Resource LC Viability Rankings

[Pancham]

Did I just hear "Spritzee has the ability to have a significantly more threatening offensive presence" than Snubbull? Are you joking? CM Spritzee can, theoretically, become more powerful than Snubbull after at least two boosts, but don't forget offensive presence isn't all about power. With Earthquake and Thief as coverage to smack things like Pawniard, Skrelp, and Gastly who otherwise are pretty good switch-ins to Fairy-types, Snubbull is way more offensively potent than Spritzee is without a lot of boosts. In addition, Snubbull has much higher immediate power with most sets having 18 Attack as opposed to Spritzee's 13 Special Attack, so Spritzee needs to forgo Aromatherapy for Calm Mind to be as much of a threat as Snubbull, further weakening its support potential. I say that Snubbull and Spritzee are opposite yet equal forces, in that Spritzee is the best defensive Fairy and Snubbull is the best offensive one, and they are equally good at each of those roles along with doing stuff like countering Fighting-types which Fairies are supposed to do.

This is why on some teams I use a lure Spritzee with Psychic, esoecially if my team is weak to Poison-types like Foongus, Croagunk, Gastly, or Skrelp; mona who think they can come in on Spritzee for free. Though, using this does mean you lose either Aromatherapy or Calm Mind, but it certainly pays off if you can catch any one of these mons on a switch. I mean sure, Snubbuls' offensive presence is generally better than Spritzee's, but Spritzee is still really powerful, and often people underestimate that.

Personally, I think Spritzee is better in most cases than Snubbul, which is why i prefer having Snubbull a rank lower than it. While Snubbul is good, I just dont think it is as good as Spritzee. It is very easy to take advantage of, and is much more staus weak than Spritzee. Snubbull is a good tank, but Spritzee is a better special wall.

As fir Pawniard, i have used many different varieties of Pawniard, and they have all never disappointed me. Even BJ Pawniard was good. The ability to take a Fletch Overheat, kill it, and be recovered to full HP was always fun to witness. Just because it is uncommon for Pawniard to have much variety, does not mean Pawniard cannot have variety...

(Will fill this spot for Fletchling in a lil bit tho)

 

[tcr]

This is why on some teams I use a lure Spritzee with Psychic, esoecially if my team is weak to Poison-types like Foongus, Croagunk, Gastly, or Skrelp; mona who think they can come in on Spritzee for free. Though, using this does mean you lose either Aromatherapy or Calm Mind, but it certainly pays off if you can catch any one of these mons on a switch. I mean sure, Snubbuls' offensive presence is generally better than Spritzee's, but Spritzee is still really powerful, and often people underestimate that.

Personally, I think Spritzee is better in most cases than Snubbul, which is why i prefer having Snubbull a rank lower than it. While Snubbul is good, I just dont think it is as good as Spritzee. It is very easy to take advantage of, and is much more staus weak than Spritzee. Snubbull is a good tank, but Spritzee is a better special wall.

As fir Pawniard, i have used many different varieties of Pawniard, and they have all never disappointed me. Even BJ Pawniard was good. The ability to take a Fletch Overheat, kill it, and be recovered to full HP was always fun to witness. Just because it is uncommon for Pawniard to have much variety, does not mean Pawniard cannot have variety...

Spritzee and Snubbull play two very distinct roles, and to be honest the only thing they have in common is that they are both mono-Fairy-type. Snubbull is used as an offensive pivot, similar to how things like Landorus-T are used in OU (or were used, IDK how common it is nowadays). It's also useful to check certain Pokemon, like Timburr and Mienfoo, as well as spread Thunder Waves around. Spritzee is a solely dedicated wall. Yeah it can carry Calm mind, but that doesn't mean it is anywhere near as offensive as something like Snubbull. Between the two, it really depends on the type of team that is being played, as something like Spritzee has no business being on a team that is super heavy offense, since it just sucks up momentum.

 

[Pancham]

Spritzee and Snubbull play two very distinct roles, and to be honest the only thing they have in common is that they are both mono-Fairy-type. Snubbull is used as an offensive pivot, similar to how things like Landorus-T are used in OU (or were used, IDK how common it is nowadays). It's also useful to check certain Pokemon, like Timburr and Mienfoo, as well as spread Thunder Waves around. Spritzee is a solely dedicated wall. Yeah it can carry Calm mind, but that doesn't mean it is anywhere near as offensive as something like Snubbull. Between the two, it really depends on the type of team that is being played, as something like Spritzee has no business being on a team that is super heavy offense, since it just sucks up momentum.

Would you honestly use Snubbull on a team that is meant to have "super heavy offense", though? I mean, sure you could, but I don't think I would. Then again, this might be because my idea of what is actually "super heavy offense" is different than yours. When I see "super heavy offense" I think mons like SD Pawn, Fletchling, Archen, Drilbur, Abra, Magnemite, Omanyte, Shellder, Gastly, Carvanha, Vulpix, Bellsprout, Drifloon... I don't really picture Snubbull in my mind, I mean I might if I took... But that would probably be nearer to the side of the spectrum where lies Porygon, Spritzee, Trubbish, and other mons that tend to "lose momentum". As for the rest of your point, never did I say Snubbull and Spritzee fit on the same styles of teams, however, I am the type of person to use "momentum losing" mons on teams where people often think they shouldn't be, like Bulky Offense.

 

[tazz]

k so I got a good nom for everyone

Corphish ---> A-
This thing easily warrants the same rank as tirtouga, the SD and to a slightly lesser extent the DD set are ridiculously good at cleaning late game with ridiculously powerful attacks (+2 crab hammer OHKOs the unresisted meta and 2HKOs the resisted) being able to spam aqua jet vs offensive teams and crabhammer vs defensive teams. It's ridiculous wallbreaking power is a huge asset to any team and should be something that everyone prepares for.

+2 196+ Atk Adaptability Corphish Crabhammer vs. 212 HP / 196+ Def Eviolite Spritzee: 22-28 (81.4 - 103.7%) -- 93.8% chance to OHKO after Stealth Rock
+2 196+ Atk Adaptability Corphish Crabhammer vs. 124 HP / 160+ Def Foongus: 18-22 (72 - 88%) -- 6.3% chance to OHKO after Stealth Rock (assuming you already knocked it off)

 

[boo836]

How are Corph and Tirt even remotely comparable? Corph doesn't have support options, nor as many set up opportunities. Besides, does Tirt really belong in A-?

 

[kingmidas]

I have a contention that sort of seeks to more effectively define the ranks and the differences between them. The definitions now are alright, but I do not feel they create hard enough striations between the letter ranks as opposed to the symbol ones. It seems like the letter ranks are simply continuing a ladder of Better than > Better than > Better than (a- is simply a little better than b+); we might as well have number ranks instead. I want a distinct difference between the letters. I mulled (for like 10 minutes while driving) of how to define them to make the definitions effective and a new list relatively congruent to the ranks we have now. I considered the case of Pawniard and how madoka wanted to bring it down mostly due to the large presence of its threats. I was trying to resolve the paradox in my head - a mon is so good it needs checks everywhere or else it will run through the tier, making it worse - when i came to a conclusion: viability rankings should not only represent the effectiveness of a mon in the meta, but also the need for teams to check given mon. The way to do that, in my estimation, is to use the letter ranks as "threat level" - the urgency of checking mon X is essentially estimated by the letter rank of mon x - and the symbols as an indication of the effectiveness of that mon in common battle conditions given the need to check them. I hashed out some rough definitions:

S-Rank: Mons you need a defined check or counter to or you will be torn apart
A-Rank: Mons who are exceptionally difficult to play around - you well should check these entirely, but you can survive playing around members of this rank if you are very smart and very careful
B-Rank: Mons who will have an effect on your team; packing a check to these mons is prudent. However, checks to these mons might be similar to A-rank mons, or these mons are not overly burdensome to play around if you are weak
C-Rank: Mons that fulfill a specific niche, but are not particularly threatening; you are usually fine if you ensure you have no glaring weakness

These definitions mainly work with the current list. One thing i would suggest is Fletchling moving up - the reason so many checks are on teams is because you absolutely need a Fletch check - that's shit you cant play around. I'd move it to S. i can answer questions about this if it seems interesting idk i can also give some ideas of moves and stuff if this is put in

You don't change the rankings themselves to suit the mons, you change the rankings the mons are placed in. Gonna ignore your thought process because its honestly you not grasping what a viability ranking already does. Your "correct" ranking requirements ignore that for all of S and A you need at least 2 checks or a counter and a check. Not to mention they use subjective reasoning as to handle these mons. It also puts less emphasis on defensive mons, as a defensive mon is generally not gonna "tear apart" a team but it'll still wall the hell out of a team if you don't have more than 1 solid switch in most of the time. Its more about the influence than the result imo, to many things go wrong in pokemon to rate on what that mon can do in the best possible scenario, ie: your S rank definition gives reasoning for a ton of shit to move up. Its what the mon can do even when its more limited in its role, it forces you to think and illustrate how the game will go down.

 

[Shrug]

Gonna ignore your thought process because its honestly you not grasping what a viability ranking already does.

im going to ask, how can you say "im ignoring what you're thinking... but your thinking is wrong"? Do words have meaning to you?

Your "correct" ranking requirements ignore that for all of S and A you need at least 2 checks or a counter and a check.

no you dont. I've played around Timburr before when i had no timburr checks on a team; I've taken teams without anything to hit Spritzee and beaten Spritz balance teams. If you lack a counter to things like Omanyte, you can prevent it from setting up by using momentum + pressure. Of course, all these things are done with great difficulty; this is what makes these mons A-rank mons. The only mons (in my opinion) that CANNOT be played around are Fletch, Pawn, and Foo, Foo in a supportive capacity - it will weaken your team and wreck uncontroled havoc if you dont check it.

It also puts less emphasis on defensive mons, as a defensive mon is generally not gonna "tear apart" a team but it'll still wall the hell out of a team if you don't have more than 1 solid switch in most of the time.

I misused the words "tear up". I should have said "will have great influence". If you have nothing to break a given defensive mon, that mon is just as good as an unchecked sweeper. That is what I meant.

Its more about the influence than the result imo, to many things go wrong in pokemon to rate on what that mon can do in the best possible scenario, ie: your S rank definition gives reasoning for a ton of shit to move up. Its what the mon can do even when its more limited in its role, it forces you to think and illustrate how the game will go down.

Yes I agree it is more about the influence than the result in an ideal scenario. But the current system you're defending is not about measuring influence; if it was, Fletch would be above Ponyta (no one is like "shit gotta have them pony checks!" you can play around it). the current system (in my opinion) is too reactionary, taking one mon and shooting it up, then slamming it back down upon people seeing its rank and using checks to it, at which point it becomes overrated and is better again, etc. These fluctuations in my opinion are best dealt with through the symbol system - as a mon performs better in a meta it moves up its symbol rankings, and down as it gets more heavily dealt with. This allows for the understanding a meta is fundamentally capricious due to game theory and reactions to be made accordingly, but for some underlying structure to be in place for what is considered a general threat level for a mon.

 

[Merritt]

The massive issue with Fletch going to S rank is that it has checks/counters on every competent team. While this is a case for meta-defining on par with the S-ranks we have now (you can easily argue that Mienfoo and in turn all fighting type's effectiveness is due to Pawniard) it also runs into the issue that this is the Viability rankings, not the Metagame Influence rankings. It's a similar situation to OU and Keldeo, who recently dropped. Something especially quotable was that Keldeo deserves to stay S because every team has a check for it. This is a fallacy in arguing, to a degree that goes further that relying on definitions or comparisons for ranking. One of the immediate issues is that it fails to take into account metagame shifts, that is when the meta becomes more or less favorable to it. Everything has a level of threat, and defining something by how many checks you need is heavily biased towards offensive mons.

For example, you must have a Zigzagoon counter/check. Otherwise it sweeps your team. Does this mean it's S-rank? Of course not, Zig has multiple flaws that hold it back from even high A ranking. Not the least is that Ferroseed and other steel types, along with rock types, are almost mandatory on a serious team due to Fletchling. They're not on teams because of Zig, otherwise the specific mons would be different (less archen!) but because they are there the metagame isn't overly favorable to it. But I'd argue that a well-played Zigzagoon is far more threatening than Fletchling when it goes for the sweep, because you can't use faster priority, Cottonee/Diglett support make it hard to stop the setup, and it hits harder than Fletchling at +2.

A good point Shrug makes (something I mentioned a while back) is that ranking based on comparing something to something in __ rank is flawed. The issue is that it's one of the few ways to decide on a place to put something since going strictly by definitions is a no-go. So what's left, a method of "I feel like this is B rank/C- rank/S rank and not X rank" as our option?

What would be ideal is if the definitions were overhauled to make them actually definitions instead of the guidelines they are now. It's about time for an overhaul, it's been years since the content changed, but it would take a lot of work and possibly collaboration with other tier leaders in order to standardize the new definitions, and that's a lot to ask of the viability ranking staff. That's the best solution I see, but unfortunately it would take a lot of work.

 

[boo836]

Or we could follow the guidelines and stop inflating our A ranks by jumping on every bandwagon around. We should be starting from the bottom, eliminating or dropping mons that don't really belong on the list.

Just by looking at the D rank I can see quite a few mons that don't really belong. Rufflett? Starly? Phantump? They have no place on this list. Paras, Mincinno, and Chikorita don't either. I'd rather say they should just be dropped to smog frog. Shieldon isn't even remotely relevant either. Smog frog.

 

[RZL]

Mincinno warrants a spot in D-Rank because it is a semi-decent wall breaker with Tail Slap granting it a little more damage -specifically against 24 and 27 defense targets, Adamant Aipom achieves this only on 24.- than Aipom, warrants giving it a small niche. Although Mincinno is weaker than Aipom in many circumstances, it is stronger at breaking strong physical walls. They do rarely differ, but if you need that 2HKO; 196 Atk Life Orb Minccino Tail Slap (5 hits) vs. 212 HP / 212+ Def Eviolite Hippopotas: 20-25 (76.9 - 96.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO. That is a KO after the Eviolite is Knock Off so, you can not even let your Hippopotas get Knock Offed.

The other Pokemon you mentioned should definitely good down. Fenniken, Shroomish, Sewaddle, Skiddo, and Wingull? What do they do?

Also since Totodile should be C Rank as, it recently got Sheer Force which after a Dragon Dance can let it Heavily damage a team, just for comparison.
+1 156+ Atk Sheer Force Totodile Waterfall vs. 236 HP / 196 Def Eviolite Porygon: 12-15 (46.1 - 57.6%) -- 51.2% chance to 2HKO
+1 124+ Atk Tyrunt Dragon Claw vs. 236 HP / 196 Def Eviolite Porygon: 10-13 (38.4 - 50%) -- 0.4% chance to 2HKO
That is a heavily invested Porygon, but that is a 50% chance to 2HKO, whilst a Pokemon in that is in the semi-tier above it, deals less damage, but has slightly better bulk -1 HP, and 1 Defense-.

I think we should clean up the lower ranks right now, and then focus more so on the upper ranks later as, they are fine right now -albeit slightly messy but more so livable- and our C-Ranks and such are in a very large mess with the Pokemon stated here, and in boo836's post.

I think do this in an order D-Rank, then C-, C, C+, and so on, and so forth. Does anyone disagree? I like organization therefore this is very much so catered towards me.

 

[tcr]

Wanna nominate Riolu for either B or B+ rank. It's really cute, and its actually really cool to use, as a cleaner / revenge killer / psuedo-lead. It's really flexible with priority Copycat. You can make sick plays, like setting up your own hazards against Pokemon. They go to pop that Stealth Rock, you do a move then bam, Copycat the SR (unless its like, Archen which you shouldn't stay in on anyway) then you just pop away. You can revenge with HJK Copycat spam, or against things like Acro Foo, Scraggy, PuP Pawniard, etc you can just copycat and wear them away (I chose those 3 bc they can be cool set up sweepers or cleaners that Riolu can take care of). You also outspeed Fletchling with 14 Spe, meaning that you can 2hko with HJK. O yeah its also really cute, and can perform more varying roles than things like Chespin and even Amaura

 

[kingmidas]

im going to ask, how can you say "im ignoring what you're thinking... but your thinking is wrong"? Do words have meaning to you?



no you dont. I've played around Timburr before when i had no timburr checks on a team; I've taken teams without anything to hit Spritzee and beaten Spritz balance teams. If you lack a counter to things like Omanyte, you can prevent it from setting up by using momentum + pressure. Of course, all these things are done with great difficulty; this is what makes these mons A-rank mons. The only mons (in my opinion) that CANNOT be played around are Fletch, Pawn, and Foo, Foo in a supportive capacity - it will weaken your team and wreck uncontroled havoc if you dont check it.



I misused the words "tear up". I should have said "will have great influence". If you have nothing to break a given defensive mon, that mon is just as good as an unchecked sweeper. That is what I meant.



Yes I agree it is more about the influence than the result in an ideal scenario. But the current system you're defending is not about measuring influence; if it was, Fletch would be above Ponyta (no one is like "shit gotta have them pony checks!" you can play around it). the current system (in my opinion) is too reactionary, taking one mon and shooting it up, then slamming it back down upon people seeing its rank and using checks to it, at which point it becomes overrated and is better again, etc. These fluctuations in my opinion are best dealt with through the symbol system - as a mon performs better in a meta it moves up its symbol rankings, and down as it gets more heavily dealt with. This allows for the understanding a meta is fundamentally capricious due to game theory and reactions to be made accordingly, but for some underlying structure to be in place for what is considered a general threat level for a mon.

Just gonna answer this with 2 sentences baring this one.The first paragraph isn't impressive, idk if you're facing bad teams/players or what but you are making no sense, if you had no checks then its up to what happened stupidly in the actual game. Thats what a meta is, this is sad how you're arguing against the sole idea of the viability rankings, if you want like what you're describing finish the threat list idk, not to mention viability rankings are not mostly based off of relativity, I actually have wanted to make ponyta A rank by the way.

 

[Rowan]

Dunno if anyone noticed, but I actually did slightly edit the descriptions of B, C and D rank recently. this was because it seemed like the descriptions were basically just the same, but saying A is good, B is not quite as good as A, which made it very subjective. I added sentences onto the end saying,

for example, B now says, "Their niches are often slightly smaller than those that are in A and S rank, which leads them to face some competition for a teamslot."
B mons are always just slightly less useful to have on a team slot. Either they face tough competition from similar A and S mons, e.g. Larvesta facing competition from Ponyta, Corphish having competition in carvanha/tirtouga, Doduo for Fletchling. Or, their niche is too small to be considered an A rank niche, e.g. Torchic, Surskit.

C rank now reads, "C rank Pokemon tend to find themselves outclassed by Pokemon in the above tiers, and face a lot of competition for a team slot."
Basically C rank mons niches are really small so they don't justify a team slot most of the time, and there should be a good reason for using them.

D now says, "Their niche is often so tiny that they are not worth putting on a team the majority of the time."
self explanatory.

 

[Rowan]

On the back of this change, I'd like to nominate Pancham for B+. Its niche is just a lot smaller to justify use over Timburr and Mienfoo the majority of the time. Most of the time I feel that it's not worth dropping the usefulness that Timburr or Mienfoo provide for Pancham. idk about everyone else, but Pancham just offers a lot less to a team, particularly the fact that it's a lot less reliable as a Pawniard check, and a check to Tirtouga, Carvanha, amongst others.

 

[tcr]

To be honest, I kinda wanna put Pancham at B, maybe B-. In this meta, Fighting-types are mainly put on teams to be a Pawniard check, or a Knock Off Pokemon. Take a look at Mienfoo; it is so solid because it is the best Pawniard check right now, and can easily fit on any team. It has solid prescence throughout the game. Timburr, on the other hand, is a strong SS check, as well as Pawniard check, while being a really bulky offensive pivot. Pancham does both jobs worse, with its only niche being Parting Shot, to make it kinda a worse Mienfoo at being an offensive pivot. I don't really see the benefit in having it B+, its a cool mon yeah, but it has trouble establishing a specific niche for itself. B+ is basically A soo

 

[apt-get]

SD pancham wrecks though, sweeps so many things / wallbreaks easily spritzee for scraggy

 

[tcr]

SD Gunk Shot Pancham is p cool yeah, but it doesn't realistically sweep against normal teams. It acts as a less bulky Timburr basically, and has a niche on very specific teams.

I don't think that Pancham is anywhere near on the same level of things like Larvesta, Zigzagoon, Bellsprout, simply because of one lure set. If that was the case, bump Amaura up for Chople+Hyper Beam luring and beating most Fights

 

[kingmidas]

SD Gunk Shot Pancham is p cool yeah, but it doesn't realistically sweep against normal teams. It acts as a less bulky Timburr basically, and has a niche on very specific teams.

I don't think that Pancham is anywhere near on the same level of things like Larvesta, Zigzagoon, Bellsprout, simply because of one lure set. If that was the case, bump Amaura up for Chople+Hyper Beam luring and beating most Fights

pancham is bulkier js, and it does work great on double fighting cores, because they pick up the slack while it does the no counter thing. I still agree with yo u though it has apparent issues, like need jolly for 14 and in general not doing what other fighters can.

 

[mad0ka]

Okay so I'd like to nom Drifloon for at least B+. It has an unparalleled niche in being the only unburden user that is offensively and defensively competent. It can run a myriad of useful sets, like CM+3 atks, CM+sub, sub+3 attacks, dbond, will-o-wisp, tailwind, all of which are good in their own right. It is an excellent support mon and can easily clear the pathway for a successful Fletchling sweep or sweep outright on its own and deserves a better ranking than C+.

 

[tazz]

Okay so I'd like to nom Drifloon for at least B+. It has an unparalleled niche in being the only unburden user that is offensively and defensively competent. It can run a myriad of useful sets, like CM+3 atks, CM+sub, sub+3 attacks, dbond, will-o-wisp, tailwind, all of which are good in their own right. It is an excellent support mon and can easily clear the pathway for a successful Fletchling sweep or sweep outright on its own and deserves a better ranking than C+.

After facing you using physical drifloon and using subCM myself, it's insane power and variety easily warrant B+. Honestly I would go farther and place it at A- (probably not that's just me) as depending on its set it can put on massive work vs virtually any team (subCM destroys stall, unburden acro is very hard for offense to deal with, can spinblock, can memento support, the list goes on).

 

[Holiday]

Probably a controversial nom but I got to make it.

Larvesta to A-

WAIT YES I SEE "STEALTH ROCK X4 SO ITS ASS" WELL STOP THE PRESSES.


AND WHAT ABOUT PWNYTAH?

Okay yes it has that SR thing and Pony exists, but that's why only A-. Larvesta fulfills such a potent niche as a burn spreading pivot on VoltTurn. Pony has to manually come and can kill momentum or exchange momentum with opponent, but Larv can keep up the pace with the strongest UTurn in LC. It also takes on fighters a bit better with a resistance to them. I guess you can run a scarf set but I really do think that how well Larv can pivot into attacks deserves A-. Ponyta has speed, less SR damage and fire resist, while Larv has STAB UTurn and takes on fighters better. Make it A- as its a generally nice choice in the meta and people act like it's impossible to keep rocks off field (it can always heal up with morning sun as well so)

Yeah. A- for our bug boy

 

[Pancham]

pancham is bulkier js, and it does work great on double fighting cores, because they pick up the slack while it does the no counter thing. I still agree with yo u though it has apparent issues, like need jolly for 14 and in general not doing what other fighters can.

I wold like to just point out that this post is wrong: Pancham hits 14 Spe without having to use Jolly.

Also, I think the clear idea now tha A is divided into four subranks is that it means we can now nominate evry singlemon in B for A- because hey we have four subranks now.... Let's not, honstly. Now that that's covered, am I the only person who used Larvesta on a volturn team and felt it was extemely underwhelming? Then agan this is coming from the same person that thinks every Chinchou that's not Parafusion is underwhelming as fuck, so carry on and nominate mons I think suck to higher and higher subranks XD (Speaking of Chinchou, I am surprised nobody has nominated it for A* yet....)

 

[Celestavian]

I haven't seen anyone try to put Chinchou in A*, but I nominated it to go down to A. I've thought Chinchou was overrated for a long time, and I don't even get what it is it's supposed to do anymore. Chinchou is supposed to be a pivot, but honestly looking at the A rank I don't see much it can actually switch into besides Ponyta, Fletching (who can U-turn), Magnemite (who now runs HP Ground so often as to be a liability), and opposing Chinchou (lol). The standard set is the Berry Juice set, and the best way to describe it is "piss weak". For example, BJ Chinchou fails to 2HKO standard 236 HP / 76 SDef Vullaby with Volt Switch, which is simply pathetic. The Berry Juice also makes it not very bulky, and while it is EVed to survive stuff like Archen's EQ, it utterly fails against boosted threats and is extremely allergic to Knock Off. It can spread Scald burns, but that's hardly a unique trait and once again it is super weak. Of course that's not the only set, and it does have some pretty good variety in its movepool, and can do stuff like RestTalking and Scarf in addition to Berry Juice. Of course, the RestTalk set is even weaker and the Scarf set is weak in comparison to heavy hitters like Mienfoo, Gastly, or Magnemite. I'm not trying to stuff Chinchou in B- or anything like that, but I definitely don't see why its in A+.

 

[apt-get]

Supporting Larvesta in A-. It's an amazing mon that I use 90% of the time in my teams, essential element of volt-turn, provides defensive, balance, and offense teams with unparalleled support. Scarfmag with sturdy + Larvesta is also one of the most amazing offensive / setup sweeper-checking cores in the meta, provided you have a way to remove hazards. Honestly, I'd put it in A, but I know some people like to fanboy quite a lot Ponyta and its amazing qualities so I'll refrain from showing them the true bulky fire.

 

[Holiday]

Let's not, honstly. Now that that's covered, am I the only person who used Larvesta on a volturn team and felt it was extemely underwhelming? Then agan this is coming from the same person that thinks every Chinchou that's not Parafusion is underwhelming as fuck, so carry on and nominate mons I think suck to higher and higher subranks XD (Speaking of Chinchou, I am surprised nobody has nominated it for A* yet....)

I stopped reading after this