence becomes "unhealthy" if Aegislash leaves, then obviously its due to a few pokemon pushing the envelope which promptly get banned. But by your own argument, offensive threats won't become broken...

This argument... I like it. I just want to add that if this person can argue that "Offense will become unhealthy with Aegislash gone", then you can argue in the opposite direction and say that "defense is unhealthy" because Aegislash is in. At least, thats how I would feel if I were arguing with that type of logic.

 

[Shirou Saberfox]

Aegislash can be trapped and baited with some skill. Bisharp+azumaril. Mega Mawhile also one of Aegislash's biggest threats on account of Mawile's ability to taunt, sucker punch, and extremely high offensive capability. Mega Mawile is a huge check to Aegislash. I won't go as far to say counter without actual data, but I would say it's a contender. Aegislash is also not nearly as bad as swag play was or megakhan. Aegislash is difficult and annoying, but not broken.

Mega Mawile can work, as thats pretty much the only mega I find cute enough to use on my team. But M. Mawile cant switch into it well if its carrying Sacred Sword or whatever sword it learns. And the fast set of Aegi out speeds Mawile, so its not really reliable to go with taunt and sucker punch on it.
And I've never seen Azumaril do anything to an Aegi.

Aegislash is more than difficult and annoying. It simply is the metagame now, because you don't really do much any more unless you run one on your team. I recall you saying something to someone about not wanting to change a static team above. Is running Aegislash on every team not static itself? If everyone had access to Mewtwo or Blaziken, everyone would be running it. Because of Aegi, the metagame is stale, without being at its full competitive height simply because Aegi is too easy and too powerful.

I will agree with you on one thing, Swag and Megakhan are garbage to the game. I feel like Aegi is right up there with them.

 

[Shirou Saberfox]

Priority+switch
And if you don't like that combo, then Rotom Wash+M-Mawile.
However, I'm sure Mawile does the job.

It would work with Mawile, but you have to give up what could be coverage that Mawile needs. Its a hard choice between Iron Head, Fire Fang, and Play Rough. And you can't just Volt Switch into Mawile, Sacred Sword is a thing.

 

[LU-the great]

Before beginning, I would like to introduce myself. I have been a member of the community through generation 5 and 6. I generally use the showdown simulator to build teams that are compatible with the showdown ladder and wifi competitive play. It has worked out pretty well. Last Season, or season 4 I was ranked 8th for the US in single battles. The team that I used is also showdown compatible. It contains no banned pokemon or tactics. I have had a lot of experience with the previous suspects, as they completely litter wifi teams.

On the 50/50 Arguement:

First of all, 50/50's are a consequence of the natural mechanics of the game. For example, if my opponent has Zapdose on the field and his only other pokemon is Infernape, and my only pokemon is Mamoswine, then I am instantly in a prediction lacuna. If I Icicle Crash hoping to do massive damage to his electric bird, then I take the risk that my opponent will possibly switch to Infernape which will out-speed and KO the following turn. If I predict a switch and earthquake to KO the opposing fire monkey, then I risk Zapdose staying on the field and wasting a turn completely. Further, my opponent is in a 50/50 scenario. Does s/he Heatwave with Zapdose and do massive damage to my Mamoswine, or predict a IC and switch to Infernape? Here, we can see that the natural mechanics of the game generate 50/50 scenarios. Further, we can see that 50/50's are, despite what some pro-ban advocates may claim, completely competitive and essential to the game. In conclusion, the 50/50 pro-ban argument fails unless there is a relevant distinction between the Aegislash 50/50 scenarios and those that naturally manifest through the mechanics of the game itself.

The burden to make a distinction falls on the pro-ban community. Some have argued that, though 50/50's are natural occurrences of the game, Aegislash generates an excessive amount of 50/50's and is therefore damaging to the meta as a whole and relevantly different than natural 50/50's. I remain unconvinced, and see it unlikely that this argument could ever have any justification much less complete certainly. I gave one example of a natural 50/50, and such a 50/50 occurs often as Mamoswine users know. This is due to its typing which allows it incredible offensive coverage but weaknesses to common attacks. Further, I can construct indefinitely many examples with each individual Pokemon. So, unless the pro-ban community can demonstrate these invisible values, and further demonstrate that Aegislash creates a large majority of these scenarios, and even further give an argument on how this is actually negative to the metagame, Aegislash generating 50/50's is an irrelevant fact and to make said fact into a statement is as useful and interesting as pointing out that Aegislash is a sword.

As I have previously stated, I only see one distinction to made between Aegislash and the natural 50/50's: Natural 50/50's are unexpected and difficult to account for mentally, while a 50/50 generated by Aegislash, as we can see by this discussion, is expected and therefore more predictable.

On being Overpowered and Unbalanced:

Many posts seem to focus on Aegislash being overpowered and/or an unbalanced force in the metagame. These arguments tend to overlap and muddle together. I am going to try to keep them separate because though they are related they are not synonymous and should be addressed separately.

A pokemon cannot be considered overpowered if it makes sense to think that said pokemon was designed by a rational being with the intention of balance in mind. For instance, any of us would be hard pressed to make a case that Mega Khan was designed simultaneously by both a rational being and a being that favors balance. It just seems very unlikely. My justification for this definition is very simple. It is neutral to a pokemon's move pool, stats, typing, ability and effect on the metagame, yet they are relevant features that can be used to categorize a pokemon as overpowered. It is a holistic approach to categorization, and it seems very similar to the vague way we actually do categorize. For example, it is hard to make a case that Mega Gengar is overpowered simply by looking at its stats, move pool, and typing but if we take into account shadow-tag then it instantly becomes much more justifiable to think that Mega Gengar is overpowered. In the same sense one might think Mega Aerodactyle is overpowered based solely on its typing, stats, and ability but once one takes a look at its limited move pool, it becomes apparent that there is no case to categorize it as OP. Being overpowered and/or balanced within a meta-game is a vague notion that though can be categorized within a vacuum cannot always be so categorized. As many have suggested, categorization as overpowered or balanced has to be decided holistically, which my definition allows.

This leaves us with the question “If any of us were both rational and promoted the concept of balance, would we introduce Aegislash?” I think we would. Aegislash has an incredible and unique typing, has a versatile move pool, has incredible stats depending on the stance, a unique ability, and an understandably substantial effect on the metagame, but there is a caveat to each. Each caveat seems to imply design by a rational being that favors balance. Aegislash's typing is indeed both an exceptionally good offensive and defensive typing making it an ideal switch into banded and scarfed fighting attacks and many more offensive threats in general. Further, Shadow ball has great neutral coverage in a similar way as Close Combat. In addition, Aegislash has god sent coverage with sacred sword allowing it to run an effective wall breaking set. We can conclude from this that Aegislash both softly checks hyper offensive and hyper defensive teams, based on typing and offensive presence alone. This is further justified by the suspect ladder that has become more offensive based in the absence of Aegislash. This fact is due to the meta itself, not solely Aegislash. It is just true that XY brought us many new exceptionally powerful attackers, but walls that did not surpass their predecessors (i.e. Skarmory, Blissey). If the situation had been reversed than it is likely that the absence of Aegislash would have led to a more defensive metagame. In addition, Aegislash's typing gives it weaknesses to the omnipresent fire and ground and a weakness to dark which because of knock-off and pursuit already serve the utility of trapping and crippling a switch. Further, Aegislash is susceptible to taunt, statuses other than poison, leech seed, encore, etc which is found on more eloquent defensive teams. I hope I am not getting ahead of myself, but the fact that Aegislash's typing gives it the necessary offensive and defensive capabilities to both softly check offensive and defensive threats, in addition to the fact that it is weak to common offensive attacks and susceptible to common stall tactics, seems to imply that Aegislash is most definitely balanced, and therefore in no meaningful sense overpowered.

Aegislash has a very interesting stat distribution in addition to its equally interesting ability. 140/140 defenses and 140/140 offenses is nothing to turn your head at, especially when you take into account a movepool that, though isn't extensive, completely suits it. Still, it is only a fact that to have either of these stats the user must sacrifice one for the other and burn a turn as a cost for the exchange. I do not think I have to explore any further how that can be justified as an obvious rational balancing caveat on these seemingly unjustifiable states. There is no way Aegislash can do anything, other than switching in, without taking some substantial risk to itself.

To clarify the point I am trying to make, I would will introduce a thought experiment. Imagine for a moment that you were attempting to make a completely balanced pokemon. Would you give it 75/69/72/114/100/104 stats, a typing with a reasonable offensive and defensive presence like fire/psychic, a movepool with support moves and attacks, and an interesting but sub par ability? No, you would not if you were attempting to balance the game. A pokemon with the above description has little to no effect on the meta-game. In fact, the above description is of Delphox. And Delophox sucks. The reason you wouldn't is because the metagame is completely littered with powerful walls and attackers that can easily stall or sweep entire teams. To make any substantial “balancing act” of the metagame one would have to introduce something other than another hyper offensive, hyper defensive, or traditionally balanced pokemon. One would have to introduce a pokemon that had some of the qualities of each put together in such a way that it could be pit against the most powerful attackers and walls in the meta. You would have designed Aegislash.

The conclusion that Aegislash is a balancing agent has a natural explanation of why one may think that Aegislash is overpowered. Aegislash is such a radical form of balancing in the likes of which none of us have ever been acquainted with before. Still, as we can see from the above thought experiment of attempting to create a substantial balancing force in the current metagame, it seems that it was the only right one.

On Centralization:

Many have invoked the concept of centralization and over centralization of the metagame to justify an Aegislash ban. Overcentralization is suppose to describe an event that occurs with-in the meta and changes it in such a way that we can only conclude that the meta is exhausting its focus on a single feature, and therefore limiting the meta in some unhealthy way. Many have argued that Aegislash is this exhausting feature. We can make a distinction between centralization and overcentralization here. Centralization is simply an occurrence in a meta that takes up some portion of the focus of the meta and limits some other portion. We then can infer from this that centralization is a natural tendency of a metagame and it will occur if we like it or not. The question then is, what is a healthy centralization? I think I have a natural analysis here. A healthy centralization is a centralization that allows more than it limits. My argument then is that Aegislash is indeed an agent of centralization, but of healthy centralization. Aegislash shifts the metagame's natural tendency toward hyper offensive and defensive tactics to prediction and balance tactics as equally relevant win conditions. This is done without completely nerfing offensive and defensive teams, which fills the requirement for a more diverse meta.

I have already addressed the truth that Aegislash is a balancing agent that softly checks hyper offensive and hyper defensive cores. So, it seems that it would do little to reiterate it in this section. Though, it is important to note the intuitive truth that a team that is balanced can easily handle Aegislash. For instance, a team that has great coverage, great defensive synergy, can defend on both the special and physical side, both can attack on the special and physical side, and has found room for utility is unlikely to have real problems walling, crippling, and/or eliminating Aegislash. It is for this reason that Aegislash centralizes away from the more radical tactics towards balance.

I have also already shown that the 50/50 “coin flip” that Aegislash forces is no different than the natural mechanics of the game, an element that a good player can in part avoid or use to his/her advantage, and that the only relevant difference is that Aegislash adds a more predictable element. All situations of chance are also opportunities for prediction. This is a fact. I have said it before and I will say it again, there is a plethora of information in team preview, in observing the other players play style, taking note of Aegislash's item and moves knowing it can have at most three attacking moves. It is for these reasons that prediction is always a viable option. Defensive and Offensive teams limit the need for said immediate prediction. A boost on the right turn can lead to a complete sweep or a crippling of the opposing team. Walls can simply pivot to another wall and either set up or status the switch in. Such tactics naturally centralize away from the immediate need for prediction and are naturally alluring to a player for their sheer power. A meta dominated by either of these play styles cannot be defined as a healthy meta.

People tend to cite the fact that Aegislash is found on so many teams as a way to conclude over centralization. This only means that there is centralization. There is equal if not more centralization of things such as Rotom-W, Scizor, Latios, Mamoswine etc for completely relevant reason other than being over powered. Why then is Aegislash being used so much? There are many possible reasons. It is possible that Aegislash is still being explored. Aegislash has a complex build and therefore complex EV distributions available to it. We as players may lack balance in our teams and therefore many teams place Aegislash to capitalize on this weakness. Still, the most likely reason is that Aegislash is simply a good pokemon and therefore over used. It is important to note that none of these reasons are mutually exclusive. Any combination of these reasons can be true.

In Conclusion


It has been pointed out that this suspect test really comes down to what kind of meta we as a

community prefer. As I have argued, Aegislash is an agent of balance that centralizes the meta around prediction and balanced tactics and away from the offensive and defensive tactics, without completely eliminating their effectiveness. This limits the viability of certain teams and brings up the viability of others to the degree that it allows a more diverse meta. If the only condition for banning pokemon is that it has a large effect on the meta game than Aegislash should be banned. Indeed Aegislash does have a huge effect on the metagame. If our community decides that an offensive meta and perhaps in the future a defensive dominated meta is what we prefer then, again, Aegislash had it coming. But, if our community favors balanced tactics and a focus on prediction as our conceptual healthy metagame, as I do, then it is essential that Aegislash not be banned. To ban Aegislash is tantamount to banning balance itself, it is just that simple.


Don't Ban

 

[Karxrida]

To add to this, we're not talking about the same situation as with MegaKhan where you basically had to donate a pokemon to the opponent first in order to switch in a check because it was both insanely strong, fast, could boost, and had a strong priority move (plus that ability which amounted to a free choice band) and then the opponent would simply switch MegaKhan out. Aegis can't really OHKO stuff that isn't weak to its moves (at least, without a WP boost), the name of its game is 2HKOs. So given its low speed lots of stuff can come in, take a SB, and then cripple it next turn before going down. At that point almost anything can come in and finish the job. So unlike MegaKanga, we're talking about situations where you can severely cripple Aegis, although it may cost you a pokemon (or it may not with some prediction), and then you can clean up later, so what you're really doing is trading 1.25 of your pokemon (because Aegis can sneak before dying), for 1 of your opponent's pokemon. Not really that bad of a deal.

As for checks to Aegislash, all of the pokemon LT. SURGE111 mentioned actually are pretty good checks. YZard would be a counter were it not for Stealth Rocks, as it tanks a shadow ball like a champ (it's not even always a 2HKO if Aegis doesn't run Life Orb), and then threatens to OHKO through Shield Forme or can roost off damage. Excadrill may not really be that great of a check, as it goes down to shadow ball + shadow sneak, but if it comes in on Iron Head or Shadow Sneak it can severely cripple with earthquake. LO Bisharp comes in on anything except Sacred Sword and OHKOs 68.8% of the time with Knock Off. Amoonguss is actually a soft counter because it tanks anything except Iron Head from max attack Aegis and OHKOs back with Foul Play (he outslows Aegis), and recovers with Regenerator and/or Synthesis (or sleeps something). Landorus tanks a shadow ball+shadow sneak and OHKOs with EP. Another he didn't mention is specially defensive Hippo. Yes, Air Balloon sucks for it, but it can handle Aegis holding any other item, and it is good for much more than just Aegis. And of course there is Garchomp, who is in a similar boat to Excadrill except he doesn't go down to SB+SS. With LO he can also OHKO through shield forme without Adamant, though it's only 50% of the time.

These pokemon aren't exactly Numel, they're top threats in the OU meta. (well, maybe not really Amoonguss, but he's not bad either.) People will be bringing them whether Aegis is in the meta or not. With the power creep that's been happening every generation, you just can't really demand a perfect counter anymore to every possible set of a strong pokemon, or one that works without requiring prediction. Aegislash is powerful, and a top tier threat, but its checks (and soft counters) seem like they're being underestimated or thrown aside simply because they're not cold stops like, say, Skarmory is to Cokeldurr.

We're not talking about situations where you have to run "Sableye or Rocky Helmet Ferro." There are a number of really viable options here that can fit on a multitude of teams.

There's also the fact that several checks synergize well with each other and are some of the best Pokemon in the meta, so having 2-3 of them on a team isn't unrealistic since you're going to have them anyway without even thinking about it.

 

[RoyalDispenser]

There's also the fact that several checks synergize well with each other and are some of the best Pokemon in the meta, so having 2-3 of them on a team isn't unrealistic since you're going to have them anyway without even thinking about it.

This. The biggest reason why I don't think aegislash is broken. Unlike BP and such, the pokemon which check and counter aegislash can easily fit on any team and are viable in the OU tier while not having to run gimmicky sets to do so either. That is one reason why we ban pokemon.. it's hard to counter and it's checks are unviable in it's tier or need to waste a moveslot which is useless outside of what it's used for. While aegislash is definitly hard to counter.. it's checks are far from useless.

 

[Zebstrika]

On being Overpowered and Unbalanced

A pokemon cannot be considered overpowered if it makes sense to think that said pokemon was designed by a rational being with the intention of balance in mind.

Sorry if I'm misunderstanding this, but you seem to be talking about whether a pokemon was intended to be broken. In other words, whether the developers thought the theorymons they had in mind while designing it were broken.

First, Smogon doesn't care about how broken a pokemon is supposed to be, not since we banned our first non-legendary for being overpowered, D/P Garchomp, or we unbanned Kyurem-B, a 700 BST box legendary.

You seem to go on about whether a pokemon looks broken, when in reality, it's not looks that counts, it's actual performance. We know looks can be ridiculously off; look at the first post of the Viable Mega thread or any post written way back at the release of XY, and I'm sure we all had some similar flawed thoughts about some of the new things when they came out, that turned out laughably wrong.

 

[LT. SURGE111]

This. The biggest reason why I don't think aegislash is broken. Unlike BP and such, the pokemon which check and counter aegislash can easily fit on any team and are viable in the OU tier while not having to run gimmicky sets to do so either. That is one reason why we ban pokemon.. it's hard to counter and it's checks are unviable in it's tier or need to waste a moveslot which is useless outside of what it's used for. While aegislash is definitly hard to counter.. it's checks are far from useless.

This is the point I was trying to make earlier.
I feel like the Zards, Mandibuzz, Rotom-w, Mawile, Lando, Bisharp, etc. can all be seen fairly commonly around the meta and all provide a usefulness to the team. Also, The campaign for a hard counter to Aegislash 1v1 is somewhat unfair when matches are played with teams of 6.

 

[Immortal]

Unfortunately though, Aegi can destroy my whole team with relative ease, even in the hands of an incompetent player.


~Titania

Sorry but if this is the case then you are probably a terrible team builder, Aegislash is damn good but it is pretty easy to check, its weak to fire dark ground and ghost, four of the best attacking types in the game right now. Its also slow. Aegislash is mostly a pivot and yeah it's a good pokemon but it typically isnt something that single-handedly destroys teams. This is just another case of people thinking that banning aegislash will make their nonviable favorite pokemon more usable in ou.

 

[Zebstrika]

I'm not denying that Aegislash has a lot of checks, but I think the bigger problem is Aegislash's lack of good switch-ins, especially on offensive teams. You might dismiss this thinking that offensive teams don't need switch-ins to your typical wall breaker, but there's a big difference. The thing that stops the concept of a wallbreaker from being broken is they are limited by their free turns and free switchins. Mega Gardevoir, for example, can be 2HKO by any stab neutral physical attack, from Gliscor's Earthquake to Skarmory's Brave Bird. So if you're super weak to Mega Gardevoir, you can make it tough for her to get the turns she needs to wreck things by constantly attacking.

Between Aegislash's 60/150/150 defenses switching in (and the ability to invest in them when it can dump speed), its 12 resistances/immunities thanks to its typing, and King's Shield vs contact attackers, Aegislash gets a lot more switch ins and free turns vs offensive teams, compared to most wall breakers.

That's why those Megas like Gardevoir and Medicham are rarely seem on offensive teams. Not because they're wall breakers walled by a common pokemon, after all, Charizard Y has common switchins in the Lati twins (who actually combine for as much usage as Aegislash in June's 1825 stats). It's that those Megas can't afford to give Aegislash free switch-ins and free turns, because then the team will have to pick some unfortunate pokemon to eat stab or super effective attacks off 150/150 offenses.

 

[Ropeburn]

I always thought pokemon that took no skill belonged in Ubers, and I still feel that way. With great typing, perfect sets to run, Kings Shield, who wouldn't want to spam one in there party when it can bring so many wins with relative ease? If I didn't have the weird pride that I do, Im sure I would be running one as well.

If you're seriously having that much trouble with Aegislash, then it's a matter of your skill, not the pokemon. The problem of Aegislash is in that it's difficult to OHKO, without taking a huge chunk from STAB moves off either spectrum. Also, no, OU has been filled with shitty, no skill pokemon since the beginning of the game back in RBY. Just because it's easy to send out Scarf Garchomp and just spam Outrage doesn't mean it's Uber. Just because you feel something doesn't mean it's right.

Aegislash has PLENTY of checks in OU that fit on all playstyles, and frankly I'd like to see what teams you're running, because I think you are WILDLY over-exaggerating about how bad Aegislash is.

 

[Karxrida]

As I've mentioned a couple times (I forget that im probably one of the few who read every single post in this forum and the only ones that people notice are the ones they want to cause conflict with or try to show act better than others. Pesky human psychology, no?) I run very unconventional pokemon in OU. Generally, no more than two or three of my pokemon are actually in OU, because its boring. So yeah, if I run NU pokemon against Aegislash, what do you expect will happen?

So if you want to target my skill as the problem go for it. But there are plenty of other people here that I am sure run teams of six OU pokemon and are more skilled than me AND still think OU would be far better off without Aegislash. Disparage my "bad skill" all you want, but it has nothing to do with Aeglislash running OU into the ground.

Please explain exactly how Aegislash is running OU into the ground, because last I checked it wasn't overcentralizing due to the sheer amount of viable checks it has (10+) and the fact no one playstyle is becoming dominant on the ladder like with Deo-D and Hyper Offense.

EDIT: Things that check the most common Aegislash (KS + 3 Attacks or SubToxic, Head Smash is stupid as fuck so don't bring it up), all from the OU Viability Ranking Thread
Landorus-I (OHKOs through Shield Form)
Thundurus-I (Defiant Variants)
Bisharp (can OHKO through Shield Form, counters SubToxic variants)
Clefable (can set up CM on those without Iron Head)
Excadrill (Life Orb OHKOs through Shield Form)
Garchomp (Earthquake always 2HKOs, LO Earthquake has a 56.3% chance to OHKO Shield Form)
Greninja (LO Hydro Pump can 2HKO before Shadow Ball can)
Keldeo (Specs Hydro Pump can 2HKO before Shadow Ball can, Scald burns cripple)
Charizard Y (counter as long as SR is gone, again because Head Smash is stupid)
Heatran (Lava Plume forces out due to possible burn, Roar deals with SubToxic)
Hippowdon (Whirlwind deals with SubToxic and can tank the hits from 3 Attacks)
Lando-T (Earthquake 2HKOs before Shadow Ball, Intimidate makes coverage less powerful)
Mandibuzz (counters anything but SubToxic, which it can still force out with Taunt)
Diggersby (Earthquake can OHKO through Shield form, guaranteed with Life Orb)
Gliscor (DGAF about SubToxic, can stall out with Roost, and Earthquake has a chance to 2HKO Shield Form even uninvested)
Mamoswine (Jolly Life Orb can OHKO Shield Form, while Adamant Life Orb WILL)
Amoonguss (counter, DGAF about anything and Foul Plays back)
Entei (Sacred Fire 2HKOs Shield Form before Shadow Ball 2HKOs, will OHKO with a Band)

Every one of those mons other than Amoonguss and Entei are A Rank too, so don't give me any overcentralization BS when they're all clearly viable.

 

[Kairyu_Gen1]

As I've mentioned a couple times (I forget that im probably one of the few who read every single post in this forum and the only ones that people notice are the ones they want to cause conflict with or try to show act better than others. Pesky human psychology, no?) I run very unconventional pokemon in OU. Generally, no more than two or three of my pokemon are actually in OU, because its boring. So yeah, if I run NU pokemon against Aegislash, what do you expect will happen?

So if you want to target my skill as the problem go for it. But there are plenty of other people here that I am sure run teams of six OU pokemon and are more skilled than me AND still think OU would be far better off without Aegislash. Disparage my "bad skill" all you want, but it has nothing to do with Aeglislash running OU into the ground.

Using under appreciated pokemon is fine. I personally get kick out of using pokes like Darmanitan, Chandelure and Lucario, but using a team that is inherently inferior or weak to a major meta game threat is not grounds to complain about that major threat.

And about those "other people," their whole argument is that Aegislash has crossed a line of overcentralization (anyone who claims Aegislash is over powered needs to check themselves) that is completely subjective. We say it hasn't, they say it has. As long as both sides explain their reasoning and let people make up their minds on their own, this is fine, but when people start using logical fallacies and faulty evidence, then we have a problem.

Speaking of fallacies, that thing you did using other people to support your argument, it's called bandwagon, and it's not a good pro-ban argument.

 

[Ropeburn]

As I've mentioned a couple times (I forget that im probably one of the few who read every single post in this forum and the only ones that people notice are the ones they want to cause conflict with or try to show act better than others. Pesky human psychology, no?) I run very unconventional pokemon in OU. Generally, no more than two or three of my pokemon are actually in OU, because its boring. So yeah, if I run NU pokemon against Aegislash, what do you expect will happen?

So if you want to target my skill as the problem go for it. But there are plenty of other people here that I am sure run teams of six OU pokemon and are more skilled than me AND still think OU would be far better off without Aegislash. Disparage my "bad skill" all you want, but it has nothing to do with Aeglislash running OU into the ground.

I'd appreciate if you kept the backhanded comments to yourself. You're not special for following a thread on the internet. I didn't mean the comment about your skill as a insult. There's nothing wrong with being new and learning the game. However, you can't seriously expect us to tailor the OU metagame because you want to use NU pokemon. Go play fucking NU and leave our tier alone. If OU's so boring, don't play it. That's the wonderful thing about tiers, if you don't like one, you have a handful more to choose from. Stop blaming Aegislash because you're running crappy pokemon. I'm still waiting to see what kind of team you're running that you are getting 6-0'd by Aegislash.

(By the way, please stop double posting and triple posting. You're crowding up the thread. If you have anything else to say, and no one's said anything yet, just edit your previous post.)

 

[TheWyvernKing]

Before beginning, I would like to introduce myself. I have been a member of the community through generation 5 and 6. I generally use the showdown simulator to build teams that are compatible with the showdown ladder and wifi competitive play. It has worked out pretty well. Last Season, or season 4 I was ranked 8th for the US in single battles. The team that I used is also showdown compatible. It contains no banned pokemon or tactics. I have had a lot of experience with the previous suspects, as they completely litter wifi teams.

On the 50/50 Arguement:

First of all, 50/50's are a consequence of the natural mechanics of the game. For example, if my opponent has Zapdose on the field and his only other pokemon is Infernape, and my only pokemon is Mamoswine, then I am instantly in a prediction lacuna. If I Icicle Crash hoping to do massive damage to his electric bird, then I take the risk that my opponent will possibly switch to Infernape which will out-speed and KO the following turn. If I predict a switch and earthquake to KO the opposing fire monkey, then I risk Zapdose staying on the field and wasting a turn completely. Further, my opponent is in a 50/50 scenario. Does s/he Heatwave with Zapdose and do massive damage to my Mamoswine, or predict a IC and switch to Infernape? Here, we can see that the natural mechanics of the game generate 50/50 scenarios. Further, we can see that 50/50's are, despite what some pro-ban advocates may claim, completely competitive and essential to the game. In conclusion, the 50/50 pro-ban argument fails unless there is a relevant distinction between the Aegislash 50/50 scenarios and those that naturally manifest through the mechanics of the game itself.

The burden to make a distinction falls on the pro-ban community. Some have argued that, though 50/50's are natural occurrences of the game, Aegislash generates an excessive amount of 50/50's and is therefore damaging to the meta as a whole and relevantly different than natural 50/50's. I remain unconvinced, and see it unlikely that this argument could ever have any justification much less complete certainly. I gave one example of a natural 50/50, and such a 50/50 occurs often as Mamoswine users know. This is due to its typing which allows it incredible offensive coverage but weaknesses to common attacks. Further, I can construct indefinitely many examples with each individual Pokemon. So, unless the pro-ban community can demonstrate these invisible values, and further demonstrate that Aegislash creates a large majority of these scenarios, and even further give an argument on how this is actually negative to the metagame, Aegislash generating 50/50's is an irrelevant fact and to make said fact into a statement is as useful and interesting as pointing out that Aegislash is a sword.

As I have previously stated, I only see one distinction to made between Aegislash and the natural 50/50's: Natural 50/50's are unexpected and difficult to account for mentally, while a 50/50 generated by Aegislash, as we can see by this discussion, is expected and therefore more predictable.

On being Overpowered and Unbalanced:

Many posts seem to focus on Aegislash being overpowered and/or an unbalanced force in the metagame. These arguments tend to overlap and muddle together. I am going to try to keep them separate because though they are related they are not synonymous and should be addressed separately.

A pokemon cannot be considered overpowered if it makes sense to think that said pokemon was designed by a rational being with the intention of balance in mind. For instance, any of us would be hard pressed to make a case that Mega Khan was designed simultaneously by both a rational being and a being that favors balance. It just seems very unlikely. My justification for this definition is very simple. It is neutral to a pokemon's move pool, stats, typing, ability and effect on the metagame, yet they are relevant features that can be used to categorize a pokemon as overpowered. It is a holistic approach to categorization, and it seems very similar to the vague way we actually do categorize. For example, it is hard to make a case that Mega Gengar is overpowered simply by looking at its stats, move pool, and typing but if we take into account shadow-tag then it instantly becomes much more justifiable to think that Mega Gengar is overpowered. In the same sense one might think Mega Aerodactyle is overpowered based solely on its typing, stats, and ability but once one takes a look at its limited move pool, it becomes apparent that there is no case to categorize it as OP. Being overpowered and/or balanced within a meta-game is a vague notion that though can be categorized within a vacuum cannot always be so categorized. As many have suggested, categorization as overpowered or balanced has to be decided holistically, which my definition allows.

This leaves us with the question “If any of us were both rational and promoted the concept of balance, would we introduce Aegislash?” I think we would. Aegislash has an incredible and unique typing, has a versatile move pool, has incredible stats depending on the stance, a unique ability, and an understandably substantial effect on the metagame, but there is a caveat to each. Each caveat seems to imply design by a rational being that favors balance. Aegislash's typing is indeed both an exceptionally good offensive and defensive typing making it an ideal switch into banded and scarfed fighting attacks and many more offensive threats in general. Further, Shadow ball has great neutral coverage in a similar way as Close Combat. In addition, Aegislash has god sent coverage with sacred sword allowing it to run an effective wall breaking set. We can conclude from this that Aegislash both softly checks hyper offensive and hyper defensive teams, based on typing and offensive presence alone. This is further justified by the suspect ladder that has become more offensive based in the absence of Aegislash. This fact is due to the meta itself, not solely Aegislash. It is just true that XY brought us many new exceptionally powerful attackers, but walls that did not surpass their predecessors (i.e. Skarmory, Blissey). If the situation had been reversed than it is likely that the absence of Aegislash would have led to a more defensive metagame. In addition, Aegislash's typing gives it weaknesses to the omnipresent fire and ground and a weakness to dark which because of knock-off and pursuit already serve the utility of trapping and crippling a switch. Further, Aegislash is susceptible to taunt, statuses other than poison, leech seed, encore, etc which is found on more eloquent defensive teams. I hope I am not getting ahead of myself, but the fact that Aegislash's typing gives it the necessary offensive and defensive capabilities to both softly check offensive and defensive threats, in addition to the fact that it is weak to common offensive attacks and susceptible to common stall tactics, seems to imply that Aegislash is most definitely balanced, and therefore in no meaningful sense overpowered.

Aegislash has a very interesting stat distribution in addition to its equally interesting ability. 140/140 defenses and 140/140 offenses is nothing to turn your head at, especially when you take into account a movepool that, though isn't extensive, completely suits it. Still, it is only a fact that to have either of these stats the user must sacrifice one for the other and burn a turn as a cost for the exchange. I do not think I have to explore any further how that can be justified as an obvious rational balancing caveat on these seemingly unjustifiable states. There is no way Aegislash can do anything, other than switching in, without taking some substantial risk to itself.

To clarify the point I am trying to make, I would will introduce a thought experiment. Imagine for a moment that you were attempting to make a completely balanced pokemon. Would you give it 75/69/72/114/100/104 stats, a typing with a reasonable offensive and defensive presence like fire/psychic, a movepool with support moves and attacks, and an interesting but sub par ability? No, you would not if you were attempting to balance the game. A pokemon with the above description has little to no effect on the meta-game. In fact, the above description is of Delphox. And Delophox sucks. The reason you wouldn't is because the metagame is completely littered with powerful walls and attackers that can easily stall or sweep entire teams. To make any substantial “balancing act” of the metagame one would have to introduce something other than another hyper offensive, hyper defensive, or traditionally balanced pokemon. One would have to introduce a pokemon that had some of the qualities of each put together in such a way that it could be pit against the most powerful attackers and walls in the meta. You would have designed Aegislash.

The conclusion that Aegislash is a balancing agent has a natural explanation of why one may think that Aegislash is overpowered. Aegislash is such a radical form of balancing in the likes of which none of us have ever been acquainted with before. Still, as we can see from the above thought experiment of attempting to create a substantial balancing force in the current metagame, it seems that it was the only right one.

On Centralization:

Many have invoked the concept of centralization and over centralization of the metagame to justify an Aegislash ban. Overcentralization is suppose to describe an event that occurs with-in the meta and changes it in such a way that we can only conclude that the meta is exhausting its focus on a single feature, and therefore limiting the meta in some unhealthy way. Many have argued that Aegislash is this exhausting feature. We can make a distinction between centralization and overcentralization here. Centralization is simply an occurrence in a meta that takes up some portion of the focus of the meta and limits some other portion. We then can infer from this that centralization is a natural tendency of a metagame and it will occur if we like it or not. The question then is, what is a healthy centralization? I think I have a natural analysis here. A healthy centralization is a centralization that allows more than it limits. My argument then is that Aegislash is indeed an agent of centralization, but of healthy centralization. Aegislash shifts the metagame's natural tendency toward hyper offensive and defensive tactics to prediction and balance tactics as equally relevant win conditions. This is done without completely nerfing offensive and defensive teams, which fills the requirement for a more diverse meta.

I have already addressed the truth that Aegislash is a balancing agent that softly checks hyper offensive and hyper defensive cores. So, it seems that it would do little to reiterate it in this section. Though, it is important to note the intuitive truth that a team that is balanced can easily handle Aegislash. For instance, a team that has great coverage, great defensive synergy, can defend on both the special and physical side, both can attack on the special and physical side, and has found room for utility is unlikely to have real problems walling, crippling, and/or eliminating Aegislash. It is for this reason that Aegislash centralizes away from the more radical tactics towards balance.

I have also already shown that the 50/50 “coin flip” that Aegislash forces is no different than the natural mechanics of the game, an element that a good player can in part avoid or use to his/her advantage, and that the only relevant difference is that Aegislash adds a more predictable element. All situations of chance are also opportunities for prediction. This is a fact. I have said it before and I will say it again, there is a plethora of information in team preview, in observing the other players play style, taking note of Aegislash's item and moves knowing it can have at most three attacking moves. It is for these reasons that prediction is always a viable option. Defensive and Offensive teams limit the need for said immediate prediction. A boost on the right turn can lead to a complete sweep or a crippling of the opposing team. Walls can simply pivot to another wall and either set up or status the switch in. Such tactics naturally centralize away from the immediate need for prediction and are naturally alluring to a player for their sheer power. A meta dominated by either of these play styles cannot be defined as a healthy meta.

People tend to cite the fact that Aegislash is found on so many teams as a way to conclude over centralization. This only means that there is centralization. There is equal if not more centralization of things such as Rotom-W, Scizor, Latios, Mamoswine etc for completely relevant reason other than being over powered. Why then is Aegislash being used so much? There are many possible reasons. It is possible that Aegislash is still being explored. Aegislash has a complex build and therefore complex EV distributions available to it. We as players may lack balance in our teams and therefore many teams place Aegislash to capitalize on this weakness. Still, the most likely reason is that Aegislash is simply a good pokemon and therefore over used. It is important to note that none of these reasons are mutually exclusive. Any combination of these reasons can be true.

In Conclusion


It has been pointed out that this suspect test really comes down to what kind of meta we as a

community prefer. As I have argued, Aegislash is an agent of balance that centralizes the meta around prediction and balanced tactics and away from the offensive and defensive tactics, without completely eliminating their effectiveness. This limits the viability of certain teams and brings up the viability of others to the degree that it allows a more diverse meta. If the only condition for banning pokemon is that it has a large effect on the meta game than Aegislash should be banned. Indeed Aegislash does have a huge effect on the metagame. If our community decides that an offensive meta and perhaps in the future a defensive dominated meta is what we prefer then, again, Aegislash had it coming. But, if our community favors balanced tactics and a focus on prediction as our conceptual healthy metagame, as I do, then it is essential that Aegislash not be banned. To ban Aegislash is tantamount to banning balance itself, it is just that simple.


Don't Ban

I've read your post and I have many things to disagree with. First off in your overcentralizing post you pretty much said it was being used so much for being good. After 9 months of people getting rid of what doesn't work against it like lucario, and starmie which has always been ou since gen 1 and one of the best spinners to move down. Not only this but due to it we see the same pokes everywhere. Excadrill is the only pokemon that can deal with it and spin so it's the only surviving spinner for example. Being S-class for 9 months and always top usage clearly shows it has uber strength and little to no counters. I admit a good pokemon has the right to be over used, after all that's what ou stands for but when you see aegislash on every other team along with the same exact pokes it's clearly not a good thing and is nothing but unhealthy for the metagame. The amount of diversity in the game alone shows how much aegislash was used. Last gen for example I would be in the 1700's and see sun teams, rain, hail along with many uu pokes, in fact i've seen many nu pokes sweep against legit players. This gen we see the same 6 pokes every other game. Is that what we want of the metagame? A tier were aegislash IS THE TIER? If you don't call that unhealthy I'm not sure what is.

On your post of Aegislash being overpower I have a few comments. First off all I agreed that aegislash should've been banned but I must say it doesnt exactly come to my mind as broken or overpowered. It's amazing offenses/defenses gives it a variety of sets which could easily stall out an entire team or sweep in an instant. And yet, Aegislash has always been 1 step away from the uber mark because of it's speed stat. To be totally honest I think it would've been banned ages ago if it had a good speed stat since it has offenses on par with many ubers including dialga in terms of special attack. The problem with being extremely balanced as you said, with such an ability and move to perfect this balance ironically makes it overpowered if you ask me. The fact it has too many sets to count easily is a problem for many people as 1 free turn is the same as gg in many cases. I'll admit that smogon has made many ridiculous bans, in fact my prime tier monotype is absolutely ignored by smogon. In this tier creativity makes pokemon like quick attack scizor useful and I was in the top 40's on the ladder when talon was around when using bug, every fight was fire/flying to and talon wasn't anywhere close to op but it got banned without a proper suspect test if you ask me. However back on topic I think talon is a totally different story. It's strength isn't the fact it has uber powers or it's amazing typing, it's the fact that it's too versatile if you ask me. Pokemon such as infernape could run bands, scarfs, mixed, nasty plot, and so on yet it pales in comparison to aegislash which has no legitimate counter and given that switch to a physical wall expecting a swords dance set they could easily use shadow ball and take it from there. Overall aegislash isn't exactly broken but it's clearly unhealthy for the metagame since it's the center of the metagame itself and think about it? Whats wrong with using it? It has no counter, can fit potentially any role and can sweep in 2 seconds flat. Overall it's too versatile if you ask me.

Onto your last argument there were a few things I noticed. First off this is the aegislash argument I consider the weakest but i can show you how you can be wrong. In a normal game most pokemon are known for doing something and you have to predict around your oponents plays, like what you listed earlier. Overall aegislash's 50/50's are like any other if you ask me but there are a few things I must point out. Lets say aegislash is sent in on a conkeldurr with drain punch/knock off/ice punch/mach punch at 60% health, your other 2 pokes are a sp defensive sylveon, a mandibuzz, and physical defensive skarm health. If you use knock off and he king's shields your a total set up fodder, as such you switch to mandibuzz and he swords dances, the next turn your mandibuzz is at 70% health however he outspeeds and iron heads (speedy sd). As such you have 2 pokemon that can't take a hit and a skarm that will take massive damage. In this situation the aegislash didn't even need king's shield to make the oponent lose the 50/50. I'll admit it's any ordinary 50/50 but it does nothing but prove that aegislash is dominating the metagame where the tales and replays of aegislash sweeps are everywhere. This pokemon can pretty much give itself a free turn if predicted properly and freely set up and easily open up ways to sweep.

Overall Aegislash may not be broken but it's clearly unhealthy for the metagame, cutting of diversity and sweeping in a moments pas. It's versatility alone makes people lose 50/50's and it can easily open up free turns to sweep with king's shield. It's true it may come down to a mispredict many times but mispredicts are what cost games. Overall aegislash has ruled this age for too long.

Ban

 

[Shirou Saberfox]

Please explain exactly how Aegislash is running OU into the ground, because last I checked it wasn't overcentralizing due to the sheer amount of viable checks it has (10+) and the fact no one playstyle is becoming dominant on the ladder like with Deo-D and Hyper Offense.

Whew, so many comments. First, me saying Aegislash is running OU into the ground is my opinion. I didn't state it as fact. You can go find my first post if you want to read my thoughts on Aegi. I don't really feel like re-typing any of it. And sure, 10+ checks in a game that has 700+ pokemon sound fine to me. But I thought the big issue that was being raised was that it had no hard counters? There really isn't even anything that can switch into it from what I've gathered. Just because I would like to see it banned, doesn't mean I can't or wont play around it.

Using under appreciated pokemon is fine. I personally get kick out of using pokes like Darmanitan, Chandelure and Lucario, but using a team that is inherently inferior or weak to a major meta game threat is not grounds to complain about that major threat.

And about those "other people," their whole argument is that Aegislash has crossed a line of overcentralization (anyone who claims Aegislash is over powered needs to check themselves) that is completely subjective. We say it hasn't, they say it has. As long as both sides explain their reasoning and let people make up their minds on their own, this is fine, but when people start using logical fallacies and faulty evidence, then we have a problem.

Speaking of fallacies, that thing you did using other people to support your argument, it's called bandwagon, and it's not a good pro-ban argument.

Okay, so we agree that using under appreciated pokemon is fine. You get points in my book for that. And I guess I should clarify some things.

First, my argument about my own teams have nothing to do with my original thoughts and arguments about Aegislash. They just happened to be brought up when I noticed people trying to target my skill level as a player, and I just brought in my pokemon usage in defense of that. My adorable Clefable has brought down plenty of Aegislash, despite the disadvantage it can be at.

Also, I've kinda been into debate a bit myself in my life. I'm pretty sure that first of all, I was just pointing to other peoples arguments to support my own viewpoint and not saying "well other people think my way, so its the right way". The real example of a bandwagon fallacy would be "Well everyone else is going to vote to ban Aegislash, so everyone else might as well do it too, even if they disagree with doing it".

I'd appreciate if you kept the backhanded comments to yourself. You're not special for following a thread on the internet. I didn't mean the comment about your skill as a insult. There's nothing wrong with being new and learning the game. However, you can't seriously expect us to tailor the OU metagame because you want to use NU pokemon. Go play fucking NU and leave our tier alone. If OU's so boring, don't play it. That's the wonderful thing about tiers, if you don't like one, you have a handful more to choose from. Stop blaming Aegislash because you're running crappy pokemon. I'm still waiting to see what kind of team you're running that you are getting 6-0'd by Aegislash.

(By the way, please stop double posting and triple posting. You're crowding up the thread. If you have anything else to say, and no one's said anything yet, just edit your previous post.)

I'm not new, nor am I "learning the game". I've been playing for quite a while, as I have said in a previous post.

I'm also not trying to get people to tailor anything to my play style. If NU pokemon werent NU, then what would be the fun of running them in a higher tier? My argument was never about seeing NU pokemon rise to the ranks of OU. What I think will happen if Aegi is gone, is a slightly more diverse OU. And there is nothing wrong with that.

Go find my original post if you care about how I feel about Aegislash, instead of picking up some ladder post that was in response to someone elses post or point. Does anyone pay attention to the whole thing, or does everyone just wanna pick and choose specific parts?

 

[Karxrida]

Whew, so many comments. First, me saying Aegislash is running OU into the ground is my opinion. I didn't state it as fact. You can go find my first post if you want to read my thoughts on Aegi. I don't really feel like re-typing any of it. And sure, 10+ checks in a game that has 700+ pokemon sound fine to me. But I thought the big issue that was being raised was that it had no hard counters? There really isn't even anything that can switch into it from what I've gathered. Just because I would like to see it banned, doesn't mean I can't or wont play around it.




Okay, so we agree that using under appreciated pokemon is fine. You get points in my book for that. And I guess I should clarify some things.

First, my argument about my own teams have nothing to do with my original thoughts and arguments about Aegislash. They just happened to be brought up when I noticed people trying to target my skill level as a player, and I just brought in my pokemon usage in defense of that. My adorable Clefable has brought down plenty of Aegislash, despite the disadvantage it can be at.

Also, I've kinda been into debate a bit myself in my life. I'm pretty sure that first of all, I was just pointing to other peoples arguments to support my own viewpoint and not saying "well other people think my way, so its the right way". The real example of a bandwagon fallacy would be "Well everyone else is going to vote to ban Aegislash, so everyone else might as well do it too, even if they disagree with doing it".





Ouch. Well okay, first of all, it sounded like an insult. Either be more careful with your words, or expect some sort of backlash.

I'm not new, nor am I "learning the game". I've been playing for quite a while, as I have said in a previous post.

I'm also not trying to get people to tailor anything to my play style. If NU pokemon werent NU, then what would be the fun of running them in a higher tier? My argument was never about seeing NU pokemon rise to the ranks of OU. What I think will happen if Aegi is gone, is a slightly more diverse OU. And there is nothing wrong with that.

Go find my original post if you care about how I feel about Aegislash, instead of picking up some ladder post that was in response to someone elses post or point. Does anyone pay attention to the whole thing, or does everyone just wanna pick and choose specific parts?


Whoo, I'm loving being apart of this community already~

I'm only going to comment on the first part since it was meant for me.

Counterability does not really matter if the Mon in question has a reasonable number of checks. Last Gen Hydreigon was pretty much impossible to switch into (and thus counter) and even had U-turn to throw prediction out the window for the user yet was never banned (don't know if it was ever suspected because it was before my time here). There's also the fact that hard countering is difficult, if not impossible, to do for many top tier threats due to their movepools over. You could lose your Ferrothorn or Skarmory to a Garchomp's Fire Blast, your Bisharp to Latios' HP Fighting, or hell even get hit by a Gengar's Knock Off as you switch in your wall.

Aegislash has a ton if checks, which I edited a list of into my post if you care to look.

 

[RoyalDispenser]

Please explain exactly how Aegislash is running OU into the ground, because last I checked it wasn't overcentralizing due to the sheer amount of viable checks it has (10+) and the fact no one playstyle is becoming dominant on the ladder like with Deo-D and Hyper Offense.

EDIT: Things that check the most common Aegislash (KS + 3 Attacks or SubToxic, Head Smash is stupid as fuck so don't bring it up), all from the OU Viability Ranking Thread
Landorus-I (OHKOs through Shield Form)
Thundurus-I (Defiant Variants)
Bisharp (can OHKO through Shield Form, counters SubToxic variants)
Clefable (can set up CM on those without Iron Head)
Excadrill (Life Orb OHKOs through Shield Form)
Garchomp (Earthquake always 2HKOs, LO Earthquake has a 56.3% chance to OHKO Shield Form)
Greninja (LO Hydro Pump can 2HKO before Shadow Ball can)
Keldeo (Specs Hydro Pump can 2HKO before Shadow Ball can, Scald burns cripple)
Charizard Y (counter as long as SR is gone, again because Head Smash is stupid)
Heatran (Lava Plume forces out due to possible burn, Roar deals with SubToxic)
Hippowdon (Whirlwind deals with SubToxic and can tank the hits from 3 Attacks)
Lando-T (Earthquake 2HKOs before Shadow Ball, Intimidate makes coverage less powerful)
Mandibuzz (counters anything but SubToxic, which it can still force out with Taunt)
Diggersby (Earthquake can OHKO through Shield form, guaranteed with Life Orb)
Gliscor (DGAF about SubToxic, can stall out with Roost, and Earthquake has a chance to 2HKO Shield Form even uninvested)
Mamoswine (Jolly Life Orb can OHKO Shield Form, while Adamant Life Orb WILL)
Amoonguss (counter, DGAF about anything and Foul Plays back)
Entei (Sacred Fire 2HKOs Shield Form before Shadow Ball 2HKOs, will OHKO with a Band)

Every one of those mons other than Amoonguss and Entei are A Rank too, so don't give me any overcentralization BS when they're all clearly viable.

Conk also is a good check. Bulky, can utilize assault vest for mixed sets, and guts for sub-toxic.. also outslows aegislash giving it a nasty knock off or payback.

Sableye can burnt it, outslow and foul play/knock off, and spam recover.

252+ SpA Aegislash-Blade Shadow Ball vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Sableye: 151-178 (49.6 - 58.5%) -- 68% chance to 2HKO after Leftovers recovery

 

[Jukain]

The first thing I have to say is can everyone please stop all of this self-righteous burden of proof crusading. It does nothing to strengthen your argument, only proving that you can't make an adequate argument as to why Aegislash should not be banned. Sure the pro-ban side should have to prove that Aegislash should be banned, but it's not a one-way street. The anti-ban side also has to prove that Aegislash is a healthy presence in the tier, because something does not have to be broken to be banned. If you can't prove that Aegislash is not unhealthy, then your argument holds no water.

Before beginning, I would like to introduce myself. I have been a member of the community through generation 5 and 6. I generally use the showdown simulator to build teams that are compatible with the showdown ladder and wifi competitive play. It has worked out pretty well. Last Season, or season 4 I was ranked 8th for the US in single battles. The team that I used is also showdown compatible. It contains no banned pokemon or tactics. I have had a lot of experience with the previous suspects, as they completely litter wifi teams.

On the 50/50 Arguement:

First of all, 50/50's are a consequence of the natural mechanics of the game. For example, if my opponent has Zapdose on the field and his only other pokemon is Infernape, and my only pokemon is Mamoswine, then I am instantly in a prediction lacuna. If I Icicle Crash hoping to do massive damage to his electric bird, then I take the risk that my opponent will possibly switch to Infernape which will out-speed and KO the following turn. If I predict a switch and earthquake to KO the opposing fire monkey, then I risk Zapdose staying on the field and wasting a turn completely. Further, my opponent is in a 50/50 scenario. Does s/he Heatwave with Zapdose and do massive damage to my Mamoswine, or predict a IC and switch to Infernape? Here, we can see that the natural mechanics of the game generate 50/50 scenarios. Further, we can see that 50/50's are, despite what some pro-ban advocates may claim, completely competitive and essential to the game. In conclusion, the 50/50 pro-ban argument fails unless there is a relevant distinction between the Aegislash 50/50 scenarios and those that naturally manifest through the mechanics of the game itself.

The burden to make a distinction falls on the pro-ban community. Some have argued that, though 50/50's are natural occurrences of the game, Aegislash generates an excessive amount of 50/50's and is therefore damaging to the meta as a whole and relevantly different than natural 50/50's. I remain unconvinced, and see it unlikely that this argument could ever have any justification much less complete certainly. I gave one example of a natural 50/50, and such a 50/50 occurs often as Mamoswine users know. This is due to its typing which allows it incredible offensive coverage but weaknesses to common attacks. Further, I can construct indefinitely many examples with each individual Pokemon. So, unless the pro-ban community can demonstrate these invisible values, and further demonstrate that Aegislash creates a large majority of these scenarios, and even further give an argument on how this is actually negative to the metagame, Aegislash generating 50/50's is an irrelevant fact and to make said fact into a statement is as useful and interesting as pointing out that Aegislash is a sword.

As I have previously stated, I only see one distinction to made between Aegislash and the natural 50/50's: Natural 50/50's are unexpected and difficult to account for mentally, while a 50/50 generated by Aegislash, as we can see by this discussion, is expected and therefore more predictable.

On being Overpowered and Unbalanced:

Many posts seem to focus on Aegislash being overpowered and/or an unbalanced force in the metagame. These arguments tend to overlap and muddle together. I am going to try to keep them separate because though they are related they are not synonymous and should be addressed separately.

A pokemon cannot be considered overpowered if it makes sense to think that said pokemon was designed by a rational being with the intention of balance in mind. For instance, any of us would be hard pressed to make a case that Mega Khan was designed simultaneously by both a rational being and a being that favors balance. It just seems very unlikely. My justification for this definition is very simple. It is neutral to a pokemon's move pool, stats, typing, ability and effect on the metagame, yet they are relevant features that can be used to categorize a pokemon as overpowered. It is a holistic approach to categorization, and it seems very similar to the vague way we actually do categorize. For example, it is hard to make a case that Mega Gengar is overpowered simply by looking at its stats, move pool, and typing but if we take into account shadow-tag then it instantly becomes much more justifiable to think that Mega Gengar is overpowered. In the same sense one might think Mega Aerodactyle is overpowered based solely on its typing, stats, and ability but once one takes a look at its limited move pool, it becomes apparent that there is no case to categorize it as OP. Being overpowered and/or balanced within a meta-game is a vague notion that though can be categorized within a vacuum cannot always be so categorized. As many have suggested, categorization as overpowered or balanced has to be decided holistically, which my definition allows.

This leaves us with the question “If any of us were both rational and promoted the concept of balance, would we introduce Aegislash?” I think we would. Aegislash has an incredible and unique typing, has a versatile move pool, has incredible stats depending on the stance, a unique ability, and an understandably substantial effect on the metagame, but there is a caveat to each. Each caveat seems to imply design by a rational being that favors balance. Aegislash's typing is indeed both an exceptionally good offensive and defensive typing making it an ideal switch into banded and scarfed fighting attacks and many more offensive threats in general. Further, Shadow ball has great neutral coverage in a similar way as Close Combat. In addition, Aegislash has god sent coverage with sacred sword allowing it to run an effective wall breaking set. We can conclude from this that Aegislash both softly checks hyper offensive and hyper defensive teams, based on typing and offensive presence alone. This is further justified by the suspect ladder that has become more offensive based in the absence of Aegislash. This fact is due to the meta itself, not solely Aegislash. It is just true that XY brought us many new exceptionally powerful attackers, but walls that did not surpass their predecessors (i.e. Skarmory, Blissey). If the situation had been reversed than it is likely that the absence of Aegislash would have led to a more defensive metagame. In addition, Aegislash's typing gives it weaknesses to the omnipresent fire and ground and a weakness to dark which because of knock-off and pursuit already serve the utility of trapping and crippling a switch. Further, Aegislash is susceptible to taunt, statuses other than poison, leech seed, encore, etc which is found on more eloquent defensive teams. I hope I am not getting ahead of myself, but the fact that Aegislash's typing gives it the necessary offensive and defensive capabilities to both softly check offensive and defensive threats, in addition to the fact that it is weak to common offensive attacks and susceptible to common stall tactics, seems to imply that Aegislash is most definitely balanced, and therefore in no meaningful sense overpowered.

Aegislash has a very interesting stat distribution in addition to its equally interesting ability. 140/140 defenses and 140/140 offenses is nothing to turn your head at, especially when you take into account a movepool that, though isn't extensive, completely suits it. Still, it is only a fact that to have either of these stats the user must sacrifice one for the other and burn a turn as a cost for the exchange. I do not think I have to explore any further how that can be justified as an obvious rational balancing caveat on these seemingly unjustifiable states. There is no way Aegislash can do anything, other than switching in, without taking some substantial risk to itself.

To clarify the point I am trying to make, I would will introduce a thought experiment. Imagine for a moment that you were attempting to make a completely balanced pokemon. Would you give it 75/69/72/114/100/104 stats, a typing with a reasonable offensive and defensive presence like fire/psychic, a movepool with support moves and attacks, and an interesting but sub par ability? No, you would not if you were attempting to balance the game. A pokemon with the above description has little to no effect on the meta-game. In fact, the above description is of Delphox. And Delophox sucks. The reason you wouldn't is because the metagame is completely littered with powerful walls and attackers that can easily stall or sweep entire teams. To make any substantial “balancing act” of the metagame one would have to introduce something other than another hyper offensive, hyper defensive, or traditionally balanced pokemon. One would have to introduce a pokemon that had some of the qualities of each put together in such a way that it could be pit against the most powerful attackers and walls in the meta. You would have designed Aegislash.

The conclusion that Aegislash is a balancing agent has a natural explanation of why one may think that Aegislash is overpowered. Aegislash is such a radical form of balancing in the likes of which none of us have ever been acquainted with before. Still, as we can see from the above thought experiment of attempting to create a substantial balancing force in the current metagame, it seems that it was the only right one.

On Centralization:

Many have invoked the concept of centralization and over centralization of the metagame to justify an Aegislash ban. Overcentralization is suppose to describe an event that occurs with-in the meta and changes it in such a way that we can only conclude that the meta is exhausting its focus on a single feature, and therefore limiting the meta in some unhealthy way. Many have argued that Aegislash is this exhausting feature. We can make a distinction between centralization and overcentralization here. Centralization is simply an occurrence in a meta that takes up some portion of the focus of the meta and limits some other portion. We then can infer from this that centralization is a natural tendency of a metagame and it will occur if we like it or not. The question then is, what is a healthy centralization? I think I have a natural analysis here. A healthy centralization is a centralization that allows more than it limits. My argument then is that Aegislash is indeed an agent of centralization, but of healthy centralization. Aegislash shifts the metagame's natural tendency toward hyper offensive and defensive tactics to prediction and balance tactics as equally relevant win conditions. This is done without completely nerfing offensive and defensive teams, which fills the requirement for a more diverse meta.

I have already addressed the truth that Aegislash is a balancing agent that softly checks hyper offensive and hyper defensive cores. So, it seems that it would do little to reiterate it in this section. Though, it is important to note the intuitive truth that a team that is balanced can easily handle Aegislash. For instance, a team that has great coverage, great defensive synergy, can defend on both the special and physical side, both can attack on the special and physical side, and has found room for utility is unlikely to have real problems walling, crippling, and/or eliminating Aegislash. It is for this reason that Aegislash centralizes away from the more radical tactics towards balance.

I have also already shown that the 50/50 “coin flip” that Aegislash forces is no different than the natural mechanics of the game, an element that a good player can in part avoid or use to his/her advantage, and that the only relevant difference is that Aegislash adds a more predictable element. All situations of chance are also opportunities for prediction. This is a fact. I have said it before and I will say it again, there is a plethora of information in team preview, in observing the other players play style, taking note of Aegislash's item and moves knowing it can have at most three attacking moves. It is for these reasons that prediction is always a viable option. Defensive and Offensive teams limit the need for said immediate prediction. A boost on the right turn can lead to a complete sweep or a crippling of the opposing team. Walls can simply pivot to another wall and either set up or status the switch in. Such tactics naturally centralize away from the immediate need for prediction and are naturally alluring to a player for their sheer power. A meta dominated by either of these play styles cannot be defined as a healthy meta.

People tend to cite the fact that Aegislash is found on so many teams as a way to conclude over centralization. This only means that there is centralization. There is equal if not more centralization of things such as Rotom-W, Scizor, Latios, Mamoswine etc for completely relevant reason other than being over powered. Why then is Aegislash being used so much? There are many possible reasons. It is possible that Aegislash is still being explored. Aegislash has a complex build and therefore complex EV distributions available to it. We as players may lack balance in our teams and therefore many teams place Aegislash to capitalize on this weakness. Still, the most likely reason is that Aegislash is simply a good pokemon and therefore over used. It is important to note that none of these reasons are mutually exclusive. Any combination of these reasons can be true.

In Conclusion


It has been pointed out that this suspect test really comes down to what kind of meta we as a

community prefer. As I have argued, Aegislash is an agent of balance that centralizes the meta around prediction and balanced tactics and away from the offensive and defensive tactics, without completely eliminating their effectiveness. This limits the viability of certain teams and brings up the viability of others to the degree that it allows a more diverse meta. If the only condition for banning pokemon is that it has a large effect on the meta game than Aegislash should be banned. Indeed Aegislash does have a huge effect on the metagame. If our community decides that an offensive meta and perhaps in the future a defensive dominated meta is what we prefer then, again, Aegislash had it coming. But, if our community favors balanced tactics and a focus on prediction as our conceptual healthy metagame, as I do, then it is essential that Aegislash not be banned. To ban Aegislash is tantamount to banning balance itself, it is just that simple.


Don't Ban

I don't know how you can say that Aegislash doesn't cause more 50/50s than other Pokemon because that's an objective fact that every top player has commented on. King's Shield generates 50/50s by nature of its function, except Aegislash has an advantage because it has the 50/50 and -2 Atk. This is what differentiates KS 50/50s from other 50/50s. I can make a list of 50/50s on the spot concerning Aegislash vs other OU Pokemon.

Char X - Flare Blitz or DD?
Conkeldurr - Knock Off or Drain Punch?
Bisharp - Knock Off, Sucker Punch, or Pursuit?
KyuB - Sub or EP?
Mega Venusaur - Synthesis or HP Fire?
Char Y - Roost or Fire Blast?
Kabutops - KS or SD?
Garchomp - SR or get 2HKOed by Shadow Ball?
Mega Mawile - Sucker Punch or Fire Fang?
Diggersby - SD or EQ?
Mega Gyarados - DD or EQ?
Mega Tyranitar - DD or EQ?
Mamoswine - SR or EQ?
Zapdos - Heat Wave or Roost?

Obviously there are risks/rewards attached to these plays in different scenarios but the main fact is that setting up on Aegi carries an enormous risk, while so does attacking it due to the effects of KS. The risk of both plays in many scenarios is roughly equal. These guessing games are unique again because of the nature of King's Shield and its effects.

Your second argument is irrelevant, because it has nothing to do with what makes Aegislash overpowered and instead makes up a definition of overpowered to fit your needs to make an argument. In fact I think your definition is inherently flawed. A balancing agent is not necessarily healthy for the metagame. For example, I'm sure we can bring down Lugia and neuter a crapload of offensive threats, but we're not doing that any time soon, are we? A Pokemon that balances other Pokemon has nothing to do with banworthiness or unhealthiness. Regardless of what it keeps in check, Aegislash has a net negative impact in reducing diversity and the threat level of certain threats purely by existing, unique among every single OU Pokemon.

Aegislash is overcentralizing because it centralizes more than is healthy. I can cite the 10 OU Pokemon nigh forced to run coverage solely for it, and the bunch of Pokemon made more or less viable because of its presence. No other Pokemon has such an impact that it literally on its own is one of the primary things that determines viablity and overall usefulness in the tier. I'm going to bring up the Latis here. Why do you think they're not ultra amazing devastating threats to offensive teams in A+? It is so much because of Aegi, which is a complete stop to them outside of gimmicks like Shadow Ball Latios. Why is Bisharp so good? I mean it has obvious other useful attributes, but would it be used so much if it wasn't the only thing that has a 50/50 at trapping and eliminating Aegi (almost) with Pursuit? I entirely doubt it. Amoonguss is so valuable to defensive teams because it can beat almost every common Aegi. Mandibuzz is a million times better because it can beat one Aegislash set. Aegislash's checks are more viable, while the things it checks are less viable. You can't even argue these examples because they're 100% true, these things ARE used so much more because of Aegislash. It has such a polarizing effect on the tier that I don't know how you can call it anything but overcentralization.

Finally as ginganinja has pointed out, a shift to an offensive or defensive meta is more or less irrelevant as to why Aegislash should or should not be banned. Banning will naturally shift the offensive/defensive nature of the meta, this is not unique to Aegi and really does nothing to back up your argument whatsoever.

 

[Yogofu]

SO my first post at Smogon.. :D Hey everyopne my Name is Yogofu and i play Pokemon since Red and Blue and i did start to play with Smogon rules since gen 4 (or atleast i guess that the rules my friend explained to me came from here :P). I usually put togheter teams with little to now plan just to see how they work (mixed teams with NU, UU, OU pokemons in most cases). Since Aegislash i started to build teams with more plan since this Pokemon needs some special attention. My usual picks for this are Sableye and Choiced Landorus-T. I would still say BAN.. its like Mega Gengar.. semi good movepool but the abillity makes it OP. If Stance Change would only affect Att and Def or SP.A and SP.D it would be balanced. The Team limitations are just too much.. even if most of its checks do great against other Pokemon you need to dedicate 2 slots just for a potential Aegislash with 3-4 possible and viable sets (Phys, Special, Mixed, Sub Toxic). If you just take 1 Check and the enemy just got the set that counters the check you loose the game. Its not even a 50/50.. its a 20/80 guessing game that will result in a 50/50 thx to KS.

 

[Kairyu_Gen1]

The first thing I have to say is can everyone please stop all of this self-righteous burden of proof crusading. It does nothing to strengthen your argument, only proving that you can't make an adequate argument as to why Aegislash should not be banned. Sure the pro-ban side should have to prove that Aegislash should be banned, but it's not a one-way street. The anti-ban side also has to prove that Aegislash is a healthy presence in the tier, because something does not have to be broken to be banned. If you can't prove that Aegislash is not unhealthy, then your argument holds no water.

I don't know how you can say that Aegislash doesn't cause more 50/50s than other Pokemon because that's an objective fact that every top player has commented on. King's Shield generates 50/50s by nature of its function, except Aegislash has an advantage because it has the 50/50 and -2 Atk. This is what differentiates KS 50/50s from other 50/50s. I can make a list of 50/50s on the spot concerning Aegislash vs other OU Pokemon.

Char X - Flare Blitz or DD?
Conkeldurr - Knock Off or Drain Punch?
Bisharp - Knock Off, Sucker Punch, or Pursuit?
KyuB - Sub or EP?
Mega Venusaur - Synthesis or HP Fire?
Char Y - Roost or Fire Blast?
Kabutops - KS or SD?
Garchomp - SR or get 2HKOed by Shadow Ball?
Mega Mawile - Sucker Punch or Fire Fang?
Diggersby - SD or EQ?
Mega Gyarados - DD or EQ?
Mega Tyranitar - DD or EQ?
Mamoswine - SR or EQ?
Zapdos - Heat Wave or Roost?

Obviously there are risks/rewards attached to these plays in different scenarios but the main fact is that setting up on Aegi carries an enormous risk, while so does attacking it due to the effects of KS. The risk of both plays in many scenarios is roughly equal. These guessing games are unique again because of the nature of King's Shield and its effects.

Your second argument is irrelevant, because it has nothing to do with what makes Aegislash overpowered and instead makes up a definition of overpowered to fit your needs to make an argument. In fact I think your definition is inherently flawed. A balancing agent is not necessarily healthy for the metagame. For example, I'm sure we can bring down Lugia and neuter a crapload of offensive threats, but we're not doing that any time soon, are we? A Pokemon that balances other Pokemon has nothing to do with banworthiness or unhealthiness. Regardless of what it keeps in check, Aegislash has a net negative impact in reducing diversity and the threat level of certain threats purely by existing, unique among every single OU Pokemon.

Aegislash is overcentralizing because it centralizes more than is healthy. I can cite the 10 OU Pokemon nigh forced to run coverage solely for it, and the bunch of Pokemon made more or less viable because of its presence. No other Pokemon has such an impact that it literally on its own is one of the primary things that determines viablity and overall usefulness in the tier. I'm going to bring up the Latis here. Why do you think they're not ultra amazing devastating threats to offensive teams in A+? It is so much because of Aegi, which is a complete stop to them outside of gimmicks like Shadow Ball Latios. Why is Bisharp so good? I mean it has obvious other useful attributes, but would it be used so much if it wasn't the only thing that has a 50/50 at trapping and eliminating Aegi (almost) with Pursuit? I entirely doubt it. Amoonguss is so valuable to defensive teams because it can beat almost every common Aegi. Mandibuzz is a million times better because it can beat one Aegislash set. Aegislash's checks are more viable, while the things it checks are less viable. You can't even argue these examples because they're 100% true, these things ARE used so much more because of Aegislash. It has such a polarizing effect on the tier that I don't know how you can call it anything but overcentralization.

Finally as ginganinja has pointed out, a shift to an offensive or defensive meta is more or less irrelevant as to why Aegislash should or should not be banned. Banning will naturally shift the offensive/defensive nature of the meta, this is not unique to Aegi and really does nothing to back up your argument whatsoever.

The burden of proof idea is pretty easy to justify. If you are unsure if a pokemon is ban worthy, then you should definitely not vote for a ban. The best option would be to abstain, but it's a lot easier to justify voting no ban on a controversial topic than voting ban just to be safe. Getting rid of potentially broken sets is a UU policy that we don't currently use. Maybe we will in the future, but right now it seems pretty stupid to ban something few people are 100% confident is worth it.

And about your list-

Charizard - Earthquake
Conk - Ok, you got 1
Bisharp - Knock Off, no down sides and you can confidently say you outspeed (I've yet to meet 252+ Slash). Pursuit is fair, but this exact dilemma comes with every pursuit trapper
KyuB - EP, don't get caught being greedy.
Venusaur - HP, sleep powder, or leech seed, whatever
Charizard - Fire Blast, don't get caught being greedy

I'd go on, but you get the point. Besides Conk, there's no downside to your spammable moves. They all can KO faster than Aegislash can, so you're fine. You can boost if you really want to, but that's like bringing in Gyarados with intimidate on a Mawile and DDing expecting either the switch or the sucker punch and sack, but then getting OHKO'd by Play Rough after Rocks. Props to your opponent for predicting, but that's your bad, not Mawile's.

And I'd love to hear these 10. I can definitely think of a couple, maybe some that would love to toss EQ and just use CC, but most run EQ for Heatran as well, most run HP fire for Ferrothorn as well, and most would keep running ghost/dark because they're great types. Saying it centralizes the meta in an unhealthy way is completely subjective because we don't even have any real criteria for this.

the bunch of Pokemon made more or less viable because of its presence.

This is what top tier threats do! Every single sweeper that isn't ground or electric is made less viable by Thundurus's prankster T wave. Every single defogger is made less viable by bisharp. Every single poke weak to flying is made less viable by Pinsir and Talonflame. You can make arguments they're broken, but there's always going to be that one poke that is the most influential, so proving Aegislash is that one does nothing. You have to prove that it crossed a line that we haven't even established its location. That's probably why Haunter posted that thing about voting not based on a subjective standard of "broken," but which meta you like better. If you think the prediction wars produced by Aegislash are worse than the absolute chaos of the suspect ladder, fine. I can't argue with that because it's your opinion, but don't pretend this is a one sided argument.

 

[Jukain]

The burden of proof idea is pretty easy to justify. If you are unsure if a pokemon is ban worthy, then you should definitely not vote for a ban. The best option would be to abstain, but it's a lot easier to justify voting no ban on a controversial topic than voting ban just to be safe. Getting rid of potentially broken sets is a UU policy that we don't currently use. Maybe we will in the future, but right now it seems pretty stupid to ban something few people are 100% confident is worth it.

And about your list-

Charizard - Earthquake
Conk - Ok, you got 1
Bisharp - Knock Off, no down sides and you can confidently say you outspeed (I've yet to meet 252+ Slash). Pursuit is fair, but this exact dilemma comes with every pursuit trapper
KyuB - EP, don't get caught being greedy.
Venusaur - HP, sleep powder, or leech seed, whatever
Charizard - Fire Blast, don't get caught being greedy

I'd go on, but you get the point. Besides Conk, there's no downside to your spammable moves. They all can KO faster than Aegislash can, so you're fine. You can boost if you really want to, but that's like bringing in Gyarados with intimidate on a Mawile and DDing expecting either the switch or the sucker punch and sack, but then getting OHKO'd by Play Rough after Rocks. Props to your opponent for predicting, but that's your bad, not Mawile's.

And I'd love to hear these 10. I can definitely think of a couple, maybe some that would love to toss EQ and just use CC, but most run EQ for Heatran as well, most run HP fire for Ferrothorn as well, and most would keep running ghost/dark because they're great types. Saying it centralizes the meta in an unhealthy way is completely subjective because we don't even have any real criteria for this.


This is what top tier threats do! Every single sweeper that isn't ground or electric is made less viable by Thundurus's prankster T wave. Every single defogger is made less viable by bisharp. Every single poke weak to flying is made less viable by Pinsir and Talonflame. You can make arguments they're broken, but there's always going to be that one poke that is the most influential, so proving Aegislash is that one does nothing. You have to prove that it crossed a line that we haven't even established its location. That's probably why Haunter posted that thing about voting not based on a subjective standard of "broken," but which meta you like better. If you think the prediction wars produced by Aegislash are worse than the absolute chaos of the suspect ladder, fine. I can't argue with that because it's your opinion, but don't pretend this is a one sided argument.

Nobody runs EQ Zard X outside of SDef, and regardless it does shit damage, and now you have a weakened ass Zard X. The same dilemma is not true with every other Pursuit trapper when it comes to Bisharp. Either you weaken Aegi or you don't, and Bisharp is the only thing that can Pursuit trap it. Aegi is also unique because it can easily take a Pursuit if it doesn't switch, so what it forces is the epitome of a 50/50. If KyuB EPs and Aegi uses KS, then it just lost momentum giving Aegi a free hit. That's also a 50/50. HP and have a 50% Venusaur, see how well that works out for you when you can't switch into Keldeo anymore. Charizard Y uses Fire Blast, great, Aegislash switched, now you have a 40% Zard Y that can't even switch into SR if it's up and you can't remove it, and is too low to switch into Aegi. My examples were also not the main point, the main point is that there ARE so many 50/50 situations that Aegislash causes, only a terrible player would tell you otherwise.

That's not what top-tier threats do. Thundurus maybe helps neuter certain offensive threats, and decrease their impact a bit, but there's no way you can argue it makes anything unviable in the way Aegi does. Defoggers are not less viable because of Bisharp, why does every team have a Defogger then? Why are Keldeo and Mega Venusaur top-tier? The Pokemon you mention have a much, MUCH less drastic impact. Furthermore saying that the tier will always be centralized around 1 Pokemon is completely untrue and just a defeatist position. No Pokemon is going to centralize as much as Aegi, I can guarantee you that. No one thing will be the focal point of the tier, because nothing is anywhere near as good as Aegi.

 

[Kairyu_Gen1]

Nobody runs EQ Zard X outside of SDef, and regardless it does shit damage, and now you have a weakened ass Zard X. The same dilemma is not true with every other Pursuit trapper when it comes to Bisharp. Either you weaken Aegi or you don't, and Bisharp is the only thing that can Pursuit trap it. Aegi is also unique because it can easily take a Pursuit if it doesn't switch, so what it forces is the epitome of a 50/50. If KyuB EPs and Aegi uses KS, then it just lost momentum giving Aegi a free hit. That's also a 50/50. HP and have a 50% Venusaur, see how well that works out for you when you can't switch into Keldeo anymore. Charizard Y uses Fire Blast, great, Aegislash switched, now you have a 40% Zard Y that can't even switch into SR if it's up and you can't remove it, and is too low to switch into Aegi. My examples were also not the main point, the main point is that there ARE so many 50/50 situations that Aegislash causes, only a terrible player would tell you otherwise.

That's not what top-tier threats do. Thundurus maybe helps neuter certain offensive threats, and decrease their impact a bit, but there's no way you can argue it makes anything unviable in the way Aegi does. Defoggers are not less viable because of Bisharp, why does every team have a Defogger then? Why are Keldeo and Mega Venusaur top-tier? The Pokemon you mention have a much, MUCH less drastic impact. Furthermore saying that the tier will always be centralized around 1 Pokemon is completely untrue and just a defeatist position. No Pokemon is going to centralize as much as Aegi, I can guarantee you that. No one thing will be the focal point of the tier, because nothing is anywhere near as good as Aegi.

It's only it's main coverage move, I know I run it a lot because getting walled by Heatran sucks, but maybe I'm just crazy. The point is that you're seriously over dramatizing these prediction wars. Did you really just pretend a pokemon being able to switch is a reason to ban it? Next you'll want to ban sucker punch, because it undeniably has the same affect. Predictions aren't easy, but they've always been part of the game and Aegislash does not push it over the edge or whatever you think it does.

And do you really pretend Thundurus doesn't make your life significantly harder just by being on a team? You can't clear rocks because it might be a defiant set that could sweep. You can't begin your Gyarados sweep because it might be a prankster set, and no matter how many DDs you get off, you're toast if it uses T wave. And yet Mega Gyarados is A+ because top level threats have a balancing affect on each other. Sure some will stick out, maybe enough to ban, but Aegislash is clearly in the twilight zone where it's not day and not night.

Tyranitar, a poke that has a pretty poor 1v1 match up with Slash, is A+ as well. Gengar, Lati@s, and Terrakion are all A. Pokes can adapt and be effective in a metagame that includes Aegislash. Some can't but that's because they have multiple problems. Gardevoir has Scizor and Gengar. Medicham has Talonflame. People keep saying Aegislash has too great of an impact on the meta for one poke, but it doesn't do it by itself. Mawile, Heatran, Scizor, Bisharp, Gengar, etc. all contribute to its centralization. It is the most influential, nobody can deny it, but you're ignoring a lot of things and you're pretending it is clearly across the "overcentralizing" line, which, as I said, is impossible to say with certainty because it's right on the line and without specific criteria, any judgements about which side it's on are completely subjective.

 

[Magicxgame]

"Overcentralizing"
"Overcentralizing"
"Overcentralizing'

If anything needs to be banned, it's this pointless buzzword.

Also, pro-ban side really needs to learn the burden of proof. YOU are the ones who want Aegislash banned, YOU need convincing arguments. Not wishy-washy ones like, "Well, I don't know if it's broken, but it should be banned because I think it has a negative effect." If you aren't sure, on't ban. It's that simple.