np: ORAS OU Suspect Process, Round 3 - Wandering Ghosts [Aegislash remains in Ubers]

[Alfalfa]

I didn't say for a fact that it balances out the metagame (although I believe it does to an extent), but it making other mons good isn't a good reason for it to be banned and not those mons. Tyranitar and Hippowdon summoned sand that made excadrill broken, but excadrill was the one that was banned, and not ttar/hippo.

And that still doesn't make it broken.

I am not saying that it makes certain Pokemon good, I said that it makes the top threats even more difficult to handle; think Zard-X and Thundurus back during XY as an example. Of course Aegislash is going to make some Pokemon good, but it naturally makes all of the top threats exuberantly more difficult to deal with because Aegislash provides a more efficient way of removing their defensive checks (and I mean being able to remove ANY defensive check) in tandem to being able to blanket check the entire metagame.

A Pokemon does not have to be broken to be banned. Aegislash in XY was banned not for being broken, but for having a negative presence in the metagame due to its overcentralization of XY OU. Being broken is not the only factor that would warrant a ban.

 

[Aberforth]

And see, that's where we disagree on things. I dont want to ban things because of overcentralisation or any other reason than they are broken. Or would you ban Snorlax from GSC OU?

 

[RoyalDispenser]

I am not saying that it makes certain Pokemon good, I said that it makes the top threats even more difficult to handle; think Zard-X and Thundurus back during XY as an example. Of course Aegislash is going to make some Pokemon good, but it naturally makes all of the top threats exuberantly more difficult to deal with because Aegislash provides a more efficient way of removing their defensive checks (and I mean being able to remove ANY defensive check) in tandem to being able to blanket check the entire metagame.

A Pokemon does not have to be broken to be banned. Aegislash in XY was banned not for being broken, but for having a negative presence in the metagame due to its overcentralization of XY OU. Being broken is not the only factor that would warrant a ban.

What is aegislash going to get rid of that a +1 zard doesn't already?

+1 252+ Atk Tough Claws Mega Charizard X Flare Blitz vs. 252 HP / 4 Def Sylveon: 607-715 (154 - 181.4%) -- guaranteed OHKO
+1 252+ Atk Tough Claws Mega Charizard X Flare Blitz vs. 252 HP / 160 Def Clefable: 457-538 (115.9 - 136.5%) -- guaranteed OHKO
+1 252+ Atk Mega Charizard X Earthquake vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Tyranitar: 330-390 (81.6 - 96.5%) -- 62.5% chance to OHKO after Stealth Rock


I don't get what exactly made zard better with aegislash around.. The reason why zard isn't used as much now is due to opportunity cost of wasting a meta slot over something with more utility like metagross or altaria (plus altaria as a counter itself). It ain't like zard was weak to fairies or psychics that aegislash was such a major influence for him.

Correct me if I'm wrong, as I don't want to sound like I'm trying to be arronant and nitpick.. but I don't believe aegislash is to blame for anything becoming more dangerous than it already was in the x/y meta with mawile and like still around. Thundurus was also an amazing check to greninja as well. (fast para despite ice beam)

 

[thesecondbest]

We could alternatively fix the actual problem by banning Pokemon that are problems instead of inserting a blanket check that only the metagame even more cancerous to deal with. Why is everybody afraid of suspecting Landorus or anything else that could be a problem? In addition, while Aegislash can check some of the potential problematic Pokemon in OU (bar Landorus), you also run the risk of improving that Pokemon by introducing a very easy way to remove any one of its checks, which has been pointed out for the past 20-25 pages. You could argue that Aegislash brought stability, but you could have argued that with Gira-O as well, even if it was a joke suspect, and Gira-O was clearly overpowering.

But we're not talking about fixing thee meta as a whole, the ou council decided that the first step is to see if aegi/ is broken or not. That's what the test is about, not fixing the meta as a whole. If one more person says "we need to ban not free" then why are you even posting in this thread. We're talking about whether aegi/ specifically is too good for ou or not.

I did suggest one idea and it's pretty simple, exactly first post at page 20. In case someone missed it I will repeat it.

Instead of suspect testing Aegislash, let's just present simple suspect test metagame, where most controversial candidates at the moment are out.

Plan MINIMUM:

Landorus-I
Meta Metagross
Also I feel like testing Aegislash without them would make this less controversial and clouded as Aegislash make those even stronger, mostly with his Pursuit support. And as I said - I'm not a fan of Aegislash suspect test with all those (and few others as a bonus, but I feel like this is least drastic method) unlike introducing all banned in the past from OU Uber as I still feel like 'broken check out/support broken' aftertaste may be noticed in a way at the moment IMO with Aegislash in. So yes, I agree that Aegislash isn't broken, but also it's not healthy (well said btw) which is why I dislike it at the moment.

This is just my simple idea. If people won't like it - they won't discuss it.

Counterplan:
Free aegislash to check mega meta(and altaria) then ban landorus. Doesn't that fix everything if Aegislash , to quote you, isn't broke, which is WHAT THE SUSPECT IS ABOUT? Then if aegislash is the broken thing in the meta, it can be banned. But if it isn't broken, don't talk about a plan that bans other stuff.
TL;DR focus on the suspect test, stop theorymoning about the ideal meta. If you want the ideal meta go play UU. They know how to ban overcentralized stuff, and they even retest them (although they should try dropping all of the flying types at the same time lol jk)

 

[Alfalfa]

What is aegislash going to get rid of that a +1 zard doesn't already?

+1 252+ Atk Tough Claws Mega Charizard X Flare Blitz vs. 252 HP / 4 Def Sylveon: 607-715 (154 - 181.4%) -- guaranteed OHKO
+1 252+ Atk Tough Claws Mega Charizard X Flare Blitz vs. 252 HP / 160 Def Clefable: 457-538 (115.9 - 136.5%) -- guaranteed OHKO
+1 252+ Atk Mega Charizard X Earthquake vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Tyranitar: 330-390 (81.6 - 96.5%) -- 62.5% chance to OHKO after Stealth Rock


I don't get what exactly made zard better with aegislash around.. The reason why zard isn't used as much now is due to opportunity cost of wasting a meta slot over something with more utility like metagross or altaria (plus altaria as a counter itself). It ain't like zard was weak to fairies or psychics that aegislash was such a major influence for him.

Correct me if I'm wrong, as I don't want to sound like I'm trying to be arronant and nitpick.. but I don't believe aegislash is to blame for anything becoming more dangerous than it already was in the x/y meta with mawile and like still around. Thundurus was also an amazing check to greninja as well. (fast para despite ice beam)

Aegislash could deal with any of Zard X's checks, such as Heatran, Landorus-T, Hippowdon, and Azumarill, and cripple which ever one Zard X wanted out of the way. Aegislash has never been limited to what it could weaken, check, or cripple, which is what the pro-ban side is trying to argue.

 

[Freeroamer]

Aegislash could deal with any of Zard X's checks, such as Heatran, Landorus-T, Hippowdon, and Azumarill, and cripple which ever one Zard X wanted out of the way. Aegislash has never been limited to what it could weaken, check, or cripple, which is what the pro-ban side is trying to argue.

I've never really seen it as that great a partner to Zard X, seeing as it doesn't really switch into any of those and in the case of Hippo, SpDef Hippo is actually a fair Aegi check so I don't know why that's helpful? o.o I think the reason Zard was seen a lot more in XY was because it was the premier offensive mega of the tier, compared to now where it faces a hella lot of competition to land that role on teams, and it's initial 4x rocks weakness and even the 2x weakness in Mega are pretty nasty with the best spinblocker OU has seen back in the tier. Hell of a partner for Zard Y though, beats p. much all checks with an SD or Pursuit+Sacred Sword set.

 

[RoyalDispenser]

Aegislash could deal with any of Zard X's checks, such as Heatran, Landorus-T, Hippowdon, and Azumarill, and cripple which ever one Zard X wanted out of the way. Aegislash has never been limited to what it could weaken, check, or cripple, which is what the pro-ban side is trying to argue.

I'm still not convinced when azumaril has knock off to hit aegi on switch and zard has EQ for heatran. Landorus-t I cannot see aegi being a check too when it can't be brought in on EQ, at all, unless air balloon, and same case with hippowdon.

252+ Atk Choice Band Huge Power Azumarill Knock Off (97.5 BP) vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Aegislash-Shield: 272-320 (83.9 - 98.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

EDIT: Ninja'd

 

[Of Moose & Men]

And see, that's where we disagree on things. I dont want to ban things because of overcentralisation or any other reason than they are broken. Or would you ban Snorlax from GSC OU?

lol, well that's a horrible way to look at it if I must admit. You could if you tried to classify centralizing the meta as breaking it. Morphing it into its version. Is it broken? No, it cant just OHKO the meta with little to no effort, but that's not what should matter.

When suspecting something dont look at it as "is it broken?" Look at it as "is it healthy for the current meta?"

 

[Alfalfa]

I'm still not convinced when azumaril has knock off to hit aegi on switch and zard has EQ for heatran. Landorus-t I cannot see aegi being a check too when it can't be brought in on EQ, at all, unless air balloon, and same case with hippowdon.

252+ Atk Choice Band Huge Power Azumarill Knock Off (97.5 BP) vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Aegislash-Shield: 272-320 (83.9 - 98.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

EDIT: Ninja'd

I meant that SpD Heatran, Hippowdon, and AV Azumarill were common switch-ins to Aegislash, not the other way around, and that Aegislash usually had ways around them that Zard X benefited from. I apologize if I implied that Aegislash was switching in on those threats, for such would have been a dumb move to make.

 

[MeteorMiss]

Got reqs. Here are some thoughts:

(Disclaimer: I've only used a stall team so far in the suspect test, so my perspective is admittedly a bit limited. I'm going to ladder on an alt with a more offensive team in the next few days.)

Aegislash can be checked by a sizable number of Pokemon, many of which are fairly common in the metagame.

• For example, Swords Dance Aegislash is countered by Mandibuzz, Gliscor, Hippowdon, Unaware Clefable and Unaware Quagsire, all of which can switch in (even after a boost) and beat it 1v1. SD Aegislash can also be revenge-killed by many offensive pokemon in the tier, such as Bisharp, Heatran, Garchomp, Landorus-T, Tyranitar, Diggersby, etc.
• Life Orb Aegislash is harder to directly counter, but Mandibuzz still works, as do Mega Sableye, defensive Manaphy, and a few other things depending on its set. (For example, Sylveon can beat it if it doesn't have Flash Cannon, and Heatran/Bisharp/Chansey can counter it if it doesn't have Sacred Sword.) The LO set wears itself down quickly, and consequently it's much easier to revenge-kill. (The same revenge-killers above also work on the Life Orb set. Several other things can do enough damage to take it out when it's at low health, which will occur more often due to the recoil.)
• It's not really that difficult to figure out which set Aegislash is running. For example, you can tell whether it has Leftovers as it switches into damage or rocks.

Consequently, most good teams will already be able to deal with Aegislash. Some teams will need to be adjusted, but there are many ways to account for Aegislash -- it is not "overcentralizing".

• If you have a stall team, you might just be able to counter it. If you have an offensive team, you might not be able to switch in directly, but at worst you'll be able to revenge-kill it (or put pressure on anything that decides to switch in). Also, an offensive Aegislash set might have trouble switching into an offensive team in the first place.
• Many other OU threats (Landorus, Mega Scizor, Mega Gyarados, Mega Charizard X, etc.) require much more preparation in teambuilding than Aegislash does. As a wallbreaker, something like Landorus is generally more of a concern than Aegislash -- it has STAB Earth Power and Sheer Force. As a bulky sweeper, Mega Scizor is largely more threatening for its access to Roost and Technician Bullet Punch.
• This is not to say that Aegislash is outclassed -- it has its advantages over the above threats. However, it does not put any more pressure on teambuilding than the above threats.

I'm open to other peoples' arguments, but right now I'm strongly leaning to unban Aegislash.

 

[Let's go shuckles]

I'm still not convinced when azumaril has knock off to hit aegi on switch and zard has EQ for heatran. Landorus-t I cannot see aegi being a check too when it can't be brought in on EQ, at all, unless air balloon, and same case with hippowdon.

252+ Atk Choice Band Huge Power Azumarill Knock Off (97.5 BP) vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Aegislash-Shield: 272-320 (83.9 - 98.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

EDIT: Ninja'd

I would just like to point out that the idea of checks is that they don't switch in. Actual switch ins are called counters.
Also that this post isn't a complete waste of time, I would like to just point out that aegislash has no counters.

 

[PK Gaming]

And see, that's where we disagree on things. I dont want to ban things because of overcentralisation or any other reason than they are broken. Or would you ban Snorlax from GSC OU?

Arguably a false equivalency, considering the sheer history behind Snorlax's existence in GSC OU. At this point, it's not a stretch to say that Snorlax is the GSC metagame, so banning it would the equivalent of completely resetting the metagame. Snorlax is a unique case, and not at all comparable to Aegislash.

 

[Mencee]

I would like to just point out that aegislash has no counters.

While I agree it has no true counters, the things that check Aegi are actual OU pokemon, unlike Greninja where people were running Porygon-2 out of desperation.

Anyway ofc you have to prepare for Aegislash, if you don't prepare for x mon in the tier, it will likely shit on you. You run stealth rocks for the extra damage on the mons in the tier to help with 3hkos become 2hkos. Wanna check/counter Talonflame? run Rotom-W and/or Heatran, check/counter Mega Garde? run Scizor or Heatran (shaky at best because of Focus Blast). I could go on and on but the whole point of this suspect test is because there is too much to prepare for and maybe Aegislash could help. I'm sure the OU council knew it'd still be a centralizing motherfucker, else I don't see the reason why they would drop it down now + the OP states it's to help check the threats. Now, it all just boils down to whether Aegislash helps the meta or not, and that all depends on your view of Aegislash.

Hide

 

[WebBowser]

Arguably a false equivalency, considering the sheer history behind Snorlax's existence in GSC OU. At this point, it's not a stretch to say that Snorlax is the GSC metagame, so banning it would the equivalent of completely resetting the metagame. Snorlax is a unique case, and not at all comparable to Aegislash.

To be fair, if we decide to not ban aegi and give the meta a few years to develop like GSC has, XY could very well be remembered as "Aegislash: the metagame". I personally don't think it'll be that centralizing, but it certainly looked that way for a bit during XY OU, which was part of the reason for it's banning.

That being said, I still think that 1. the amount that aegi will centralize the meta has been heavily exaggerated and 2. overcentralization isn't a great argument for banning something in the first place.

I personally see him as being similar to DPP Scizor: very strong immediate presence, bulky, great priority, nearly unparalleled versatility (he even got reliable recovery :o), great typing, yet still not broken due to low speed and very clear (even if few) weaknesses.

 

[PK Gaming]

To be fair, if we decide to not ban aegi and give the meta a few years to develop like GSC has, XY could very well be remembered as "Aegislash: the metagame". I personally don't think it'll be that centralizing, but it certainly looked that way for a bit during XY OU, which was part of the reason for it's banning.

It's a moot point considering there is no chance of that ever happening again. Once again, GSC OU is a special exception.

I personally see him as being similar to DPP Scizor: very strong immediate presence, bulky, great priority, nearly unparalleled versatility (he even got reliable recovery :o, great typing, yet still not broken due to low speed and very clear (even if few) weaknesses.

That's a faulty comparison. DPP Scizor was versatile (and a top class scout) but it definitely lacked Aegislash's immediate power. The only set that came close was Choice Band, but that certainly can't be compared to Aegislash. For one, Aegislash has a tremendously powerful STAB to work with (and a useful sub-STAB) coming off a base 150 Special Attack. And that's not even taking King's Shield into account which lets it dance around certain Pokemon. In short, Scizor had several consistent checks that stopped it from running wild. Aegislash does not.

 

[Machi]

I would just like to point out that the idea of checks is that they don't switch in. Actual switch ins are called counters.
Also that this post isn't a complete waste of time, I would like to just point out that aegislash has no counters.

Actually they can switch in but it really depends on how many moves of the opposing mon are they likely to switch into safely, meaning what they resist/outright immune/can defend against. Part of the thing that seems to be missed by many is that they assume a check should switch in on a coverage or status move... Which is why they are a check in the first place, they cannot switch in safely to all moves that would be akin to a counter.

But hey if you can switch in to 3 out of 4 moves of most pokemon that makes you a relatively good check, which a lot of people are missing when they only focus on Aegis switching in to a coverage move which again is just not the way to go about using a check. Of course it goes without saying you generally force out the pokemon or threaten it with a KO once inside, leaving them only with fight or flight with a huge risk to go either way.

Edit: In the same way some people also seem to expect Aegislash to check certain mons when it has been worn out... If you really must persist on that train of thought what I'd have to ask is how laborious was the process of getting Aegis to that magic number?

 

[MaestroDeSWAG]

Perhaps it's just because people are overpreparing for it in all the hell it's gotten since it left, but I really don't feel that it's as big of a threat as it used to be. I was against the initial ban, but that may have been due to bias.

Looking at aegis as it stands now, I feel that it's strong, but that people are blowing this thing way out of proportion. Again, maybe people are just building teams to counter it and cores built w/ it, and the meta is OVERprepared for it, and this is the only reason I'm seeing this, but it just kinda seems ridiculous to me how much more opposed to it people have become w/ time. Like Clinton, only the opposite.

Also, I'm still in scrub territory, where people do stupid things that can sometimes miraculously work. So maybe my perception isn't perfectly clear on the topic yet. Stuff like using confuse ray as a wincon... Seriously, TF?

 

[Aberforth]

lol, well that's a horrible way to look at it if I must admit. You could if you tried to classify centralizing the meta as breaking it. Morphing it into its version. Is it broken? No, it cant just OHKO the meta with little to no effort, but that's not what should matter.

When suspecting something dont look at it as "is it broken?" Look at it as "is it healthy for the current meta?"

Did you read my prior post when I said that I look for if something is broken?

Aegislash is not broken, and ergo it should not be banned.

I was using snorlax as an example of something being centralising without being broken.

 

[Adamant Zoroark]

Did you read my prior post when I said that I look for if something is broken?

Aegislash is not broken, and ergo it should not be banned.

I was using snorlax as an example of something being centralising without being broken.

I recall tehy at one point saying that Aegislash was overcentralizing and therefore WAS broken, not instead of being broken. PK Gaming already explained why GSC Snorlax isn't comparable to Aegislash, so I won't delve into that. The point is, you can make an argument that being overcentralizing is a way to be broken.

Personally, I think it's an awful idea to create a metagame with a bunch of limbo Pokemon that are too good for UU but not viable in OU. Point is, back in XY, if you were hard countered by Aegislash, you sucked, period, and nothing has really changed that. This had an especially negative effect on Pokemon like Hawlucha and Mega Heracross, who were too good for UU but, because of Aegislash, nigh-unusable in OU. And let's not forget that Aegislash blanket checks half the metagame... I know the Giratina-O suspect was a joke suspect, but people pointed out in that how blanket checking half the metagame would have a bad effect on the meta. What makes it any different in Aegislash's case?

 

[tehy]

yeah, i'll repeat what i said

Overcentralizing is just a way to be broken. If a pokemon is so good that losing to it makes you worthless, and the entire metagame warps around it, forcing you to run certain mons, making certain crappy mons 'viable' etc then it's just overcentralize-broken rather than conventionally broken. Of course, this type of broken is harder to analyse in some cases but still

 

[BCE]

in Gen 7 or in pokemon Z, if gamefreaks creates the first ghost / normal pokemon to counter aegislash, we can allow him in OU, for now, just accept it and kick this thing to uber. I do believe banning Kings shield is a good solution but will be problematic in next game,if something else learns this move.

 

[Of Moose & Men]

Did you read my prior post when I said that I look for if something is broken?

Aegislash is not broken, and ergo it should not be banned.

I was using snorlax as an example of something being centralising without being broken.

Did you read any of my post you replied to? I don't care that you think a mon has to run train on the meta to be banned, but what you need to do is take a step back from this one track mind you've got and realize we are trying to make the meta healthy. Something the inclusion of aegi is not Helping with.

 

[Magcargo]

What about introducing a new BL?
Broken in OU doesn't mean aegi has the tools to deserve meaningful usage in what's presently known as ubers.

Ubers is a banlist for pokemon that break the metagame; usage in ubers has no effect as to whether the pokemon moves up to it or not.

 

[Synchronation]

Just a small post about some arguments here.

There are still people who think that HO will become as dominant as before with the bad, bad Aegislash ruining the great meta we have.
As I mentioned before, there are no members of these HO-teams besides Bisharp and Aegislash left. Deoxys, the perfect lead, is gone. Lucario and Mawile, the strong wallbreaking and sweeping megas, are banned. Landorus is broken anyway and keeping it would be stupid anyways. Greninja, the fastest balance-breaker is no more. Do you really think, that Bisharp and Aegislash ALONE can lead to an aggressive fast HO-meta? Not to mention that we got excellent checks to HO in form of Lopunny and Sceptile, so I really don't see that playstyle as dominant as before. Thundurus will not become broken and I and others already explained Charizard X.

As a response to Kurona's post (don't worry, I won't nitpick your Rayquaza-example):
Not all of us see Aegislash as the "better poison". I for myself believe that a meta with Aegislash is healthy and better than the current one. Every meta needs something it centralizes itself around otherwise it will become a huge mess. If you look at other metagames like Super Smash, you will realize that even this game has centralizing aspects around fast and rush-down characters, but that doesn't mean that only these ones are good. Currently, OU has nothing it can shape around and if you look closely you will see how much of a mess it really is. People were suggesting special Tauros to deal with threats, which is not the greatest idea but it still worked for them. There were so many ridiculous D-rank nominations in the past weeks despite most of them being horrible they could use them to success. I know that this is happening quite a few times but not to this extent. You can call that creativity but people are desperately trying to build team that will not loose every third game due to match-up. This is not healthy and I honestly can not understand how some people are claiming that this meta is actually "pretty balanced".
XY-meta is different from ORAS-meta, and having so many threats already banned and new checks to HO and Aegislash, I do not believe that Aegislash will be some sort of better poison, it will be a healthy and positive centralizing aspect of the metagame.

One more thing I would like to explain is why some people are saying that we have "staleness" in this meta despite having more viable Pokemon than ever.
Let me ask this: When was the last time you saw a Mega-Beedrill? Or a Mega-Aerodactyl?
Only a few are still using them because in this matchup-meta it is better to stick to the already working as it will have more success most of the time. You almost always see Metagross and Altaria and occasionally Charizard X, Slowbro and Scizor. I'm not saying nobody uses all the other megas but it is undeniable that they are not as common as they should be.

One little side-note:
There are so many posts how they dislike the new ladder.
This ladder is new, people are still experimenting. Basing your opinion JUST from the current trends is not a good idea. You can use it as a help to understand the suspects perfomance, but don't base your entire argument on this.

 

[MikeDawg]

I don't get the arguments that people are giving about Aegislash not being too strong and being easily checked, while only providing examples of things that existed pre-oras (not to mention the mons that have little relevancy aside from checking aegi, but i digress).

Aegislash was deemed broken (especially by top-tier players) in XY, so using xy things as an argument is contradictory to the initial banning. Sure, you may have had a dissenting opinion all along, but (obviously) that opinion and the associated arguments were shot down by the pro-ban side (hence the ban). Go read aldaron's post for the specifics.

What has been introduced in oras that hinders aegislash? Mega altaria loses. The mega latis lose. Pidgeot loses. Glalie loses. Metagross loses. Diancie loses. Lopunny wins if encore or sub (and can win potentially if otherwise too), sableye wins maybe (idk didnt calc)? Slowbro loses. Gallade loses. Sceptile loses. Swampert wins yay. Beedrill loses. Camerupt wins. And that is all of oras (things like hawlucha that gained popularity also lose).

So lopunny, sableye, swampert, camerupt are the oras mons that bode well against aegi in most scenarios. Aegi will limit the others.

Let us keep in mind that the burden of proof now lies on the anti-ban side, not the pro-ban side, so they must make a very good case for a metagame shift that warrants its return.

As far as being a good pokemon, aegislash gained a lot of traction. It beats every mon that emerged post-aegi, and it beats almost every new oras mon. That is entirely contradictory to it coming back by the "too strong" standards.

On the other side of things, aegi becomes even more of a blanket check than before. It is important to remember that this was already deemed a poor way to go about supressing the meta. That is a very important factor.

Again, the onus lies on the pro-ban side to justify how things have changed to warrant its return.

I realize that all has been said. Aegislash makes it much easier to check everything. It is a much stronger presence in the meta as a result. It will presumptuously have even more usage than before as a result of this. It will be even more centralizing than before.

The factor, then, to argue here is whether or not it is good to have that centralizing force. To reiterate once again because important: this was deemed to be bad when aegislash was a less potent mon. It is now stronger, and it will hold the metagame even stronger than before.

I don't see why precedent should change. The premise of aegislash was deemed to be unhealthy. Aegislash as a whole was deemed to be overpowered.

Now aegislash is stronger. It will limit more things, yes, but this only exasperates the "this is a bad way to go about balancing the meta" decision that was already made.

In my opinion, the alleged "need" to have aegislash back does not stack up to the cost of going against the premise of the original decision.

QED