Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Since I've been seeing a lot of posts right now about matchup problems in the metagame, I feel I have to reiterate what I and a few others have said before in the thread. Matchup is simply never going to get better, and bringing something like aegislash down is like putting a band-aid on a gunshot wound. It'll help for a bit, but you'll still eventually bleed out. The matchup won't get better, because when pokemon Z or gen 7 comes out, we are going to get a whole lot of borderline overpowered megas that we will have to prepare for, and in gen 7, a bunch more non-mega threats to consider, plus new moves/abilities/items/buffs/nerfs etc. Gen 6 was the tipping point, and now everyone will have to accept that in the future, OU will be very matchup based. There will be threats like Lando-i and zard y that are impossible to switch into, and they will make it so if you don't prepare for one, you lose. If you don't like matchup, we can't keep bringing down overcentralized threats, because for one, that sets a bad example by saying, "this thing is broken and unmanageable, but we need to unban it so a bunch of other things aren't broken and unmanageable." The idea behind smogon's bans is to ban something if it is broken or overcentralizing, not bringing something back to limit it. Secondly, it won't work. Yes, aegislash may be a band-aid right now, but say in gen 7, we get 15 super threats, 10 that aegislash can stop, 5 that aegislash can't stop, but greninja can stop those 5 threats, so by the logic of this suspect, we bring back greninja, a borderline broken threat to check others (PS, I know aegislash and greninja aren't the same at all, its just an example). But if we go down this path, we will most likely either reach a point where we run out of borderline broken stuff like greninja, deo-d/s, gene, and aegislash, and the threats keep piling on, and then matchup isn't fixed, or we get a really centralized and unbalanced metagame, built around 5-8 huge threats and countering them, sort of like how ubers is about primal groudon, extreme killer arceus, xerneas, and beating those threats (I also know that isn't what ubers is about, but those guys completely centralize the tier, and if you don't have generally 2 solid checks to each, you will lose). Anyway, unbanning aegislash won't cure matchup, it'll just keep it from coming back for about a year.
TLDR: MATCHUP ISN'T GOING TO GET ANY BETTER AT ALL, STOP WHINING ABOUT IT! AEGISLASH MAY BE A SHORT-TIME SOLUTION, BUT IT WON'T HELP IN THE FUTURE.
It doesn't matter how the matchup in OU is going to be in Gen 7 or when Z comes out. Not is it all speculation and guess work at that point but our OU metgamae is ORAS at the moment and not Gen VII or Z. Because of that I can't agree with the argument you present and I believe bringing up how Aegislash helps making OU less match up based right now can be a valid argument for pro Aegislash peeps. You can't really disregard this argument with speculation about future gens.
But like I said I'm not convinced at all about this match up argument so I'll be voting for Aegis to stay in Ubers.
Couldn't post my ideas earlier because i first wanted to get the needed reqs 'cause that's the only way to gain a good knowledge of what we're talking about. At a first glance and without battling in suspect, i must admit that i thought that maybe aegislash was really a good " antidote " for all the " poisoning things " that affect the OU tier. I was damn wrong. On the road to reqs i used a team with aegislash for most of my battles and i must say that pratical approach completely changed my way of thinking. Aegislash will not help the OU tier because he will simply turn the "matchup problems" that many guys mentioned into nothing else but COINFLIPS. We will just return back to early XY, when Bisharp ( another damn damn damn coinflip inducer ) ruled unrivaled the usage. Is aegi probably one of the best fairy's check? Absolutely yes. But we cant close our eyes: the fact that aegi will put a stop to the fairy spam is not the only relevant fact. I think that We must absolutely consider what the aegi's unban will bring pratically: bisharp's usage will rise again and some already dangerous megas ( like lopunny ) will start to run the damn substitute. What does it means? This means that aegi will bring with itsefl a bunch of NON-COMPETITIVE COINFLIPS that will reduce even more than now the " gap " between " good " players and " newbies " . This is not competitive, pokemon should be 80 skill 10 luck 10 mu, not the inverse and aegi just turn backwards the factors. That's why i' gonna vote for BAN.
I'd like to take the time to discuss the Match Up argument that's been floating around the forums since... oh, about mid-BW2 OU (perhaps longer, but it was most prominent in this era).
The argument is that Match Up dictates the winner and in a metagame such as this, Skill is not always the victor; therefore, Smogon need an answer to it.
The problem is that people assume that this problem has a fix, but due to how the Pokemon mechanics are set up (status moves, status chance, critical hit, and numerous of options in teambuilding and wide moovepools), no one can ever start a battle on even grounds with their opponent.
This is part of what defines teambuilding skill. See, this bit is usually ignored, but there are two types of skill in Pokemon: teambuilding and battling. People assume that Battle Skill alone should suffice in victory, as such, creating balance in the metagame. This is not false; hypothetically, such a metagame would be balanced. However, in Pokemon, this type of balance is impossible due to the mechanics and nature of this game. Battle Skill cannot drive a victory alone, and this is intentional due to how this game is designed.
I don't like seeing this MU argument brought up so much because I believe a player needs to have both the Battle Skills to play around bad matchups, and the Teambuilding Skills to make such a disadvantage as minimal as possible. I don't think Smogon needs an answer to Match Up disadvantage other than to simply get better at this game. LightningLuxray brings up a good point about how the metagame seeks to enter an equilibrium of balance; however, I do not believe unbanning Aegislash will give the metagame the balance it needs. Aegislash will only contribute to match-up reliant battles anyway, and in the direction metagame is developing, I don't think we'll be seeing any sort of perfect balance of MU advantage; however, due to the nature of this game and team construction, I think this is intentional on the developer's part. (Maybe not on a competitive standpoint, but as a feature of the game as a whole. They want players to think abstractly and create teams that achieve balance themselves). No team can be perfect, but I think with all the new Pokemon GameFreak is developing, this is unavoidable. They'll only continue to develop more and more Pokemon, but this also means more and more room for creativity in teambuilding, and teambuilding is what makes teams effective. Yes, you can't cover every threat, but you're supposed to use what's given to you to make a team that can achieve the highest win ratio possible, a team that can overcome its weaknesses with good Battle Skills and Teammates.
If you're losing to a Match Up based disadvantage, you have to think on how your team can minimalize its loss against the specific threats, and you have to know how to play around them (no player is of equal skill level; an adavantage or disadvantage helps give one player initiative, but I do not think the metagame is so MU that a skilled player cannot still come out on top if they have both Battle and Teambuilding Skills about them).
tl;tr: MU arguments are not reasons to unban threats. They will either contribute to MU or develop centralization (which is even worse than MU). Furthermore, MU should not be something that needs to be frowned upon or scoffed at. It's part of the game. It's part of what defines a skilled player (a completely skilled player -- most players brag that they can build amazing teams but can't use them, or battle well but can't build, but you need both to be successful at this game).
Do not unban anything in an effort to fix an issue that doesn't need a solve. Do not unban Aegislash for these reasons.
I'm not trying to attack anyone with this. LightningLuxray brings up some good points, and I wasn't trying to address him in specific, but this argument as a whole. As stated, it's been around for quite a while.
Just a question - do you believe their becomes a point in which their are so many powerful threats in a metagame that being able to cover them all effectively is plausible? It's not that I discounted teambuilding, but more so feel as though effective teambuilding in the ways we've seen it in previous generation isn't really possible anymore. Like, a good team should allow you to make bad MUs rare, (or minimal, like you said), but currently is seems as though good teams being put in disadvantageous MUs is not a rarity. Maybe this is just an overexaguration on my part, but honestly that's how it feels at the moment with the massive amounts of powerful Pokemon currently in the tier. Of course, there's also the question of whether Aegislash really even solves this problem or not, or if it's the correct way to go about solving it, though I think I'll have to put some more time into the ladder to truly discover that for myself.
Also just want to say I don't feel personally attacked in the slightest - your arguments are strong and are honestly changing my mind haha.
And the last thing I feel the need to iterate again: bringing a Pokemon down should be as an addition to a balanced metagame, not an attempt to fix and unfavorable one. Using Aegislash for the latter purpose, whether or not he is broken, is bordering on the broken-checks-broken philosophy because we are unbanning a threat as an answer to threats we consider unhealthy in the metagame as well. And that's without getting into the problem of Aegislash arguably failing to check all the big problems as intended anyway.
I'm highlighting this post because of how true it is. Aegislash really shouldn't be our way to balance the metagame, because it is, is some ways, being used to check "broken" Pokemon. But as we've seen with suspect tests in the past, it seems people truly aren't for banning the Pokemon which are actually contributing to an unhealthy metagame. I think this leaves us in a situation in which we kind of have to choose which kind of metagame we'd want - one based around match-up, or one in which we have multiple unhealthy Pokemon and centralization in the tier to avoid match-up problems.
In all honesty I'm kind of leaning towards the former now, especially because I think a lot of you may be right in that MU isn't as big of a problem in comparison to what kind of metagame we could have with Aegislash. However, I'd really like something to get done about this eventually... something like a Landorus-I or Mega Metagross suspect test would be quite nice.
Just a question - do you believe their becomes a point in which their are so many powerful threats in a metagame that being able to cover them all effectively is plausible? It's not that I discounted teambuilding, but more so feel as though effective teambuilding in the ways we've seen it in previous generation isn't really possible anymore. Like, a good team should allow you to make bad MUs rare, (or minimal, like you said), but currently is seems as though good teams being put in disadvantageous MUs is not a rarity. Maybe this is just an overexaguration on my part, but honestly that's how it feels at the moment with the massive amounts of powerful Pokemon currently in the tier. Of course, there's also the question of whether Aegislash really even solves this problem or not, or if it's the correct way to go about solving it, though I think I'll have to put some more time into the ladder to truly discover that for myself.
Personally speaking I don't feel it is possible anymore to necessarily cover threats as effectively for various reasons. Things like the ability to hit on both spectrum of defenses, better distribution of neutral coverage, reshuffling of typing, and of course megas. With those given, and likely only be further exacerbated down the line, it certainly isn't plausible to hold the same benchmark as to what we consider a good team in previous generations to this particular metagame, which in itself is quite different from other expansions that extended the main game but closer to a new generation altogether.
It is the same with Aegis I don't feel it is plausible to keep falling back on the old uber characteristics when his reasons for leaving were more different, and arguably positive once it had left (meaning while not fitting the characteristics outright Aegis still had a negative influence outside of a desirable metagame).
Heck I think there is something to be said when the council actually considers bringing Aegislash down not because there are more threats which can handle it favorably, but the opposite in that Aegislash is being reintroduced because it handles more threats.
At the very least I think a new lens needs to be taken up with regard to how match ups are viewed, or rather how teams are built, along with how we consider things "broken" as many are becoming more ambiguous and borderline.
Frankly, one of my friends who plays VGC doubles also noticed a marked difficulty in building teams from XY to ORAS, the issue of too much threats or very versatile ones at least isn't exclusive to singles.
Just got reqs after starting over completely once, so I figured I'd post my pointless thoughts in here relatively quick. (At this point, pretty much everything you can say has been said already anyways.)
The biggest issue for me on this ladder was Aegislash's ability to turn into glue in teambuilding, causing me to see it essentially every battle. Meaning restricted teambuilding. Maybe it was the fact that I had a so many checks on my team that Aegislash was never actually able to come in 100% safely, but I can definitely see how it might affect playstyles drastically.
As for Aegislash being a solution to the current metagame or something like that, I think it just changed the game completely rather than acting as just a solution to the dominating megas. Aegislash became the metagame in this suspect. I took a pretty sizable hiatus before this suspect due to the addiction of LoL, so my experience might be a little lower than others with the old meta. The old metagame definitely had more to work with though.
The one thing I didn't have a problem with that was discussed the hell out of, were the Aegislash "50/50s" with king's shield. I had one really stupid game where I saw the LO on the opposing aegi, and didn't remember it wouldn't have KS. Other than that, it felt easy to play around. Pokemon is full of 50/50s regardless of Aegislash's presence or not, it just increases the opportunities for them to happen. Not all Aegislash 50/50s will determine games either, which I found kind of important in thinking about the vote.
Tl;dr: Restricts team building. Centralizes meta-game. Occasional 50/50s with varying impacts. On the fence mostly because I'm still trying to keep an open mind, but definitely leaning towards ban.
Matchup is inherently part of the game. So is centralization. So is luck. I would say that all of them are equally harmfu.
But we minimize luck by getting rid of things like evasion moves, and we minimize centralization by banning Pokemon. So why should we just tolerate matchup-based metagames when we can do something about it?
"Make a better team" is better said than done, when even the best OU players are winning and losing at turn one.
wow haha. no. time and time again i keep hearing about how matchup dictates the outcome of oras matches, and it bothers me the more and more i hear it. at this point in the metagame, if you accept that your team is just going to lose to a certain pokemon or certain set, you've immediately made a mistake. you can't just blame every shortcoming you have with teambuilding on the tier itself. ORAS OU shouldn't be forced to change drastically just because everyone en masse thinks that teambuilding is just "too hard :(((." it's easily one of the dumbest argument ive seen in this thread, right up there with posts dedicated to listing 12 arbitrary damage calcs without actually getting a point across.
just because you're upset at your inability to build a team that deals with every relevant threat in the tier doesn't mean that the tier needs to change so that building becomes mindless and restricted. aegislash isn't some omnipotent metagame definer that will solve all your problems and make what you call "team matchup" disappear, all aegislash actually does is heavily centralize the tier to a point in which we'll all become bored within a month of playing with it because there is absolutely no way the metagame can progress with a pokemon that has next to zero disadvantages and has almost 50% usage in the tier.
Aegislash is mindless Pokemon. You can put it on nearly any team and it will be better than it would be without it nine times out of ten. Aegislash is something so easy to slap on teams, it covers up major threats, has great bulk, can pursuit trap, has an amazing typing, can spin block, has great offensive stats, and can wallbreak. Things like Latios are 'Mons that can do a lot for a team, provide good synergy, check important mons, defog, etc, but it's pretty easy to wear down and it's easily Pursuit trapped. Aegislash may not have Defog, but it has a hell of a lot more utility than Latios does without the ability to be worn down as easily nor being pursuit trapped. Aegislash has a wide range of "viable" sets. SubTox, LO, Spell Tag, Lefties, Pursuit, SD, etc. It's insanely versatile in both it's options and what it can do for a team in a battle. It has next to no actual counters and only checks that will lose and get servery crippled depending upon what set the Aegislash is running.
People like cbb wanted it banned last time it was tested because it was crippling the metagame from evolving, which turned out to be insanely true. The metagame shifted so much after it got banned and become a metagame that was actually good. I don't see how unbanning it will improve the metagame, instead just make more mindless teams with the insanely overcentralized 'Mon that is Aegislash.
I never had the time to get reqs. I was close, but w/ school and what not, I just didn't have time. But I would like to say something concerning a lot of anti-aegis arguments, rather than my oppinion on the actual suspect.
Basically all these arguments are based around one of the following arguments: 1. 50/50s, 2. It can play too many completely different roles w/ completely different checks and it's not always obvious which set its running (basically), 3. It can basically be slapped on any team and it's instantly better, and 4. "It's over-centralizing as hell."
These are all valid arguments, except one. Number four. See, over-centralization is certainly something to consider in a suspect, but in this case, where it is being re-tested as opposed to tested to be banned (not sure how better to word that), a clear view of an oras aegis meta isn't possible. To say that it is over-centralizing is unfair when retests are, almost by definition, pulsating w/ shiny new toy syndrome.
Admittedly, I feel that aegis isn't quite all that some people have made it out to be. I love it, and it's certainly really good, but it's not broken. True, there are very few things that can consistantly beat every set, every time, but it only takes a little adjusting to beat it fairly consistantly. Knock off ferro, as WebBowser pointed out, is a good example. It actually gains utility at the loss of power, while gaining the ability to beat aegis. This is, in my oppinion at least, a decent trade off. This isn't the only example, just a really good one.
Anyways, to summarize what I was saying before I distracted myself, to argue against aegis on grounds of over-centralization is unjustified at this point. It's also really impossible to say what an aegislash meta will be like, exactly. I'm open to other anti arguments, just not this one.
Got reqs for a while already, but I remember not posting anything in this thread yet.
In my opinion, Aegislash is versatile as there are so many options it can run. However, its pattern is rather elaborated and many things in the current metagame have the ability to go around with it easily. For example, Bisharp is a common check if you know Aegislash won't predict its switch-in with Sacred Sword, and Heatran and Chesnaught and many other things come to mind. Moreover, it comes fair to both players as there is a balance between risk and reward (choosing which moves to use, or just press King's Shield). The very important point is that Aegislash fits rather well in the metagame which is so full of Altaria and Metagross, and to be honest I find it to handle and be handled rather well compared to the XY era.
The only bad thing about Aegislash that I can see is that it lowers a lot of usage of other Pokemons, notable Mega Heracross, Mega Medicham, Mega Gallade... (mostly fighting, but you get the idea). It is not so healthy for the metagame, but it actually makes the metagame interesting to play since the amount of predict will be high.
I'm on the fence for this suspect, leaning more towards the NO BAN side since I really appreciate making the gameplay more challenging and differentiate between good players and better players rather well.
wow haha. no. time and time again i keep hearing about how matchup dictates the outcome of oras matches, and it bothers me the more and more i hear it. at this point in the metagame, if you accept that your team is just going to lose to a certain pokemon or certain set, you've immediately made a mistake. you can't just blame every shortcoming you have with teambuilding on the tier itself. ORAS OU shouldn't be forced to change drastically just because everyone en masse thinks that teambuilding is just "too hard :(((." it's easily one of the dumbest argument ive seen in this thread, right up there with posts dedicated to listing 12 arbitrary damage calcs without actually getting a point across.
just because you're upset at your inability to build a team that deals with every relevant threat in the tier doesn't mean that the tier needs to change so that building becomes mindless and restricted. aegislash isn't some omnipotent metagame definer that will solve all your problems and make what you call "team matchup" disappear, all aegislash actually does is heavily centralize the tier to a point in which we'll all become bored within a month of playing with it because there is absolutely no way the metagame can progress with a pokemon that has next to zero disadvantages and has almost 50% usage in the tier.
I dont think that people are saying that the match-up issue is in checking every relevant threat. I think most people mean that no one can prepare enough for all relevant cores in the tier. Many match-ups, while winnable, are significantly tougher than others simply because of the team your opponent brings. No matter how amazing you are at team building, you will have these issues where you can often tell you've lost in team preview. Not taking sides, but Im pretty sure most people can agree that there is a match-up problem in Pokemon. No one, not even the best team builders, can prepare for absolutely everything that will be thrown your way.
I dont think that people are saying that the match-up issue is in checking every relevant threat. I think most people mean that no one can prepare enough for all relevant cores in the tier. Many match-ups, while winnable, are significantly tougher than others simply because of the team your opponent brings. No matter how amazing you are at team building, you will have these issues where you can often tell you've lost in team preview. Not taking sides, but Im pretty sure most people can agree that there is a match-up problem in Pokemon. No one, not even the best team builders, can prepare for absolutely everything that will be thrown your way.
you didnt have to quote my post in order to post your own because they're pretty much unrelated. you claim that team matchup isn't a factor but in literally the next sentence you claim the underlying problem to pokemon is the inability for certain teams to play around "cores," that of which are smaller than actual teams lol and objectively easier to deal with.
also, this is a thread about whether aegislash should be banned or not, and at no point did you explain why aegislash would fix this extremely important "problem" that is plaguing everything pokemon related (it cant because the problem doesnt exist!)
Got reqs the other day and pretty much everything's been said so just gonna keep this short.
Right now, while I don't think Aegi is necessarily broken , it makes for a very unhealthy metagame by restricting teambuilding because of how easy it is to just throw on teams and making previously viable mons such as Mega Gard and Mega Hera so much worse. Aegi is extremely overcentralizing and has very few reliable counters depending on the set it's running. It's so easy to slap on teams and has little to no drawbacks to using it. It is the definition of 'low risk high reward' being able to counter a large majority of the meta thanks to its fantastic typing and great bulk while also being able to wallbreak and/or pursuit trap. There's really little to no reason not to have it on your team.
Pretty much all of the points have been discussed on Aegislash and the balance between battling and teambuilding skill. I would like to post my two cents worth on the issue.
Aegislash should stay in Ubers.
The main problem I see is not its effective 720 BST/King's shield 50-50s/etc. Kyurem-Black is not Ubers; Mega Mawile is. Stats alone incompletely explain an argument. 50-50s are less relevant now because many pokemon have changed sets from XY to ORAS. Talonflame's CB set is rarer now so it can simply roost. The biggest threats around, Lando-I/Mega Metagross/Mega Altaria/Keldeo all don't use contact moves to hit Aegis. Add on the fact that it lets status through and King's Shield 50-50s are less relevant than they might seem. They still exist, sure but I want to focus this discussion more on the philosophy of matchup and teambuilding.
It makes a bunch of pokemon less viable, like Starmie and Mega Gardevoir; completely stops some more, like Mega Gallade; and takes over a a large number of niches, like Jirachi's as the primary Lati/fairy stop. On the other hand, it makes existing threats far more deadly, such as Lando-I and Keldeo, notably with its pursuit trapping ability. Thus it decreases the number of threats, yet makes the biggest ones harder to deal with. Even if it does make teambuilding somewhat easier, it makes dealing with these top threats so much harder that it is not clear whether this will be an upgrade or just a step to the side for teambuilding.
Even if it does make teambuilding better, the problem remains that power creep is inevitable. With every coming generation of pokemon, more and more threats will be introduced. When they come, we must be ready to handle the new metagame with a stronger teambuilding ability. If you want a chess-like metagame where there is much less teambuilding skill required, metas like GSC with Snorlax and the lower tiers still exist. But for the sake of OU, we need to accept the diversity of threats that will only become stronger.
Do we want a diverse, teambuilding-based metagame or a centralized, battling-based metagame?
Aegislash should stay Uber--whether or not it helps with the metagame for now, such a solution will not be viable in the long term.
When the new generations and changes come, we must be ready to change our views of teambuilding to encompass the new threats and their effect on the metagame.
So I got my reqs a day or 2 ago, and I'm not gonna lie, when I first decided to do this, I was enjoying the first half of my laddering, because it was something new to play with and yeah, it did help check a lot of stuff currently in the tier. I was pro-OU because I found it was easier to build and I could then start being able to patch holes in my teams. Then, as soon as I got to the last 400 or so COIL needed to obtain reqs, I just stopped trying for ages, because every team I was facing was essentially the same 2 structures with maybe, a one mon difference. It was boring and stale, so I stopped, because it wasn't fun playing OU; it became a chore.
Now I can say that the impact Aegislash has made in the short time currently in testing, is a clear detrimental effect of what a 'balanced metagame' should look like. The effect it has when paired with certain mons like Landorus-I and Mega Charizard-Y; it makes them seem extremely overpowered because of how they can remove each others checks easily. No single pokemon should be able to make some of the best OU pokemon currently in the tier even better. I'm pretty sure this word has been used before, but 'catalyst' comes to mind when thinking about Aegislash.
I honestly cannot think of a single reason as to why the addition of Aegislash would be healthy for OU, with it single-handedly being able to check top threats as well as boost top threats, voting against Aegislash is the only way a better metagame can be achieved.
Earlier in this thread, I argued that Aegislash should become OU again, because I believed it was not broken. In principle (maybe because I used to play so much Ubers), I believed that we should try to enforce as few rules as possible while still maintaining a competitive metagame.
At this point, though, I've changed my mind. First of all, I think Aegislash is broken, with its combination of offensive pressure and bulk. Other people have already made arguments for this, so I won't do that here.
However, I'd like to address the argument that Aegislash makes the quantity of OU threats more manageable.
I think the wide diversity of OU is a very good thing. As long as the outcome of a game isn't predetermined at the start (and it's not, despite what some people are implying), having more diversity in a tier makes the game more fun. Back in BW2 OU, a common complaint was that the metagame was too overcentralized, and there wasn't much strategy involved in playing the game. (Many games were simply decided by "Pursuit the opposing Jellicent/Tentacruel, then spam Hydro Pump with Keldeo and sweep"). If we can have such a wide variety of playstyles and pokemon that can still be viable and competitive, why should we try to limit that? If you want a tier with less diversity, play Ubers.
That's why I'll be voting to keep Aegislash banned. Yes, with all else held equal, I think banning a pokemon is generally undesirable. However, if we can make ten more pokemon viable while banning one, it's a positive thing to do.
i think i've brought my points across very glaringly across in the past 43 pages of this suspect thread and even after getting my reqs, i stand by my point that aegislash must not come back. im going to refer a lot to AM's question bulk about aegi with regards to it's quantitative aspect as well as it's qualitative aspect and how it affects the metagame.
aegi is what we call a "jack of all trades". let's just look at the list of viable sets it has. it can utilize a tank spread (w or w/o air balloon), magrise, LO pursuit trapper, subtox, metal sound, physical/special/mixed cleaner/wallbreaker, SD sweeper, head smash user and even things like custap/auto dbond and weakness policy. these are just some sets it can run off the top of my head. lets consider how it affects the high level gameplay in terms of competition with these questions and keeping in mind that im considering under the notion that aegislash will appear on the opposite side of the field 9 times out of 10.
(A) What are the counter measures that Stall has for all of these sets combined when taking it into account in both team-builder and in battle? (B) What are the counter measures that Balance / Bulky Offense has for all of these sets combined when taking it into account in both team-builder and in battle? (C) What are the counter measures that Hyper Offense has for all of these sets combined when taking it into account in both team-builder and in battle?
stall is designed to weaken and slowly wear down opposing threats, then either finishing them off with passive damage or have something in the back that can deal with said threat. physical sets are usually less of a problem because common stall teams have a plethora of ways to deal with physical sets. however, special sets are a much larger problem, with subtox/metal sound variants being the hugest problems of them all. unaware users that are common on stall (quag doesn't appreciate eating a shadow ball and clef a flash cannon) are greatly hindered by the sheer presence of said mon. the problem here for stall teams is that because of how varied aegislash actually is. there is no tried and tested way of "identifying" the aegislash based on team preview simply because any variant of aegi can easily fit onto any archetype of team. you can argue and say subtox loses momentum for HO or SD is not as helpful for stall as say subtox would. but that's is not enough "proof" to say that it isn't going to be ran on that team. an example of this would be that if you see m-meta on a stall team you can be pretty sure it is there to deal with offense as it can't run something else other than an offensive set consistently. once again, because of the passive nature of stall and aegislash's wide range of sets that are capable of being consistent under multiple scenarios vs stall, counter measures against aegi are honestly shaky at best (unless you're running stall with ditto). this makes it extremely pressurizing for a stall player to play against opposing teams with aegi because by the time you scout out it's set, your mons have become weakened to the point where it is potentially set up bait. this is a huge problem considering your unaware users are not as viable against aegi. mandibuzz is not the most optimal mon to run on stall and while chesnaught is an option, it can still tox you (subtox) or set up or just plain weaken you. hence stall is hindered by the presence of aegi.
im going to bundle HO and balance together because it a lot more easier this way. HO games are largely down to scenarios where you risk or miss it and people often blame the 5050 for this. sucker punch and protect games are the most basic form of 5050 that we commonly see as we play the game. saying that aegislash worsens the 5050 is not entirely wrong but the problem with the 5050s that aegislash forces compared to other 5050s is that the counterplay around this often causes the scale to tilt more heavily in the favor of the aegi user simply because the aegi user has the advantage of knowing whether his aegi has king shield or not. you can argue that bisharp games can also lead down to that (on the off chance that the bisharp is scarfed, it can potentially not carry sucker punch) but this scenario is far more problematic in the sheer fact that king shield is forgoable on any set of aegi (barring subtox) whereas sucker punch is not on bisharp. HO teams are designed to overload the opponent by smacking mons with similar checks together on the same team (potentially forgoing synergy) whereas balance largely boils down to how much momentum you are willing to lose on your team and are the defensive checks on your balance teams capable of making up the loss of momentum with something that the team lacks. playing against aegislash is often less problematic for HO because of how many top metagame threats there are that can weaken aegi such that another member can take it down. this reveals the problem of HO vs aegi matchups. how much are you willing to let take unnecessary damage or even sack so that you can weaken aegi and successfully revenge/get around it? it has an optimal defense typing as well as speed to retain in it's defensive state to take a hit and retaliate back or even set up on you. as much as HO is an archetype of team where going all "idgaf lets just yolo click high jump miss" is actually beneficial to the team in the long run, aegislash forces the play of HO to become "wait, what aegi is that? can i handle him even if i go yolo?" and to top it off, aegi's set can actually counter threaten offence esp when it comes down to the 5050 scenarios. teambuilding from HO's point of view doesn't change much in the sense where it changes from "fast threat + stallbreaker + lando-i + 3 fillers" to "fast threat + lando-i + aegi + stallbreaker + 2 filler". balance has it worse because even though you can rely on your defensive backbones, aegi has the defensive typing to threaten common defensive walls on balance and it heavily pressures games because it can easily wear down it's threats and the best that all archetypes can muster for it is gliscor.
this leads me to conclude that Aegislash is too splashable of a mon and it has the typing and the movepool to allow it to perfom a plethora of roles consistently. aegis has a wide range of consistent sets and are incredibly versatile in what it can do for a team in a battle and what it can threaten opposing teams with. qualitatively, if you assume that you dont run aegi on your team while your opponents run aegi on their team, you can be assured that no matter how much you teambuild with aegi in mind, the opposing aegi will always be able to put in work be it as a supporting role or as a cleaner role. we dw one mon to be able to single handedly check more than 60% of the meta because that just causes insane levels of overcentralisation in OU and that is counter intuitive to what we have been putting our utmost effort in to prevent.
tldr - keep aegislash with primal groudon and let it not come back to OU
Sorry, but I have to disagree with some of the points you brought up. While it is true that if you don't prepare for m-alt, megagross, lando, and keldeo, you will lose, the difference is that aegislash beats its checks easily. Another difference is that at least 2 of the s rank mons have hard counters (m-venu>keldeo, cresselia>lando i), and megagross/m-alt have very solid checks. However, aegislash's checks are not solid at all and can all be taken down with the right coverage move or set: Hippo<subtoxic, Gliscor<HP ice, Garchomp<Repeated strong hits, Mandi<Head Smash, Bisharp<sacred sword, Mega venusaur<SD/LO.
sorry but you are wrong here. All S ranks can beat their checks and even their "hard counters" with the correct move: megagross can run grass knot and thunder punch for those damn skarmorys and slowbros. keldeo can carry HP flying or psychic (and some do) to deal with mega venu, just like greninja sometimes used extrasensory for the same pourpose, landorus can smack latios and cresseliawith knock off, and if you go the CM route, cresselia is setup bait unless it uses ice beam, and EVEN THEN you could include Toxic on the typical LO set if you want to disable the celestial duck THAT badly, altaria's answers depend on wether you choose EQ or fire blast as coverage. there is no difference here.
sorry but you are wrong here. All S ranks can beat their checks and even their "hard counters" with the correct move: megagross can run grass knot and thunder punch for those damn skarmorys and slowbros. keldeo can carry HP flying or psychic (and some do) to deal with mega venu, just like greninja sometimes used extrasensory for the same pourpose, landorus can smack latios and cresseliawith knock off, and if you go the CM route, cresselia is setup bait unless it uses ice beam, and EVEN THEN you could include Toxic on the typical LO set if you want to disable the celestial duck THAT badly, altaria's answers depend on wether you choose EQ or fire blast as coverage. there is no difference here.
i think oryx's point is that those moves you run on a standard s rank threat are considered coverage and may even be suboptimal to that said mon (tox on land-i, tpunch on m-meta, etc.) however on aegi, all the said ways that oryx mentioned to allow aegi to beat it's checks are considered as standard (except for headsmash) because they are actually relatively common on aegi and aegi loses close to zero consistency even when accounting for it's checks.
I decided to wait until playing the ladder before posting to see what aegislash is actually like in the ORAS meta. I found the suspect ladder very enjoyable to play in and very balanced, with lots of different team styles and pokemon. I didn’t find aegislash broken or overcentralizing, and therefore and voting No Ban.
While aegislash does have great coverage and several sets, they all have their own disadvantages and similar counters, most of which are already excellent pokemon. I'm not going to go into the list, because they have been mentioned time and time again. While it is true that aegislash can run different sets that can beat some counters to more standard sets, they all have their own disadvantages that prevent them from being broken. Leftovers aegislash is the most reliable "blanket check" to things, but lacks the power to break through bulky pokemon and can be easily walled. Sub toxic loses out on coverage for other pokemon such as bisharp and mega scizor, along with being more passive in general. Life orb sets lack reliability and cannot continually switch into pokemon aegislash is supposed to check, and as a result gets worn down very quickly. It also gets forced out after one attack due to blade's terrible defenses. Finally, SD is just terribly weak if you cannot get an opportunity to setup. Being versatile doesn't not equal broken, and many Pro-Ban supports fall into the argument of “a moveset of champions”, as others have put it.
The argument that aegislash makes many pokemon unviable and should be banned for that seems silly to me. All pokemon have solid counters, and if for one of your pokemon it is aegislash, then you bring an aegislash counter or several checks, just like for any other good pokemon. Why is aegislash the exception to basic teambuilding and is suddenly broken? Not to mention, it is greatly exaggerated how much aegislash makes certain pokemon unviable. Many of those pokemon claimed to be made unusable by aegislash have completely viable coverage options that are already in common use, allowing them to smack aegislash hard. Here are some calcs showing damage from many common pokemon:
192+ Atk Mega Altaria Earthquake vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Aegislash-Shield: 144-170 (44.4 - 52.4%) -- 19.9% chance to 2HKO
252+ SpA Mega Altaria Fire Blast vs. 252 HP / 4 SpD Aegislash-Shield: 164-194 (50.6 - 59.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252 Atk Mega Metagross Earthquake vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Aegislash-Shield: 168-198 (51.8 - 61.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252 SpA Mega Diancie Earth Power vs. 252 HP / 4 SpD Aegislash-Shield: 160-190 (49.3 - 58.6%) -- 98.8% chance to 2HKO
252+ SpA Mega Alakazam Shadow Ball vs. 252 HP / 4 SpD Aegislash-Shield: 170-200 (52.4 - 61.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252 SpA Life Orb Starmie Hydro Pump vs. 252 HP / 4 SpD Aegislash-Shield: 177-211 (54.6 - 65.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO (Analytic boosted)
244+ Atk Mega Aerodactyl Earthquake vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Aegislash-Shield: 172-204 (53 - 62.9%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
+2 0 SpA Celebi Earth Power vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Aegislash-Shield: 182-216 (56.1 - 66.6%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
These pokemon may be made slightly worse by the fact they are soft checked by aegislash, but claiming they will be unviable is ridiculous, as shown. All of those apart from metagross already run that move, no change needed.
So yeah, I found the aegislash metagame really fun and I will definitely be voting to Free Aegislash.
HP ice is suboptimal. literally Gliscor is all you are defeating with it. the SD set is the easiest to stop and take out so it's suboptimal in a way too. calling those "coverage" is pretty inacurate. that's not to mention the 4MSS: if you carry either of those: SD, Head Smash, HP ice, plus KS (excluding maybe in SD if you like geting pwned by every thing that either has powerfull priority and a bit of speed, like azumarrill or talonflame, resists ghost and outspeeds, like bisharp or most tyranitars, or in general is tough enough to take a hit and KO before it uses a coverage move, like heatran or mamoswine), you are left with only 2 slots: one is for the mandatory ghost stab, with limits your options (either getting dismantled by fast mons if you choose shadow ball, or by bulky mons if you take shadow sneak, or by any ghost resist/bulky special wall if you go bold and carry both). the last slot is generally reserved for a steel or fight coverage move, to prevent dark mons or bulky fairies from taking you on. the stantard set already has the Iron head/sacred sword problem, as forgoing one leaves you open to some checks and counters the other move covers. imagine what happens if you sacrifise another moveslot for hp ice, head smash or SD
huh? is this one of those "lemme burn it and call it a day" argument? just cause it has the potential to cripple a sd set doesn't mean that sd set is suboptimal. would you stay in with an aegislash if your opponent is going to go for the burn and you're sd? i think not.
calling those "coverage" is pretty inacurate. that's not to mention the 4MSS: if you carry either of those: SD, Head Smash, HP ice, plus KS (excluding maybe in SD if you like geting pwned by every thing that either has powerfull priority and a bit of speed, like azumarrill or talonflame, resists ghost and outspeeds, like bisharp or most tyranitars, or in general is tough enough to take a hit and KO before it uses a coverage move, like heatran or mamoswine), you are left with only 2 slots: one is for the mandatory ghost stab, with limits your options (either getting dismantled by fast mons if you choose shadow ball, or by bulky mons if you take shadow sneak, or by any ghost resist/bulky special wall if you go bold and carry both). the last slot is generally reserved for a steel or fight coverage move, to prevent dark mons or bulky fairies from taking you on. the stantard set already has the Iron head/sacred sword problem, as forgoing one leaves you open to some checks and counters the other move covers. imagine what happens if you sacrifise another moveslot for hp ice, head smash or SD
What is defined as 4MSS? By definition, 4MSS means that something essentially requires more than four moves to do its job. Defensive Eeveelutions are a good example - they'd love to have all of Wish, Protect, Baton Pass for slow switches, Heal Bell and an attacking move, but they can't and have to drop either Baton Pass or Protect (usually Baton Pass), which makes them less effective overall (still useful, but not as useful as they would be otherwise). Aegislash doesn't suffer from this. all it needs is it's ghost stab to be an offensive weapon. if you're implying that SD sets need hp ice to work, then you are really misunderstanding the scenario. SD sets wont set up when glis is around. what do you mean by azu and talon can pwn aegi? how? azu is outprioritised and should you be SD it will be a field day. on the off chance you're belly drum its a 5050. talonflame can .. use it's priority to do what..? brave bird does.. close to zero. my point is that it can run all of the sets that AM provided a while back to great efficiency with close to minimal support or it can be a great asset to the team by being a strong support with it's defense typing and the 5050s it causes.
is this one of those "lemme burn it and call it a day" argument? just cause it has the potential to cripple a sd set doesn't mean that sd set is suboptimal. would you stay in with an aegislash if your opponent is going to go for the burn and you're sd? i think not.
Gonna answer for him but the sd set is sub optimal because of the huge usage of bulky grounds in the meta: tankchomp, landorus-t, gliscor and hippowdon, along with other hard counters such as rotom-w, mega sableye, skarmory which is seeing a resurgence in usage and others. It is also weak as shit without setting up; even coming from 150 base attack a non stab 85 bp move will do absolutely zero to just about everything. Even after it has gotten off a swords dance it can't ohko common checks such as landorus-I, excadrill etc. Aegislash is much better off firing off shadow balls to punch holes in stuff, rather than being a free switch into your opponents stealth rocker every time it comes in.
Gonna answer for him but the sd set is sub optimal because of the huge usage of bulky grounds in the meta: tankchomp, landorus-t, gliscor and hippowdon, along with other hard counters such as rotom-w, mega sableye, skarmory which is seeing a resurgence in usage and others. It is also weak as shit without setting up; even coming from 150 base attack a non stab 85 bp move will do absolutely zero to just about everything. Even after it has gotten off a swords dance it can't ohko common checks such as landorus-I, excadrill etc. Aegislash is much better off firing off shadow balls to punch holes in stuff, rather than being a free switch into your opponents stealth rocker every time it comes in.
Just going to throw out some calcs to prove that SD aegi can beat these bulky grounds
+2 252+ Atk Aegislash-Blade Iron Head vs. 252 HP / 56+ Def Gliscor: 229-270 (64.6 - 76.2%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Poison Heal
+2 252+ Atk Aegislash-Blade Iron Head vs. 252 HP / 144+ Def Hippowdon: 223-264 (53 - 62.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
+2 252+ Atk Aegislash-Blade Iron Head vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Garchomp: 237-280 (56.4 - 66.6%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
+2 252+ Atk Aegislash-Blade Shadow Claw vs. 248 HP / 216+ Def Rotom-W: 198-234 (65.3 - 77.2%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
Only because bulky roost isn't that common. If bulky roost with EQ becomes a thing to counter aegi (which it certainly could), then aegi could very well begin running HP ice for him, with nailing gliscor as a bonus.
Coverage moves are very rarely ran for just one pokemon.
But Shadow Ball hits 'nite just as hard when its roosting anyway, and if its bulky roost you're better off using another check to HP Ice f*cking Aegislash (which is ass outside of very select teams as it is).
Just going to throw out some calcs to prove that SD aegi can beat these bulky grounds
+2 252+ Atk Aegislash-Blade Iron Head vs. 252 HP / 56+ Def Gliscor: 229-270 (64.6 - 76.2%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Poison Heal
+2 252+ Atk Aegislash-Blade Iron Head vs. 252 HP / 144+ Def Hippowdon: 223-264 (53 - 62.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
+2 252+ Atk Aegislash-Blade Iron Head vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Garchomp: 237-280 (56.4 - 66.6%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
+2 252+ Atk Aegislash-Blade Shadow Claw vs. 248 HP / 216+ Def Rotom-W: 198-234 (65.3 - 77.2%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
If they are weakened, then Aegislash can break through them. However, if Aegislash fails to break through them, then it will be KOd in return. You also forgot to put in Life Orb in order for those calcs to be accurate (especially the Hippowdon calc which uses LO), and a Jolly Nature because Adamant nature is really bad to use on SD Aegislash due to losing valuable speed.
