Gen 6 np: XY Ubers Shadow Tag Suspect Test - Stuck In The Middle With You

[C AllStar]

Alright so I am actually going to help shrang out as I feel he's having to fight a one-man war against Melee Mewtwo and everyone else, and he has actually managed to change my opinion from viciously pro-ban.

Personally I think that all this throwing around of the word "uncompetitive" is a load of rubbish. The premise of Shrang's argument is that Shadow Tag can be built around and can be used by both players, so you cannot really say that it is "unfair" because both players have access to it. If one player brings Kyogre / Arceus / Xerneas and the other brings Deoxys-N / Garchomp / Gardevoir, then the player with the less overpowered team cannot complain about his opponent having the advantage as he too can use Kyogre / Arceus / Xerneas. The tier is unbelievably centralized and that's not been a problem, so saying that Shadow Tag is centralizing is no good because you CAN prepare for it. You can argue that you can prepare for it and still lose, but isn't that true for so many things? You can bring your Giratina-Origin / Scizor core to cover yourself against Extremekiller and then lose to Fire Blast / Shadow Claw, for example. You can bring your sturdy Klefki along then get sniped by Xerneas once or twice and suddenly you can't check it anymore (or you can lose to Xerneas that run specific investment to make Substitutes unbreakable by Play Rough).

Something else that I think Melee Mewtwo is not realising or not admitting is that the "you can prepare for it but lose to it anyway" works in both ways. Let's go through the different methods of dealing with Shadow Tag:

Punishment Arceus - loses to Charm Gothitelle. But what if the Gothitelle is Trick Room or Heal Bell? you can contently let them get to +6 then snipe them with Punishment. "But I prepared my Gothitelle for Support Arceus with Taunt!". Too bad, you lost your Shadow Tag user.

Roar Arceus - loses to Taunt Gengar and Taunt Gothitelle. But what if the Gothitelle is Charm? you contently let it Charm you to -6, then smile as you Roar it away as it goes for Calm Mind number 5 or 6. "But I prepared for Punishment / Poison Jab / Waterfall / whatever Arceus with my Gothitelle!" Too bad, you can do nothing.

Earthquake 176+ Arceus-Grass - loses to Gothitelle (unless you run Bullet Seed and it doesn't have Charm), but outspeeds and surprise KOes Gengar. "But i prepared for Grassceus by adding Gengar to my team with Scarf Kyogre and Specs Palkia!" yeah well you got sniped by Earthquake, sucks to be you.

"But I don't want to run shit moves on my mons so that I don't lose to Shadow Tag!" Yeah well I don't want to have to run Palkia on 70% of my teams so I don't lose to Scarf Kyogre. I don't want to run Steel-Types that suck ass just so that I don't lose to Xerneas. I don't want to run Thunder Wave Palkia to insure myself against Xerneas. But I HAVE TO because Ubers is and always has been a tier that is CENTRALIZED. You can argue about being forced to run X mon for Y, or A move for B mon, or not being able to use X Y or Z because Xerneas sets up all over them, but that has never been an issue. Like Minority Suspect said, if we have to run Defog Arceus-Ghost on every team alongside Shed Shell Palkia, then that's how it will be.

Also, arguing that "well all these moves like Thunder Wave Kia also come in handy against Support Arceus so that you can outspeed, Klefki can also set up Spikes and Prankster Twave a rampaging Blaziken, Scizor can also handle Extremekiller, you may be semi-forced to run these things but at least they don't ONLY insure you against Shadow Tag / whatever, and even then you can still lose!" Dragon Tail Kia can phaze out Calm Mind Arceus-Water and Calm Mind Kyogre, Earthquake Grassceus can get the jump on Dialga / Heatran etc.

All I know is I don't complain when I prepare for Extremekiller with Giratina-Origin and then I get smacked by Shadow Force, or when I run Arceus-Ghost and lose to Refresh Jolly Extremekiller. I think what some people need to admit is that they are using "uncompetitive" as a fancy word to hide what they truly want Shadow Tag banned for - Shadow Tag turns games into a bag of dicks, ruins the ONLY element of the game that we play it for - TO ENJOY OURSELVES. I know I don't enjoy Gothitelle slowly maneuvering during 40 turns so that it can get 4 Trick Room turns to sweep instead of 3, and making sure that it's at 90% health instead of 80% health when it kills the Support Arceus. I also despise the way that Gengar can snipe something that otherwise runs a train over my opponent's team because oh look, it Taunted my +6 Arceus as I tried to dodge Destiny Bond and now it can cheaply KO Arceus without any repercussions, taking away the fact that I outplayed my opponent and exposed a flaw in his teambuilding that meant he lost 6-0 to Calm Mind Arceus-Water. Not a SINGLE person can honestly argue that they enjoy playing against Shadow Tag, and I challenge anyone who thinks that Shadow Tag leads to a positive metagame that is made better by Shadow Tag's presence to speak up and post right here explaining why they think so. Right now I am still pro-ban, but not because I think it is "uncompetitive" or "removes choice" or bla bla whatever. I want it gone because I think it is poisoning the Ubers tier, and once it is gone I will be able to enjoy all the Ubers matches that I play, which thanks to Shadow Tag doesn't happen right now.

I disagree. While Shadow Tag can be executed by both players as being 'the best strategy', the issue is even both players use Shadow Tag, it doesn't mean the game is 'fair'. In fact, the outcome of the match will depend on the matchup between the Shadow Tag teams. I will illustrate it with an example.

Assume two players are against each other and both of the teams are carrying Stag. Team A uses Charm Goth and Team B uses hp fire/icy wind/taunt/d-bond MegaGar. When they have played for a while, they have clearly spotted their win condition. Player A can trap the GrassCeus in team B to let its ScarfOgre clean up while Player B can trap the opposing Mega Scizor and allow its Ekiller to sweep. Both of them realised to prepare for Stag in teambuilding in order to not let their checks to dangerous mons be trapped and killed by Stag. Team B's GrassCeus is using Bullet Seed(yeah, I'm using it now) while Team A's Mega Scizor is using a wierd ass SpDef Occa Berry set with Knock Off. Both of them have 'prepared' for Stag but it's obvious that Team B's trapping won't be successful. Player A will therefore have an inherent advantage over Player B regardless of the skill of both players and quality of both teams thanks to Shadow Tag.

The issue of Shadow Tag is 'You can prepare for it, but your way of preparation won't necessarily work. Ultimately, the player with the right preparation to the specific opponent's Stag's set will have an inherent advantage. This turns the Ubers tier into a matchup-based metagame due to Stag limiting the important mechanics of switching'

 

[MMII]

Hello everyone. I have never participated in any suspect test bar the Gengarite test, so please excuse me if I come off as ignorant. I am not at all inexperienced in the Ubers tier, having played more matches than I care to admit. However, I am failing to understand the definition of "uncompetitive" as has been posted many times by Melee Mewtwo. He posts:



Is this not using the word in its own definition? How can that make any sense whatsoever? That would be like saying "The definition of brown is: Brown objects are those that reflect dull colors-- and do so to a degree that they can be considered brown." What? Without finding a way to define that degree, this definition is meaningless. Using a word in its own definition is a fallacy known as circular definition.

By extension, using that provided "definition" for uncompetitive, can we not put Taunt up for the same discussion? It takes autonomy away from the player, and I suppose it does so to a degree that "CAN" be considered uncompetitive (which has never been adequately defined).

Since the supposed "uncompetitiveness" of Shadow Tag is the crux of this entire debate, I think it is absolutely meaningless to continue until we have a definition of the word that does not succumb to the fallacy of circular definition.

Also, please don't focus too much on my brown example. It's late, and I'm having a hard time coming up with a better example, but my main point is entirely unaffected by the strength of my example.

i've decided to look up the definition of the word competitive. there were a few results, i'd say 2 of which definitely do not apply.

"well suited for competition; having a feature that makes for successful competition"
this definition here seemed to fit the bill most perfectly to me.

of the 4 definitions, the only other one that could apply in our case is this one:
"useful to a competitor ; giving a competitor an advantage"

so what is successful competition? one could say the very thing that makes something competitive according to the second definition is what makes it broken or uncompetitive for our purposes. it gives one player an advantage over another. but that isn't necessarily the case. successful competition requires opponents to have a chance against the other player, otherwise there is no competition. if one company has access to technology that makes it the clearly superior choice over its competitors, they're not really competing anymore at all, one is just raking in money, while the others are losing it. let's assume the other companies do not have any way to access this technology whatsoever. then it is an uneven playing field and nobody is even competing anymore. or let's use sports as an example. if a professional athlete is using the tools he has acquired in order to play against a child, it's a similar scenario. it isn't competitive because one party lacks, in every possible way, the ability to stand a chance.

i ask whether or not this is the case for shadow tag, and it clearly isn't (imo). within this thread, i feel as though, it has been proven time and time again that many other clauses which are present in ubers take away a significant amount of control on the players' part that shadow tag does not. moody/swagger/sleep are on a completely different plane than shadow tag. now let's take into consideration that any player can use shadow tag. what would you say to a company losing competition because it refused to use the tools at its disposal in order to compete against a threat within their competition? you'd tell them to stop complaining and compete, rather than try to make the technology illegal on the basis that it "just isn't fair".

if you don't want to adapt, don't. but don't say it's impossible. and don't make ridiculous arguments like "if you can't cover every other top threat while also being immune to stag, it's broken". i mean, really? no team is truly immune to anything, and you will always have weaknesses. this is the first rule i learned about teambuilding. yes, you will have trappable pokemon, because mono-ghost sucks. but you have the ability to make decisions within teambuilding, during starter-picking, and throughout the match. if you can see what is preventing a sweep from your opponent, you know to play carefully with it, and if you make a decision that allows it to get trapped, that really stinks, looks like you might lose this game. but you lost due to, entirely, your own decisions. it's not uncompetitive because it is useful, both to your competitor and to you, you have access to it as well, you can mitigate it, and you decide with it in mind the entire game. nothing is taken out of your control, until you've been trapped. but you got yourself trapped. a check mate isn't broken, it's the goddamn point.

"Uncompetitive" is a term that has been used by the Pokemon community (and maybe more? I think I've seen it elsewhere) for long while. (idk how old, it's older than my interactions with the community afaik) The meaning behind this term is completely invented and not to be found in a dictionary. It's completely retarded, I agree but it has become ingrained in the culture with this new meaning so there's not much that can be done. The meaning when the word is used by the community is the one I've quoted a few times already.

Why are we having a shadow tag suspect test when the suspect testing for Mega-Gengar concluded in no ban?

Should shadow tag get banned, it would countradict the verdict on Mega-Gengar.

Let's face it. Mega-Gengar is the reason for this shadow tag suspect. Pro-banners are unhappy with the result from the original testing and wanted a second chance it seems.

In the Uber context:

Shadow Tag requires skill to use => it is not uncompetitive.

Uncompetitiveness should be the requirement for ban => no ban

• A successful trap by your opponent does not 100% ensure that you will lose. It is not a 1-2 step.
• You using Shadow Tag does not take control out of the hands of the opponent. The opponent has control leading up to the trap, hence influencing the trap.
• Mega-Gengar requires a turn to trap. Moreover, Ghost types cannot be trapped. Can be phazed out.
• You lose the ability to switch, but you still have control of what moves to choose and its not like Mega-Gengar will live any attack from ubers.

Banning a Pokemon from uber will set a bad precedent for the tier. I'm not using this as an arguement just pointing it out.

And yes testing to ban shadow tag is a camouflaged method to ban a Pokemon from entirely.

I would normally delete a post like this but I'm actually going to respond since it's a false notion that I know is commonplace. It's partially due to this whole thing originating in IS, smogon's private, badgeholder forums, but also because folks clearly can't read. Anyways, what happened is user dice posted in IS on how Shadow Tag is ruining Ubers as a tournament metagame with two solutions; remove Ubers from tournies or do somethign about Taag in Ubers. All the best players in the metagame manifested support so after a week or so Hugendugen responded and after talking with mods the mode of action was decided. Initially, we were just going to have one test with three options. However, Hugen changed his mind and wanted this changed to the two part test you have now. (where the full tag test has been announced well before the gar results and nobody complained then :/)

Yes, everything is messy but this came about under a rather unfortunate blend of shitty circumstances.

If something is only OP, it is not grounds for a ban.

STag is only OP, I don't see how removing the ability to switch is also uncompetitive. It gives the STag user a clear advantage, isn't that what overpowered means? Where is the missing factor of luck present in Swagger or OHKO moves?

Also sleep was proven competitive when quite a few posts in the BW discussion thread clearly referred to it as overcentralizing only, which again is not grounds for a ban (posts arguing STag is overcentralizing only so ban it would be deleted in this thread, would they not? So how is policy the same as back then?). I'm not even the one who brought up Sleep in the first place, I wasn't trying to use it in my argument.

Okay, I understood you to be saying it's not uncompetitive due to the fact that it's OP, not that you think it's only OP.

It doesn't need luck to be uncompetitive. Read the definition that's been cited multiple times in this thread. Sleep was determined to be uncompetitive which is why it was banned, lol.

Yes, I know that and wasn't trying to say you were. I must have misunderstood your posts or something cause it seemed like you were trying to say something completely different and I was just trying to explain how things work with the example of Sleep.

Sorry I'm not shrang, but why would you need the team immune to shadow tag? I haven't seen any ubers teams that are "immune" to geoxern (example) and never get messed up by them in any battle, at least not teams that can also handle the rest of the metagame as you said.

Just the way that you said it needs to be "immune" to shadow tag and "adequately handle" the rest of the meta seems like a double standard here.

You are attaching too much to the word immune. I just meant it to mean that you can't trap and KO a Pokemon cause, unlike other metathreats, you don't have counterplay options in the game itself.

I'd just like to say that I find it very interesting how many of you failed to address the inability to switch as your primary ban argument during the Mega Gengar suspect but have sense moved your entire platform to focus around that idea. Perhaps it was because your vote was not counted, I don't know, but this doesn't change the fact that Shadow Tag has been prevalent for three entire generations prior to XY. You would think as we continue to add stronger and stronger mons into the game threats like Shadow Tag would become LESS of an issue, but here I see the complete opposite. I'm not saying you're wrong if you believe it should be banned, that is completely subjective, but I do believe many of you are clinging on to the next best alternative to find a reason to ban it just because you want it gone so badly.

Also, I personally find the entire X makes Y argument completely flawed. Plenty of mons have been introduced over the years that have made something else irrelevant / drop in usage / effectively removed as a threat. If you are really trying to push a ban using that logic you are completely ignorant to every generation shift that has occurred over the past 10 years. Just my two cents.

My opinion on Shadow Tag has not and will not change. It is in no way uncompetitive, broken, or "fundamentally removing an imperative aspect of the game." You choose what gets trapped and you have options to prevent a mon from getting trapped. You should always be thinking about what the goal of your opponent is. Is he trapping my X mon to setup with his Y mon? What advantage does my opponent gain from trapping my mon? etc.

Also status moves are a pretty important part of the game so let's ban Taunt. jajaja

?
Folks have been arguing about switching since the beginning. I know the Mega Gar test was odd as fuck and made it hard to determine what was on the table for discussion but I know I focused all my posts around that concept.

Nobody's (at least, afaik) argued about tag making X mon unviable or whatever as the justification for a ban.

How do I choose what gets trapped without being psychic? Even then, I can get trapped on the revenge kill which means I'd have to not kill any pokemon if I wanted to avoid getting trapped, lol. Your only options to prevent getting trapped are in teambuilder and even those can be dealt with by the Taggers. It doesn't matter if I know what my opponent is trying to trap, if I don't use the mon to check what it's there for (in order to avoid getting trapped) then the Tagger effectively killed it, anyways. (also, you can run into unlucky scenarios where the mon is phazed in as the pahzer dies and then you are screwed. Haxiom did that to fireburn in one game, lol)

Are you serious with the Taunt strawman?

Alright so I am actually going to help shrang out as I feel he's having to fight a one-man war against Melee Mewtwo and everyone else, and he has actually managed to change my opinion from viciously pro-ban.

Personally I think that all this throwing around of the word "uncompetitive" is a load of rubbish. The premise of Shrang's argument is that Shadow Tag can be built around and can be used by both players, so you cannot really say that it is "unfair" because both players have access to it. If one player brings Kyogre / Arceus / Xerneas and the other brings Deoxys-N / Garchomp / Gardevoir, then the player with the less overpowered team cannot complain about his opponent having the advantage as he too can use Kyogre / Arceus / Xerneas. The tier is unbelievably centralized and that's not been a problem, so saying that Shadow Tag is centralizing is no good because you CAN prepare for it. You can argue that you can prepare for it and still lose, but isn't that true for so many things? You can bring your Giratina-Origin / Scizor core to cover yourself against Extremekiller and then lose to Fire Blast / Shadow Claw, for example. You can bring your sturdy Klefki along then get sniped by Xerneas once or twice and suddenly you can't check it anymore (or you can lose to Xerneas that run specific investment to make Substitutes unbreakable by Play Rough).

Something else that I think Melee Mewtwo is not realising or not admitting is that the "you can prepare for it but lose to it anyway" works in both ways. Let's go through the different methods of dealing with Shadow Tag:

Punishment Arceus - loses to Charm Gothitelle. But what if the Gothitelle is Trick Room or Heal Bell? you can contently let them get to +6 then snipe them with Punishment. "But I prepared my Gothitelle for Support Arceus with Taunt!". Too bad, you lost your Shadow Tag user.

Roar Arceus - loses to Taunt Gengar and Taunt Gothitelle. But what if the Gothitelle is Charm? you contently let it Charm you to -6, then smile as you Roar it away as it goes for Calm Mind number 5 or 6. "But I prepared for Punishment / Poison Jab / Waterfall / whatever Arceus with my Gothitelle!" Too bad, you can do nothing.

Earthquake 176+ Arceus-Grass - loses to Gothitelle (unless you run Bullet Seed and it doesn't have Charm), but outspeeds and surprise KOes Gengar. "But i prepared for Grassceus by adding Gengar to my team with Scarf Kyogre and Specs Palkia!" yeah well you got sniped by Earthquake, sucks to be you.

"But I don't want to run shit moves on my mons so that I don't lose to Shadow Tag!" Yeah well I don't want to have to run Palkia on 70% of my teams so I don't lose to Scarf Kyogre. I don't want to run Steel-Types that suck ass just so that I don't lose to Xerneas. I don't want to run Thunder Wave Palkia to insure myself against Xerneas. But I HAVE TO because Ubers is and always has been a tier that is CENTRALIZED. You can argue about being forced to run X mon for Y, or A move for B mon, or not being able to use X Y or Z because Xerneas sets up all over them, but that has never been an issue. Like Minority Suspect said, if we have to run Defog Arceus-Ghost on every team alongside Shed Shell Palkia, then that's how it will be.

Also, arguing that "well all these moves like Thunder Wave Kia also come in handy against Support Arceus so that you can outspeed, Klefki can also set up Spikes and Prankster Twave a rampaging Blaziken, Scizor can also handle Extremekiller, you may be semi-forced to run these things but at least they don't ONLY insure you against Shadow Tag / whatever, and even then you can still lose!" Dragon Tail Kia can phaze out Calm Mind Arceus-Water and Calm Mind Kyogre, Earthquake Grassceus can get the jump on Dialga / Heatran etc.

All I know is I don't complain when I prepare for Extremekiller with Giratina-Origin and then I get smacked by Shadow Force, or when I run Arceus-Ghost and lose to Refresh Jolly Extremekiller. I think what some people need to admit is that they are using "uncompetitive" as a fancy word to hide what they truly want Shadow Tag banned for - Shadow Tag turns games into a bag of dicks, ruins the ONLY element of the game that we play it for - TO ENJOY OURSELVES. I know I don't enjoy Gothitelle slowly maneuvering during 40 turns so that it can get 4 Trick Room turns to sweep instead of 3, and making sure that it's at 90% health instead of 80% health when it kills the Support Arceus. I also despise the way that Gengar can snipe something that otherwise runs a train over my opponent's team because oh look, it Taunted my +6 Arceus as I tried to dodge Destiny Bond and now it can cheaply KO Arceus without any repercussions, taking away the fact that I outplayed my opponent and exposed a flaw in his teambuilding that meant he lost 6-0 to Calm Mind Arceus-Water. Not a SINGLE person can honestly argue that they enjoy playing against Shadow Tag, and I challenge anyone who thinks that Shadow Tag leads to a positive metagame that is made better by Shadow Tag's presence to speak up and post right here explaining why they think so. Right now I am still pro-ban, but not because I think it is "uncompetitive" or "removes choice" or bla bla whatever. I want it gone because I think it is poisoning the Ubers tier, and once it is gone I will be able to enjoy all the Ubers matches that I play, which thanks to Shadow Tag doesn't happen right now.

Shrang isn't fighting a one-man war as much as being one of the few anti-ban folks that can and has been willing to actually put together an ontopic argument. The ban Tag movement comes from the minority, lol. (mind you, it's the minority that comprises of all our best players but it's still a minority)

The rest of the post is lol. uncompetitive is rubbish being thrown around caue bojangles (former ubers tier leader) defined the meta with the word. Shrang's premise is flawed which is what I've been arguing against for the longest time. The rest is just "hey, I can get lucky in team preview and they brought the wrong sets", lol.

You just answered your own challenge just a while back. Why do you need a team that's immune to Shadow Tag? Like Zebstrika said, you don't need a team totally immune to GeoXern or any other threat in Ubers. What makes Shadow Tag so special that you need a team totally immune to it? I'll find you a team that's totally immune to Shadow Tag when you can tell me why it's relevant to the tier. I'll paste orch's post from earlier because I think it explains very nicely:



Also, the whole "give me one example of a S-tag immune team" does not address anything I've said in the last few posts (even though it was in response to it), and (let me remind you) that is that choice is available to the player to avert the possibility of being beaten due to S-tag. It still doesn't change the fact that you got outplayed instead of any other reason. You know, I can give you a counter-challenge: Why don't you find me a team that is totally immune to Rock Polish Groudon that adequately handles everything else? I bet you can find me plenty of them. However, that doesn't change the fact that you can still force people into the Scarf Zek vs Ghostceus/Groudon example from before. In short, your request for a completely immune to S-tag team that handles everything else that still adequately covers everything else does not address anything about what you've been trying to argue, namely how S-tag denies meaningful choice or denies the "victim" control. You seem to have trouble grasping the concept that just because you can switch does not automatically mean you have control, and via the same logic, just because you can't switch doesn't automatically mean you've lost control.



Not to go into why this argument is terrible (actually you know what I will after this), why are we even arguing about this then? Why are we arguing such a criteria (and therefore "immunity to S-tag") if you're going to come up with a conclusion that S-tag is uncompetitive regardless?

Anyway, now to address why it is terrible, the reason being that Ubers has been a "tier" (for the lack of a better word) for 5 generations where we don't give a shit that you can't be "totally immune" to threat X, Y, Z. There has never been a perfect team to check every threat in metagame or even be totally immune to any one threat, for that matter. Most Ubers have, at the very least, obscure ways to beat all of their counters, if they wished to. If you're going to call that "uncompetitive", then I'd suggest that you take "uncompetitive" out of the reasons why we ban things in Ubers, because that's exactly what Ubers was, is and always will be: uncompetitive (by that definition).

The point of asking for the team is because the failure to do so would show that there's no way to bring a team that isn't weak to Shadow Tag, so you can no longer claim that it's the player's fault for losing to it. Dice's teams are all weak to Shadow Tag, it's just reduced as much as possible without using a team that's no longer viable in the first place. Orch's post just provides an anecdote (involving POCL, lol) that doesn't show anything other than how well hack has done in said tournament.

There's obviously a reason Sweep, Aim, Edgar, Problems, Blim, Hack, and Dice are all in favor of banning Shadow Tag. While that's clearly not a reason to ban it in and of itself, it should raise a couple red flags and tell you that it's not because they aren't adapting, choosing the options to beat it, or whatever other bullshit you want to claim is there as a form of counterplay. (and for the love of god, if you turn this around to mean I'm arguing that Tag is *only* OP and completely miss the fact I'm saying that your claims concerning there being ways for the better player to beat Shadow Tag abuse is full of shit, then I'll cry)

 

[orch]

I disagree. While Shadow Tag can be executed by both players as being 'the best strategy', the issue is even both players use Shadow Tag, it doesn't mean the game is 'fair'. In fact, the outcome of the match will depend on the matchup between the Shadow Tag teams. I will illustrate it with an example.

What? It's delusional to think that Shadow Tag has to do anything with the fact that team with better match up probably will win. Even if both teams have no Shadow Tag, it's still very possible that you will fare poorly to something. The fact that Ubers is so match-up based is not fault of Shadow Tag. Like I stated before, it's due to the fact that Ubers tier contains broken pokemon. You can easily observe this fact in BW Ubers. Players with better match up usually won the game.

The issue of Shadow Tag is 'You can prepare for it, but your way of preparation won't necessarily work. Ultimately, the player with the right preparation to the specific opponent's Stag's set will have an inherent advantage. This turns the Ubers tier into a matchup-based metagame due to Stag limiting the important mechanics of switching'

I don't see how switching is relevant. If you intend to counter/check X with your Y check/counter, and X carries something that beats Y. Then, you probably will switch Y into X and lose Y. If you don't have anything else for X, then you probably will lose. This has nothing to do with switching. Ubers tier is already inherently match-up based metagame with or without Shadow Tag, and to fix match-up issue is to violate the philosophy of Ubers which is to maintain the least amount of bans.

 

[Lemonade]

Luck is pretty necessary for something to be uncompetitive. It doesn't make sense that control only has to be taken away from *one* player, it has to be taken away from both players to be uncompetitive. Kyogre forces the opponent to switch to a check or they flat out lose one of their Pokemon. It looks to me like Kyogre takes away one player's control of the game's events. Does making poor decisions count as part of one player's control?

Swagger:
OP because the +2 boost causes the afflicted mon to take more confusion damage and more Foul Play damage
ALSO uncompetitive because it takes control away from both players. The one using Swagger has a 50% chance of winning the situation (opp hits themselves), and 50% of losing the situation (opp hits through confusion)

OHKO:
OP because it instantly kills something
also uncompetitive because control is taken away from both players. The one using Sheer Cold hopes it hits (they are not in control of the outcome). The opponent can literally do anything but whether his Pokemon lives or faints is not in their control.

Moody:
OP because the user gets a +2 boost (and a -1 boost, for a net of +1)
also uncompetitive because the player using Moody doesn't have control of what gets boosted, and the player playing against Moody doesn't either.

Shadow Tag:
The one using Shadow Tag retains their control.

 

[MMII]

All of tag's "solutions" are inherently matchup based cause they exist exclusively in teambuilder is the point he is making. You can argue Ubers is matchup based without tag (which I disagree with) but that doesn't matter because with everything else you can still outplay the bad matchup since you have options, however small, that you can *switch* to during the game itself.

edit: this was for orch

 

[MMII]

Luck is pretty necessary for something to be uncompetitive. It doesn't make sense that control only has to be taken away from *one* player, it has to be taken away from both players to be uncompetitive. Kyogre forces the opponent to switch to a check or they flat out lose one of their Pokemon. It looks to me like Kyogre takes away one player's control of the game's events. Does making poor decisions count as part of one player's control?

Swagger:
OP because the +2 boost causes the afflicted mon to take more confusion damage and more Foul Play damage
ALSO uncompetitive because it takes control away from both players. The one using Swagger has a 50% chance of winning the situation (opp hits themselves), and 50% of losing the situation (opp hits through confusion)

OHKO:
OP because it instantly kills something
also uncompetitive because control is taken away from both players. The one using Sheer Cold hopes it hits (they are not in control of the outcome). The opponent can literally do anything but whether his Pokemon lives or faints is not in their control.

Moody:
OP because the user gets a +2 boost (and a -1 boost, for a net of +1)
also uncompetitive because the player using Moody doesn't have control of what gets boosted, and the player playing against Moody doesn't either.

Shadow Tag:
The one using Shadow Tag retains their control.

Why do we care about the abuser's control? Again, you are assuming things that aren't reflected by the current banlist so why is it suddenly [not] okay?

Kyogre example is lol. I can choose to go to Grassy on Spout or Heatran on Ice Beam. Risky for the latter? Sure but I have that option to choose if I feel like it's best. None of the currently banned shit gives you that sort of choice and neither does Tag.

 

[pokemaster12321]

"Uncompetitive" is a term that has been used by the Pokemon community (and maybe more? I think I've seen it elsewhere) for long while. (idk how old, it's older than my interactions with the community afaik) The meaning behind this term is completely invented and not to be found in a dictionary. It's completely retarded, I agree but it has become ingrained in the culture with this new meaning so there's not much that can be done. The meaning when the word is used by the community is the one I've quoted a few times already.

This doesn't really address my concerns at all. Saying "well that's the definition we've always used" is a very short-sighted way of looking at things. The fact of the matter is, the definition provided for uncompetitive is terrible, and leaves way too much ambiguity to be worthwhile in this discussion. How can we decide whether or not Shadow Tag is uncompetitive if we do not have a functional definition of uncompetitive? I know you don't read real world examples, but let me provide you with one to illustrate just how crucial this concept is.

Only an irrational person would say something along the lines of "Circles aren't round." This is because our definition of the word round leaves no room for debate. Based on the definitions of "circle" and "round", the only rational conclusion to draw is that circles are, in fact, round. However, with the word "uncompetitive" defined as you have defined it above, this is not possible, because the definition itself is a fallacy. The supposed "definition" leaves so much ambiguity and subjectivity that it is impossible to say with certainty whether something falls into that category or doesn't, because the definition is not specific enough to be universally applicable. I'm not saying I have the solution, but I think we have to take it upon ourselves as the Ubers community to come up with a definition that does not fall victim to these logical fallacies. Until we do that, this argument cannot progress.

 

[Lemonade]

If you are saying that making poor decisions is part of the player's control then I can't argue with that (where poor means the play that is more likely to lead to a KO / momentum loss / whatever). Moody, OHKO, and Swagger all remove control from both players, Shadow Tag does not.

 

[Thetwinmasters]

All of tag's "solutions" are inherently matchup based cause they exist exclusively in teambuilder is the point he is making. You can argue Ubers is matchup based without tag (which I disagree with) but that doesn't matter because with everything else you can still outplay the bad matchup since you have options, however small, that you can *switch* to during the game itself.

edit: this was for orch

Umm if you seriously think ubers without stag will have no matchup look at all the other tiers that doesn't have tag in the meta you will find that there is a matchup factor in every tier which is just a part of Pokemon.

 

[MMII]

This doesn't really address my concerns at all. Saying "well that's the definition we've always used" is a very short-sighted way of looking at things. The fact of the matter is, the definition provided for uncompetitive is terrible, and leaves way too much ambiguity to be worthwhile in this discussion. How can we decide whether or not Shadow Tag is uncompetitive if we do not have a functional definition of uncompetitive? I know you don't read real world examples, but let me provide you with one to illustrate just how crucial this concept is.

Only an irrational person would say something along the lines of "Circles aren't round." This is because our definition of the word round leaves no room for debate. Based on the definitions of "circle" and "round", the only rational conclusion to draw is that circles are, in fact, round. However, with the word "uncompetitive" defined as you have defined it above, this is not possible, because the definition itself is a fallacy. The supposed "definition" leaves so much ambiguity and subjectivity that it is impossible to say with certainty whether something falls into that category or doesn't, because the definition is not specific enough to be universally applicable. I'm not saying I have the solution, but I think we have to take it upon ourselves as the Ubers community to come up with a definition that does not fall victim to these logical fallacies. Until we do that, this argument cannot progress.

Yeah, I get that concern. We've got a official, unofficial definition for it, though, so we do have something concrete to work with. You may not find it in a dictionary but it's still in black and white and clearly defined.

If you are saying that making poor decisions is part of the player's control then I can't argue with that (where poor means the play that is more likely to lead to a KO / momentum loss / whatever). Moody, OHKO, and Swagger all remove control from both players, Shadow Tag does not.

Never said that.

Umm if you seriously think ubers without stag will have no matchup look at all the other tiers that doesn't have tag in the meta you will find that there is a matchup factor in every tier which is just a part of Pokemon.

Never said that.

 

[pokemaster12321]

Yeah, I get that concern. We've got a official, unofficial definition for it, though, so we do have something concrete to work with. You may not find it in a dictionary but it's still in black and white and clearly defined.

I guess you and I have different ideas about what a "concrete" definition looks like then. Saying something is uncompetitive "if it takes away autonomy to a degree that can be considered uncompetitive" is about as far from concrete as definitions come, in my estimation, for reasons I listed above (logical fallacy, ambiguity, subjectivity). But I guess that's where the disagreement lies. Not to mention, I think it is silly that we blindly accept OU's "definition" without question when clearly, we need something more applicable to Ubers to settle this debate. But that's another point entirely.

 

[Fireburn]

(also, you can run into unlucky scenarios where the mon is phazed in as the pahzer dies and then you are screwed. Haxiom did that to fireburn in one game, lol)

http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ubers-152990731

I died a little that day.

 

[MMII]

I guess you and I have different ideas about what a "concrete" definition looks like then. Saying something is uncompetitive "if it takes away autonomy to a degree that could be considered uncompetitive" is about as far from concrete as definitions come, in my estimation, for reasons I listed above (logical fallacy). But I guess that's where the disagreement lies. Not to mention, I think it is is silly that we blindly accept OU's "definition" without question when clearly, we need something more applicable to Ubers to settle this debate. But that's another point entirely.

It's not "OU's" just because the OU council gave it to us. (as in, it's not the property of the meta nor inherently attached to it) We also haven't just "blindly" accepted it, we accepted it cause it fits our use of the term uncompetitive as well.

 

[Lemonade]

I can choose to go to Grassy on Spout or Heatran on Ice Beam. Risky for the latter?

 

[pokemaster12321]

It's not "OU's" just because the OU council gave it to us. (as in, it's not the property of the meta nor inherently attached to it) We also haven't just "blindly" accepted it, we accepted it cause it fits our use of the term uncompetitive as well.

With all due respect, you literally just ignored the meat of my argument and focused instead on something I threw in there as an aside, something meant to provoke further thought.

Listen, I'll happily admit it if someone proves me wrong, but that hasn't happened yet. The fact is, this definition that you seem so attached to is utter garbage, and we need to look at redefining it if this discussion is going to go anywhere.

 

[MMII]

I can choose to go to Grassy on Spout or Heatran on Ice Beam. Risky for the latter?

risky decisions aren't poor decisions

With all due respect, you literally just ignored the meat of my argument and focused instead on something I threw in there as an aside, something meant to provoke further thought.

Listen, I'll happily admit it if someone proves me wrong, but that hasn't happened yet. The fact is, this definition that you seem so attached to is utter garbage, and we need to look at redefining it if this discussion is going to go anywhere.

? You said you agreed to disagree and then threw in those arguments so I addressed them.

I think removal of autonomy is a clear enough subject to discuss. The bit about degree to be considered uncompetitive is worded oddly, sure, but it's just there to acknowledge that there's a subjective amount of autonomy removal that you can call something uncompetitive. Which means, nothing can be objectively claimed to be uncompetitive but we at least have a clear direction to make a decision.

The whole point that definition exists and the reason I'm so attached to it is because it means we don't have to waste time arguing about some definition instead of addressing the subject itself.

edit: oh you edited your post with elaboration and I responded before reloading the page to see those edits.

 

[shrang]

"Uncompetitive" is a term that has been used by the Pokemon community (and maybe more? I think I've seen it elsewhere) for long while. (idk how old, it's older than my interactions with the community afaik) The meaning behind this term is completely invented and not to be found in a dictionary. It's completely retarded, I agree but it has become ingrained in the culture with this new meaning so there's not much that can be done. The meaning when the word is used by the community is the one I've quoted a few times already.

You also know that up until (relatively) recently in our human history, it was ingrained into cultures all around the world that the Earth is flat. Coming back to something more Smogon/Pokemon related, I'm pretty sure that's been ingrained to our community at least until (relatively) recently, that Ubers was just a banlist for OU. Here's the most recent available Smogon tier description for Ubers:

The Uber tier is based solely on the power of the Pokemon present within it. Pokemon in this tier are considered to be too powerful to participate in the standard metagame. Note that no Pokemon is banned from competing with those in the Uber tier. The result is a "free-for-all" metagame with no restrictions on which Pokemon may participate.

So why are we running suspect tests in a metagame that's supposed to have "no restrictions"? If you're going to point out all the clauses, that was the point. We've clearly moved on from what we think is definition/description that doesn't work or doesn't make sense. Why can't we do the same for the OU council's definition of "uncompetitive" when it's clearly riddled with circular logic and doesn't really apply to Ubers anyway?

You are attaching too much to the word immune. I just meant it to mean that you can't trap and KO a Pokemon cause, unlike other metathreats, you don't have counterplay options in the game itself.

The point of asking for the team is because the failure to do so would show that there's no way to bring a team that isn't weak to Shadow Tag, so you can no longer claim that it's the player's fault for losing to it. Dice's teams are all weak to Shadow Tag, it's just reduced as much as possible without using a team that's no longer viable in the first place. Orch's post just provides an anecdote (involving POCL, lol) that doesn't show anything other than how well hack has done in said tournament.

- Bolded section: This is a fallacy in and of itself. It's beside the point anyway. Having a team totally prepared for Shadow Tag is not needed to make meaningful decisions that can allow you to minimise harm done by that threat. Like I've said in the past, just because you can trap a Pokemon and kill does not mean you've won the game. Regardless, I still stand by the point that whatever happens in control of both players, so you still got outplayed if you lost because of it.
- About Orch's post: Clearly you neglected to read again. Let me bold the bits that were important:

Not to mention that you can simply use offensive mons that are least effected by Shadow Tag and click attack and kill these pokemons... If you still think that you need counter/reliable check for everything to have a successful ubers team, then you're teambuilding wrong. Even BW Ubers had this issue. You cannot check everything in ubers metagame. This is not arguable. You can give me any ubers team and I'll find a specific pokemon and its set that will seriously threaten the team. It's just the nature of Ubers, since it's inherently unbalanced, so it's always match up based. There's no need to be hyperbolic and claim that it's impossible to construct a team that minimize the impact of Shadow Tag. It's a threat, just like all other mons in the metagame.

 

[orch]

All of tag's "solutions" are inherently matchup based cause they exist exclusively in teambuilder is the point he is making. You can argue Ubers is matchup based without tag (which I disagree with) but that doesn't matter because with everything else you can still outplay the bad matchup since you have options, however small, that you can *switch* to during the game itself.

edit: this was for orch

How is Shadow Tag's solutions different from any other mon's solutions? Aren't every single solutions that you come up inherently based on whatever you put in the teambuilder, since when you use the team, you cannot change the pokemon/sets or whatever during the battle.

I don't see any clamor to ban Xerneas even though it can bypass all of its "checks" by running right coverage move (aka you're guaranteed to win the game). Isn't this just as match up based as Shadow Tag users? And, that's why I think that discussing about how Shadow Tag causes match up is bullshit and irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[MMII]

You also know that up until (relatively) recently in our human history, it was ingrained into cultures all around the world that the Earth is flat. Coming back to something more Smogon/Pokemon related, I'm pretty sure that's been ingrained to our community at least until (relatively) recently, that Ubers was just a banlist for OU. Here's the most recent available Smogon tier description for Ubers:



So why are we running suspect tests in a metagame that's supposed to have "no restrictions"? If you're going to point out all the clauses, that was the point. We've clearly moved on from what we think is definition/description that doesn't work or doesn't make sense. Why can't we do the same for the OU council's definition of "uncompetitive" when it's clearly riddled with circular logic and doesn't really apply to Ubers anyway?





- Bolded section: This is a fallacy in and of itself. It's beside the point anyway. Having a team totally prepared for Shadow Tag is not needed to make meaningful decisions that can allow you to minimise harm done by that threat. Like I've said in the past, just because you can trap a Pokemon and kill does not mean you've won the game. Even if that's the case, I still stand by the point that whatever happens in control of both players, so you still got outplayed if you lost because of it.
- About Orch's post: Clearly you neglected to read again. Let me bold the bits that were important:

You keep making that claim (bolded) but have yet to show how it doesn't besides calling it OU's. Removal of autonomy is not circular logic.

If I have a standard Palkia, that Palkia can be trapped and I have a period of time where I have no meaningful choices that I can make. In other words, just because I can make those choices elsewhere in other scenarios doesn't eliminate the fact that there'll be ones where I can't. It's *those* cases that bother me and it's why I'm asking you to show me a team that doesn't have such an issue with Shadow Tag.

I responded to exactly that. (in another post on this page, though, now that I'm looking for it) Claiming team matchup is heavy regardless of tag is something I disagree with but also something that doesn't show how tag doesn't amplify that nor, and far more importantly, how tag isn't uncompetitive.

How is Shadow Tag's solutions different from any other mon's solutions? Aren't every single solutions that you come up inherently based on whatever you put in the teambuilder, since when you use the team, you cannot change the pokemon/sets or whatever during the battle.

I don't see any clamor to ban Xerneas even though it can bypass all of its "checks" by running right coverage move (aka you're guaranteed to win the game). Isn't this just as match up based as Shadow Tag users? And, that's why I think that discussing about how Shadow Tag causes match up is bullshit and irrelevant to the discussion.

Yes of course you have to give yourself options in teambuilder before you can choose those options in a game. With tag, though, even if you gave yourself options you can't choose them unless they are already in play. (in which case the tagger either choked or got cheesed by matchup)

 

[Lemonade]

Why can't you just double switch into your STag options? It's risky but you still have that choice.

 

[Edgar]

that's why I think that discussing about how Shadow Tag causes match up is bullshit and irrelevant to the discussion.

Not at all. From my perspective Team Matchup based matches are a very disgusting element from XY Ubers, as you mentioned Shadow Tag is not the only cause but that doesn't mean we should be "Ok" with that. I think 100% controlled team matchup could be seen as uncompetitive (especially and more specifically in tournament matches), as it doesn't matter how much your opponent prepares for the battle when you have a Shadow Tag mon that, when played "right" and with the coverage moves you chose to ensure a sweep for another mon OR beat one of its checks by itself puts the player in a lose/lose situation. Once again, watch Joey vs Manaphy for SPL, user aim was facing a team with Skarmory which walled both his Ekiller Arceus and Double Dance Groudon BUT, we decided to use Hidden Power Fire Gengar to counterstyle Manaphy AND opening the path for those mons to sweep. In that situation the player failed to control the game as it couldn't switch, he even tried to Brave Bird it to 2HKO it but that did't matter cus HP Fire Ohko'd back, that alone shows the Shadow Tag is one step above team builder. Anyways, I think that is a good example of Shadow Tag takes the game out of the one player's hand, which in my opinion is uncompetitve.

 

[MMII]

Why can't you just double switch into your STag options? It's risky but you still have that choice.

Can't double switch on an RK nor when I'm phazed in as the phazer dies.

Also, just cause I know where you were trying to go with this. Risky =/= poor but it doesn't mean that there's no such thing as a poor choice. The heatran example has a lot more information and a lot better (potential, since I wasn't terribly specific) risk/reward than most potential Tag switches do, which tend to be completely blind and therefore makes the choice to do so uninteresting. (again, though, double switching isn't always an option)

 

[Inspirited]

Yes of course you have to give yourself options in teambuilder before you can choose those options in a game. With tag, though, even if you gave yourself options you can't choose them unless they are already in play. (in which case the tagger either choked or got cheesed by matchup)

So I had a discussion and a half about tag with shrang last night and this little detail was at the center of most of his counterarguments. The Shadow Tag user can still choke (collapse under pressure / show less skill than the opponent) when using it by his / her own decisions without any rng influence to save or break them. Shadow Tag does take a certain amount of experience and skill to use unlike other bans which is what makes this suspect so controversial. I am starting to see tag as just an extremely unbalanced supporting presence, which is not something Ubers has yet experience until XY and also something Ubers should not ban. I am now convinced we are lowering the bar with this potential ban due to at least one player needing to know how to use it in order for the coin flip. Whatever way you cut it, we are lowering the bar, and that is not something I can allow myself to vote for.

 

[MMII]

So I had a discussion and a half about tag with shrang last night and this little detail was at the center of most of his counterarguments. The Shadow Tag user can still choke (collapse under pressure / show less skill than the opponent) when using it by his / her own decisions without any rng influence to save or break them. Shadow Tag does take a certain amount of experience and skill to use unlike other bans which is what makes this suspect so controversial. I am starting to see tag as just an extremely unbalanced supporting presence, which is not something Ubers has yet experience until XY and also something Ubers should not ban. I am now convinced we are lowering the bar with this potential ban due to at least one player needing to know how to use it in order for the coin flip. Whatever way you cut it, we are lowering the bar, and that is not something I can allow myself to vote for.

So what? This is only a concern for low level play, which the game encourages you t grow past. (if you want to win, then you need to learn how to) Even then, the victim isn't robbed any less just because the abuser squandered what he took. It's not very reassuring to be saying it's okay for Tag to be in tournaments cause the other guy can choke...

 

[orch]

Not at all. From my perspective Team Matchup based matches are a very disgusting element from XY Ubers, as you mentioned Shadow Tag is not the only cause but that doesn't mean we should be "Ok" with that. I think 100% controlled team matchup could be seen as uncompetitive (especially and more specifically in tournament matches), as it doesn't matter how much your opponent prepares for the battle when you have a Shadow Tag mon that, when played "right" and with the coverage moves you chose to ensure a sweep for another mon OR beat one of its checks by itself puts the player in a lose/lose situation. Once again, watch Joey vs Manaphy for SPL, user aim was facing a team with Skarmory which walled both his Ekiller Arceus and Double Dance Groudon BUT, we decided to use Hidden Power Fire Gengar to counterstyle Manaphy AND opening the path for those mons to sweep. In that situation the player failed to control the game as it couldn't switch, he even tried to Brave Bird it to 2HKO it but that did't matter cus HP Fire Ohko'd back, that alone shows the Shadow Tag is one step above team builder. Anyways, I think that is a good example of Shadow Tag takes the game out of the one player's hand, which in my opinion is uncompetitve.

This is the battle in question.
I find it funny that you picked that specific battle, which Manaphy used support Arceus-Electric (not viable at all)... It's one of the worst SPL battle. All it demonstrated that Manaphy did not have sufficient understanding of XY ubers metagame to teambuild a half way decent team. Of course, you're going to lose if you don't use a team that adapts for Shadow Tag. If you want example of an excellent ubers team, then you can just head to Dice's repository which is full of teams that will not lose to HP Fire Gengar. Also just something else to think about, how is that scenario any different from a Fire Blast/Shadow Force Ekiller? It would result into a Ekiller sweep no matter what. Skarmory is OHKO'd by fire blast after SR, while Gira-A is owned by Shadow Force. I've stated this so many times, so...

You can give me any ubers team and I'll find a specific pokemon and its set that will seriously threaten the team. It's just the nature of Ubers, since it's inherently unbalanced, so it's always match up based. There's no need to be hyperbolic and claim that it's impossible to construct a team that minimize the impact of Shadow Tag. It's a threat, just like all other mons in the metagame.

I just want to be clear, Shadow Tag do contributes to the match-up issue. However, it's far from the sole cause and the fact that Ubers mons has such as expansive movepool and stats that it would require banning all good uber pokemons to create a minimal match-up based metagame (aka OU).