I'm gonna ignore the obvious fact that some people may not want to play in a tier where stupid mons, that we all know are gonna be banned, are running free. It's not only unfun, but it also paralyses the building (ie: why would I build in a Kangash meta, when we know it's gonna be banned for SPL).
Instead, I'm gonna assume that we do what you propose.
You're gonna quickly realise that it does not work because you ignored something obvious.
First,
let's say we did this for XY. We unleash all the Ubers and start from 0.
Yea, I said
all because there is no justification to refuse the re-testing of stuff like Giratina or Palkia if you plan to test the new big Pokémons such as Xerneas or Yvetal right ?
Let's see the process :
1) So we're in a tier with every single Pokémon available. And it's a mess, plus, the Uber tier is now dead, and for a good time.
2)i) Here comes a bunch of quick bans, most likely.
or
2)ii) We chose the "slow bans" option (suspect thread + ladder + identification + voting + results) and the Gen is now dead for a while
3) Decent metagame
I want to stress a couple of things :
-
The more Pokémons you have to ban, the riskier the situation is getting. I'm gonna explain it as this may be an obscure concept. If you got a balanced metagame of 10 Pokémons, and you add one single Pokémon, the risk is low, because the situation is simpler, there are few new interactions to consider. And, worst case scenario, we end up with +1 controversial Pokémon. Easy to come back.
If you got a metagame of 10 Pokémons, and you add 10 Pokémons, the risk is huge. A whole lot of new interactions appear, you need to consider them all. Worst case scenario, you created a whole new metagame, and most likely, totally unbalanced. Hard to come back.
You proposal means a crazy big amount of Pokémons that would be added to OU. I would even say that your idea is about creating a whole new batch of OU Pokémons. This is incredibly dangerous, the Council will have a crazy amount of responsibilities, and a lot of tough calls with huge impacts will need to be taken. You're putting OU at risk.
- We all know that
your idea will consume a crazy amount of time, and as I said, will
paralyse a bunch of tiers for a long time. This is something no one wants (besides maybe Ubers players, because not much would change for them). This alone, totally makes your idea impossible IMO. The only way to go around that would be to allow the Council to make a whole lot of quick bans to get the tiers up ASAP. This, is contradictory with the original purpose of your idea (ie : taking the time to explore BIG Pokémons).
Don't underestimate the time restraint. Remember the first XY OST, the tier was really unstable, and the Council had to improve the tier real quick because it was considered as impossible to host an OST in an old Generation. I can't even imagine how many tournaments would be messed up or postponed with your idea.
- We need to take lessons from the past.
There is no reason to ignore what the older generations taught us. This isn't a flaw, it's a strenght. If the G-1 tier is solid, then it's only helping us to create a G tier solid aswell. Once it has been done, then we can fool around and retest Ubers.
The obvious thing that I mentionned, is that,
back in GEN1, we tested implicitly all the Pokémons. Mew was Uber, and went down to OU when its time came. It's also true for some of other Pokémons such as Celebi, Lati@s or Garchomp. To me, this means that the process is working, and is fair. Maybe the new generations are making this process harder and longer, but this further supports my point that you can't afford to retest everything (time restraint).
isn't the purpose of of ou to achieve the most balanced meta possible with the fewest bans?
First, it's missleading to put these two goals together, they're not of equal importance. "The fewest bans" is merely as indication as to how we have to reach a balanced metagame. I'd even rather say : "achieve the most balanced meta possible in the fewest
amount of time and bans"
I want to add aswell :
i believe current ubers could achieve greater balance with fewer bans.
I don't think that Ubers' balance has to be taken into account for OU tiering decisions. Like, ever.
And I hope that's not what pushed you to post this.